Holy Spirit – Hoopoe

Holy Spirit

The Christian doctrine of the Holy Spirit arises out of the experience of the Church, as it interprets, and is itself interpreted by, the promise of the Comforter given by Jesus to His disciples (Jn 14^16)^ This appeal to experience follows the method adopted by St. Peter in his Pentecostal sermon (Acts 2:33). ‘The teaching may briefly be stated as follows: The Holy Spirit is God; a Person vrithin the Godhead; the Third Person, the knowledge of whom depends on the revela^ tion of the Father and the Son, from both of whom He proceeds. He was in the world, and spoke by the prophets before the Word became flesh, and was Himself the agent in that creative act. Through Him the atonement was consummated. He is the life-giving presence within the universal Church, the Divine agent

In its sacramental and authoritative acts; communi- „„- .- — „

eating Himself as a presence and power to the in- I Word (Schultz, OT Theol. ii. 184)

357 dividual Christian; mediating to him forgiveness and new birth; nourishing, increasing, and purifying his whole personality; knitting him into the fellowship of saints; and finally, through the resurrection of the body, bringing him to the fulness of eternal life.* The purpose of this article is to justify this teacning from Scripture.

1 . The promise of Christ. — It is unnecessary to discuss the historical character of the Last Discourses as presented in John, because the fact of the promise of the Spirit is sufficiently attested by St. Luke (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4, 5, 8 2:33), and its significance corroborated by the whole tenor of the NT. The specific promise of the Paraclete (John 14 16:26 16:7–15) must be read in view of the wider promise of the Abiding Presence, which is its background (14 15:4–11). The firft truth to be grasped by the Christian disciple is that to see Jesus is to see the Father (14, cf. 12:45), because the Son abides in the Father (v. IT"- 2"). Next he must realize the true meaning of the comfort and peace he has found in Christ as the way through which he attains his own true end, which is to come to the Father and abide in Him (14:6–9 17:21; ct. Hebrews 7:25 lO"- m). So the promise takes, first, the form of a disclosure. If Jesus is not only to embody God but to be the channel through which the faithful have communion vrith Him, He must Himself depart to prepare abiding-places in the Father’s house (14), that He may lift men to the sphere of His own eternal life, and that where He is they too may be (v., cf. 12:26). It is necessary, therefore, not only that the disciple should behold Jesus (16) as the Apostles did with their eyes (1 John 1:1, John 19:35) and as later believers do through the Apostolic word (17:20, Luke 1:2). but that he should abide in Him (John 15:4). Thus the purpose of the Incarnation is fulfilled in the linking up of the chain — the Father in the Son; the Son in the Father; the believer in the Son; mankind in God.

The method by which Jesus is to consummate this reconciling work is declared in the promise of the Paraclete.(For the question whether the word Parakletos is to be translated ‘Comforter,’ or ‘Advocate,’ see art. Advocate.) Having promised another ‘Comforter,’ the Lord proceeds to identify Him with the Spirit (John 14:17), which enables Him to give to the Person, of whom He speaks, the name of ‘the Holy Spirit’ (v. 26. the Greek having the definite article before both ‘Spirit’ and ‘Holy’). Only once in His previous teaching is He reported to have employed this title (Mark 3:29 Mark 12:36 and 13:11 appear to supply other instances, but comparison should be made with the parallel passages in either case (Matthew 22:43. Matthew 10:20, Luke 21:15). And there is something abnormal in the warning concerning the unpardonable sin, being one of the hard sayings fully interpreted only in the light of subsequent events) cf. Mark 8:34, John 6:53). But ‘Spirit’ and ‘Holy Spirit’ occur as used by Christ in the Synoptics (Matthew 12:28, lj^ nis; Gr. no definite article) and in John (3:6). "Too much cannot be made of this argument, as we are at best dealing with a Greek tr. of the words actually used by our Lord. But it remains true that in these cases a new and unexpected development is given to old ideas, as when Nicodemus fails to understand the spiritual birth (John 3:10), or disciples are scandalized by the spiritual food (6:60). yet both the terms used and the thoughts represented are familiar, and postulate a previous history of doctrine, the results of which ‘a master in Israel’ ought at least to have apprehended. The passage read by Jesus in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:18, 19. Isaiah 61:1, 2) forms a link between the Gospel and the OT in respect to the Spirit.

2. The Spirit la OT. — (D General. The’OT never uses the phrase ‘the Holy Spirit.’ In two passages the epithet ‘holy’ is applied to the Spirit, but in each it is still further qualified by a possessive pronoun (Psalms 51:11 ‘thy,’ Isaiah 63:10 ‘his’). But the conception of the ‘Spirit of God’ is characteristic, being closely related to the

The distinction between them is ttiat between the breath and the voice, the latter being the articulate expression of thought, the former the force by which the word is made living. The Spirit is the lite of God, and, as such, is life-giving. The account of creation in Genesis puts us in possession of the root idea (l^- "). ‘It was no blind force inherent in nature which produced this beautiful world, but a divine Thinlcer’ (Cheyne, OP, p. 322). The Spirit is the life of God communicated by a ‘word’ (cf. Psalms 33:6 SI" 104:30 139:7). This creative principle, which animates the universe, finds a special sphere of activity in man (On 2:7, Job 27 33:4), who by its operation becomes not only a living soul, but a rational being created in the image of God and reproducing the Divine life (Genesis 1:27). Thus the Spirit is the source of the higher qualities which manhood develops — administrative capacity in Joseph (Genesis 41), military genius in Joshua (Numbers 27:18),) judicial powers in the seventy elders (Numbers 11:17). the craftsman’s art in Bezalel and Oholiab (Exodus 31). So far there is nothing directly moral in its influence. But above all it is the Spirit that reproduces in man the moral character of God (Psalms 51:11 143:10, Isaiah 30:1, Nehemiah 9:20), though this aspect is by no means so clearly presented as might have been expected. Wickedness grieves His Spirit (Isaiah 63:10), which strives with the rebellious (Genesis 6:3, Nehemiah 9). This comprehensive dealing, affecting alike intellect, affections, and will, arises out of the central conception, stated in the Book of Wisdom, that God made man ‘an image of tiis own proper being’

(2).

(2) The Chosen Race. The epithet ‘holy’ as applied In the OT to the Spirit, though it may include positive righteousness and purity, arises in the first instance out of the negative meaning primarily attaching to holiness in Scripture; namely, separation to Him whose being is not compassed by human infirmity and mortal limitations. The Spirit, therefore, in its more general bearing, Is the indwelling influence which consecrates all things to the fulfilment of the universal purpose. But Israel believed that God had a particular purpose, which would be accomplished through His presence in the Chosen Nation. A special consecration rested upon Jacob, in view of which the Gentiles might be regarded as aliens, sinners, who were outside the purpose (Galatians 2:15. Ephesians 2:12 4:18). Thus the presence of God’s good or holy Spirit is the peculiar endowment of the Hebrew people (Nehemiah 9, Isaiah 63:11), which becomes the organ of the Divine self-manifestation, the prophetic nation (Psalms 105:15. cf. Isaiah 44:1 etc.). The term ‘prophet’ is also applied to those who were representative leaders — to Abraham (Genesis 20:7). Moses (Deuteronomy 18), Miriam (Exodus 15:20), Deborah (Judges 4:4), and Samuel. The Spirit ‘came upon’ David not only as the psalmist (2 Samuel 23:2) but as the ideal king (1 Samuel 16:13). The instruments of God’s ‘preferential action’ — Israel, and those who guided its destiny — became the channel of revelation, the ‘mouth’ (Exodus 4:16) through which the message was delivered. More directly still, God ‘spake by the mouth of his holy prophets’ (Luke 1:70; cf. Isaiah 51:16, Jeremiah 1:9), who hear the word at His mouth (Ezekiel 3:17, 1 Samuel 3:11).

(3) Prophecy. This brings us to the yet more definite sphere of the Spirit’s action in the OT. ‘It appears to the earlier ages mainly as the spirit of prophecy’ (Schultz). Among the later Jews also the Holy Spirit was equivalent to the spirit of prophecy (Cheyne). From Samuel onwards prophecy takes its place alongside the monarchy as an organized function of the national life. From the visions of seers (1 Samuel 9:9, 2 Samuel 24:11, 2 Chronicles 9:29) and the ecstatic utterance of the earlier nebi’im (1 Samuel 10:6–10 19:23, 24, 2 Kings 3:15; cf. Numbers 11:25) to the finished literature of Isaiah and Jeremiah, revelation is essentially a direct and living communication of the Spirit to the individual prophet (Deuteronomy 34:10, Amos 3:8, Micah 3:8). Though the Spirit is still an influence rather than a personality, yet as we rise to the higher plane of prophecy, where the essential thought is that of God working, speaking,

358 manifesting Himself personally, we approach the NT revelation. ‘The Lord God hath sent me, and his spirit’ (Isaiah 48:16, cf. Matthew 10:20).

(4) The Spirit and Messiah. The point of contact between the OT and NT is the expectation of a special outpouring of the Spirit in connexion with the establishment of Messiah’s Kingdom (Ezekiel 39:29, Joel 2, Zee 12; ct. Isaiah 35, Jeremiah 31:7–9). This was to distribute itself over the whole nation, which was no longer to be by representation from among its members the prophetic medium of Jehovah’s messages, but universally the organ of the Spirit. The diffusion of the gift to ‘all flesh’ corresponds with that extension of the Kingdom to include all nations in the people of God which is characteristic of later Hebrew prophecy (Isaiah 56:7 etc., Psalms 87, Luke 2:32). But it is on Messiah Himself that the Spirit is to rest in its fulness (Isaiah 11:1–5). Its presence is His anointing (Isaiah 61:1). This is the connexion in which the relation of the Spirit to the mamfestation of righteousness is most clearly shown (Isaiah 11:5, Psalms 45:4–7). So when Jesus of Nazareth begins His work as the Anointed One of Hebrew expectation, there lights upon Him what to the outward eye appears as a dove (Mark 1:10 II), emblem of that brooding presence (cf. Genesis 1:2) which was to find its home in the Messiah (John 1 ‘abiding’); in the power of which He was to ‘fulfil all righteousness’ (Matthew 3) ; to be driven into the wilderness for His fight with temptation (4:1) to return to His ministry in Galilee (Luke 4:14) to work as by the finger of God (Luke 11:20, cf . ); and to accomplish His destiny in making the Atonement (Hebrews 9:14). Spirit = The life of God. Manifested in nature. . Mani/^ted in man.

r

r

In

righteousness.

In revelation (Israel).

As intelligence. Is skill.

By the prophets.

By Messiah.

3. Theology o£ the Holy Spirit.— These two elements, namely, the promise of a Paraclete to the disciples, based on their experience of Himself, and the identification of that Paraclete with the Spirit of God, based on the older revelation, combine to produce that language In which Jesus expressed the Divine Personality of the Holy Spirit, and upon which the Christian theology of the subject is founded. When first the Holy Spirit is mentioned, Jesus says ‘whom the Father will send in my name’ (John 14:26). At the next stage of the revelation of the Comforter, it is ‘whom I will send unto you from the Father’ (15:26). Then it is the Spirit Himself coming (16:7, 13), guiding (v. 13), declaring truth (v. 13), and glorifying the Son (v. 14).

(1) He is from the Father. The revelation of Jesus Christ is primarily a showing of the Father (14:8, 9). The principle of Jehovah’s life thus becomes in the NT the Holy Spirit who proceeds from the Father (15:26). This relation is consistently preserved even when the Spirit is represented as Christ’s own gift (16:15). . Just as the Son is spoken of as God only in relation to the Father, and as subordinate to, in the sense of deriving His being from. Him, so there is no independent existence or even revelation of the Spirit. The technical term ‘proceeding," as adopted in the creeds, is taken from 15:26, which, while it refers immediately to the coming of the Spirit into the world, is seen, when the proportions of Scripture are considered, to follow a natural order inherent in the Divine Being (cf. Revelation 22:1). Already in His teaching the Lord had spoken of the’ Spirit of your Father (Matthew 10:20). And the special relation of the Spirit to the Father is prominent in St. Paul. By the Spirit God raised up Jesus and will quicken men’s mortal bodies (Romans 8:11). In the Spirit the disciple is justified (1 Corinthians 6:11) and enabled to realize his redeemed sonship and address God as Father (Romans 8, Ephesians 2:18). His relation to God (i.e. the Father) is further asserted in many places (.e.g. 1 Corinthians 2:10–12, 2 Corinthians 1 S’, Ephesians 4).

(2) This is, however, not inconsistent with, but rather results in, a dependence upon the Son (John 15 16:15, of. 15:15) which enables the Spirit to become the organ, whereby is applied to mankind the redemptive efficacy of the Incarnate Life {14"- ‘s. 21. sa. 16. ii). jesus speaks of the Spirit as His own gift ( 15:26). As Christ came in the Father’s name, so will the Spirit come in Christ’s name (14:26, ct. 5). His office is to be the witness and interpreter of Christ (I528 16:14). The testimony of the disciples is to reflect this witness (15:27). The dependence of the Spirit on the Son, both in His eternal being and in His incarnate life, is fully borne out by the language of the NT generally. He is the Spirit of God’s Son (Galatians 4:6), of the Lord [Jesus] (2 Corinthians 3:17), of Jesus (Acts 16:7 RV), of Jesus Christ (Philippians 1:19). of Christ (Romans 8:9. 1 Peter 1:11). It is to disciples only that the promise is made (John 14:17 I?*- ‘"■ and the experience o( Pentecost corresponds with it (Acts 2:1–4). the extension of the gift being offered to those only who by baptism are joined to the community (Acts 2:38).

(3) The operations of the Spirit thus bestowed are all personal in character. He teaches (John 14:26). witnesses (15:26). guides and foretells (16:13). and glorifies the Son (v. 14). So in the Acts He forbids (16:7). appoints (13:2). decides (IS^s). To Him the he of Ananias is told (5:3). And the testimony of the Epistles coincides (1 Corinthians 2:10 3 6:19, Romans 8 passim, etc.). The fellowship of the Holy Spirit is parallel with the grace of Christ and the love of God in 2 Corinthians 13:14. To the world His presence is not power, but condemnation. He is to convict the world (John 16:8) by carrying on in the life and work of the Church the testimony of Jesus (John 15. 1 Corinthians 12:3. 1 John 5:7. Revelation 19:10), in whom the prince of this world is judged (John 12:31 14:30). The witness, the power, and the victory of Christ are transferred to the society of His disciples through the Spirit.

4. Work of the Spirit In the Church.— (1) While anticipated by His work in the world (Psalms 139:7, Wisdom 1:7) and foreshadowed by His special relations with Israel, the presence of the Spirit is yet so far a new experience for Christians that St. John, speaking of the age before Pentecost, can say that ‘the Spirit was not yet [given]’ (John 7:39 RV). As from the point of view of the Chosen Race, those without were ‘sinners of the Gentiles’ (Galatians 2). ‘without God in the world’ (Ephesians 2:12). so the world outside Christ is a stranger to the Spirit. This is made clear by the facts of Pentecost. The experience of the descent, attested, to those who were the subjects of Divine favour, by the wind and fiery tongues (Acts 2:2). was granted only to the Apostles and their companions in the upper chamber (2:1. cf. !"■ "). The phenomena which followed (2:6) were interpreted by those outside, who had heard without understanding the rushing sound, either as a mysterious gift of power (v. 12) or as the effect of wine (v. 13).

Whether the tongues were foreign languages, as the narrative of Acts taken by itself would suggest (v.). must, in the light of 1 Corinthians 4:1, where the gift 13 some form of ecstatic speech needing the correlative gift of interpretation, be regarded aa at least doubtful; see also Acts 10:46 11:15. But that it enabled those who were not Palestinian Jews (w.’-") to realize ‘the mighty works of God’ (v. 1) is certain. The importance attached to it in the Apostolic Church was due, perhaos, to the peculiar novelty of the sign as understood to have been foretold by Chnst Himself (Mark 16:17), more certainly to the fact that it was a manifestation characteristic of the Christian community. See, further, Tongues, Gift of.

Though, by the time that St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, prophecy was already attaining higher importance as a more useful and therefore greater gift (1 Corinthians 12 14:1). the memory of the impression created at Pentecost, as of the arrival in the world of a new and unparalleled power, united to the spiritual exaltation felt by the possessor of the gift, was still living in the Church. Nor can the Pentecostal preaching of St. Peter, with its offer of the Holy Spirit to those that repented and were baptized (Acts 2:38). be regarded otherwise than as evidence, alike in the Apostles and in those who were ‘added to them’ (v. 47). that they were dealing with a new experience. That this was a transfer of the Spirit which dwelt in Christ from His baptism (Mark 1:10))), carrying with it the fulness of the Incarnate Life (John 1:16, Ephesians 3:14–19 4:13), was attested by the miracles wrought in His name (Acts 3:6, 7 4:30 etc.), the works which He had done and which His disciples were also to do (John 14:12). bearing witness to a unity of power.

(2) The Incarnation. That the presence of the Holy Spirit was not only a new experience tor themselves, but also, as dwelling in the Incarnate Son, a new factor in the world’s history, was recognized by the primitive Christians in proportion as they apprehended the ApostoHo conception of the Person of Christ. One of the earliest facts in Christian history that demands explanation is the separation from the Apostolic body of the Jewish party in the Church, which, after the fall of Jerusalem, hardened into the Ebionlte sects. The difference lies in the perception by the former of that new element in the humanity of Jesus which is prominent in the Christology of the Pauline Epistles (Ro 1* 5:12–21. 1 Corinthians 15:20–28. 2 Corinthians 8:9. Galatians 4:4, Philippians 2:5–11. Colossians 2:9).

It is all but certain that this language depends upon the acceptance of the Virgin Birth, which the sects above mentioned, because they had no use for it, tended to deny. The Apostles were enabled through a knowledge of this mystery to recognize Jesus as the second Adam, the quickening spirit, the beginning of the new creation of God (Revelation 3:14, . 21:5, 6). If the narrative of the Annunciation in Luke (1^) be compared with the Prologue of John (l’-‘8) and with the account of Creation in Genesis 1 , the full import of this statement becomes apparent. The Spirit overshadows Mary as He brooded upon the face of the waters. The manifestation of the Messiah was, -therefore, no mere outpouring of the spirit of prophecy even in measure hitherto unequalled.but God visiting and redeeming His people through the incarnation of His image (Hebrews 1:1–3. Colossians 1:15).

St. Paul’s protest, therefore, against Judaic Christianity, which, in spite of temporary misgivings on the part of St. Peter and St. James (Galatians 2:11, 12). received the assent of the Apostolic witnesses, resulted from a true interpretation of his experience of that Holy Spirit into which he had been baptized (Acts 9:17, 18). The Gentiles, apart from circumcision (Galatians 5:2. cf. Acts 15), were capable of the Holy Spirit as well as the Jews, by the enlargement of human nature through union with God in Christ, and by that alone (Gal #• = 6:15. 2 Corinthians 3:17, 18; cf. Ro. 8, 1 Corinthians 15:49). Thus, though the Apostolic preaching was the witness to Jesus and the Resurrection, beginning from the baptism of John (Acts 1:21, 22). the Apostolic record is necessarily carried back to the narratives of the Infancy. The ministry of reconciliation, though fulfilled in the power of the baptismal Spirit (Luke 4:14), depended for its range on the capacity of the vessel already fashioned by the same Spirit (I’‘) for His habitation — God was in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19).

(3) Union with Christ. What, therefore, the Apostolic community claimed to possess was not merely the aptitude for inspiration, as when the Spirit spoke in old times by the mouth of the prophets, but union with the life and personality of their Master (John 17:23). through the fellowship of a Spirit (2 Corinthians 13:14. Philippians 2:1) which was His (Philippians 1:19). The Acts is the record of the Spirit’s expanding activity in the organic and growing hfe of the Christian Church. The ‘things concerning the kingdom’ (1:3). of which Christ spoke before His Ascension, are summed up in the witness to be given ‘unto the uttermost part of the earth’ (v. 8) and in the promise of power (v. 8). The events subsequently recorded are a series of discoveries as to the potentialities of this new life. The Epistles set before us, not systematically, but as occasion serves, the principles of the Spirit’s action in this progressive experience, corporate and individual.

(4) Spiritual gifts. The NT teaching with regard to spiritual gifts (wh. see) springs out of the conception of the Church as the mystical body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22 2:16–20 4:16. 1 Corinthians 12:12). The Holy Spirit is the living principle distributed throughout the body (1 Corinthians 12, Ephesians 2:18 4:4). The point of supreme importance to the Christian is to have the inward response of the Spirit to the Lordship of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:3). This life is universally manifested in love (ch. 13), to strive after which is ever the ‘more excellent way’ (12:31). But, though bestowed on all Christians alike, it is distributed to each ‘according to the measure of the gift of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:7). The principle of proportion is observed by Him who has ‘tempered the body together’ (1 Corinthians 12:24). The same gifts or manifestations of the Spirit are not, therefore, to be expected in all believers or in all ages. They are given that the whole body may profit (12:7). They are correlative to the part which each has to fulfil in the organic structure of the whole (12:14–20. Ephesians 4:16). The desire for them, though not discouraged (1 Corinthians 12:31 14:1). must be regulated by consideration of the needs of the Church (14:12) and the opportunities of service (Romans 12:1–6. cf. 1 Peter 5:5). ‘Each " gifted" Individual becomes himself a gift’ (Gore).

Nowhere do we find any attempt to make a complete enumeration of spiritual gifts. In Ephesians 4:11. where the completion of the structure of Chriat’s body is the main thought (v. 12), four classes of ministerial function are named. In Romans 12. ^here a just estimate of the individual’s capacity for service is prominent, the list is promiscuous, exceptional gifts like prophecy, ministerial functions like teaching, and ordinary graces lilce liberality, being mentioned indifferently. Local circumstances confine the lists of 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, 28 to the •greater gifts’ (v. 31), those granted for more conspicuous service, most of which are tokens of God’s exceptional activity. The object of the Apostle in this catalogue is to show that tongues are by no means iirst in importance. ‘Faith’ in v. 9 is not to be confused with the primary virtue of 13:13. but is interpreted by 13:2 (cf. Matthew 17:20).

(5) Inspiration. It is in this connexion that inspiration as applied to the Bible must be brought into relation with the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. No theory, as applying to the whole Canon, is in the nature of the case to be expected in the NT itself. But prophecy is one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:10, 28), and it is clear that the prophets were recognized as a distinct order in the ApostoHc Church (Acts 11:27 13:1 21:10; ct. 1 Timothy 1:18 4:14). though there was nothing professional in this ministry (Acts 19:6 21:9). The type was undoubtedly that of the OT prophets (see above), and a distinct link with the ancient line is found in St. Peter’s reference to the words of Joel as fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2). Agabus prophesies by the Spirit (11:28). He adopts the method of signs (21:11) and the phrase ‘Thus saith the Holy Spirit’ (cf. OT ‘Thus saith the Lord’). Here, then, we have a gift that was conceived as perpetuating the mouthpiece whereby the will of God was revealed to the fathers (H li). The inspiration of the OT Scriptures as understood in the 1st cent, of the Christian era was undoubtedly regarded as an extension of the prophetic gift. They were the oracles of God (Acts 7:38. Romans 3:2. 5:12). and as such ‘the sacred writings’ (2 Timothy 3), profitable because inbreathed by God for spiritual ends (v. 16). The connexion with prophecy is explicitly drawn out in 2 Peter 1:20, 21, the same Epistle showing the process by which the writings of Apostles were already beginning to take similar rank (3:15, 16, cf. Ephesians 3:5). That the Bible is either verbally accurate or inerrant is no more a legitimate deduction from this principle than is ecclesiastical infallibility from that of the Abiding Presence in the Church. In either case the method of the Spirit’s activity must be judged by experience. Nor, in face of the express declaration of St. Paul, that ‘the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets’ (1 Corinthians 14:32). may we tolerate any theory which Impairs the freedom of human personality.

(6) The laying on of hands in the ministration of the Spirit seems to have been adopted by a spontaneous impulse in the primitive community, and to have become immediately an established ordinance. The place accorded to the practice in Hebrews 6:2. as belonging to the alphabet of gospel knowledge, attests the importance attached to it. Like baptism, its roots are in the OT, where it is found as an act of dedication (Numbers 8:9, 10, 12 27:18–23. see Schultz, OT Theol. i. 391) or benediction (Gn 48). Christ uses it in blessing the children (Mark 10:16). The Apostles adopt it as the sign, joined with prayer, for the anointing of the Holy Spirit, by which they effected consecration to an office or function (Acts 6:6; cf. 1 Timothy 4:14 5:22 (? see below), 2 Timothy 1:6). or conferred blessing on the baptized (Acts 8:14–24 19:5, 6). The offer of money to Peter at Samaria (8:18) shows that the rite might be, and in this ease was, followed by exceptional manifestations, like those which appeared at Pentecost; and that the fallacy which awakened Simon’s covetousness was the identification of the gift with these effects. Though associated with the bestowal of the Spirit, the laying on of hands has not yet been reduced to a technical rite in a crystalUzed ecclesiastical system. Ananias uses it in the recovery of Saul’s sight (Acts 9:12, 17) the Antiochene Church, not probably in ordaining Barnabas and Saul, but in sending them forth to a particular mission (Acts 13:3). In Mark 16:18 and Acts 28:8 it is a symbol of healing(cf. Mark 1:41 5:23 6:5 8:23. Revelation 1:17. also James 5:14, 15) in 1 Timothy 5:22 not improbably of absolution (see Hort, Bcdesia, p. 214). According to 2 Timothy 1:6, it was used by St. Paul in conveying spiritual authority to his representative at Ephesus; or, if the reference be the same as in 1 Timothy 4:14. in the ordination of Timothy to a ministerial function. The symbolism is natural and expressive, and its employment by the Christian Church was immediately justified in experience (.e.g. Ac. 19). Its connexion with the bestowal of specific gifts, like healing, or of official authority, like that of the Seven (Acts 6:6). is easily recognized.

A more difficult question to determine is its precise relation to baptism, where the purpose! of the ministration is general. The Holy Spirit is offered by St. Peter to such as repent and are baptized (Acts 2:38. cf. 1 Corinthians 12:13) while of those whom Philip had baptized at Samaria (Acts 8:12) it is expressly asserted that He had ‘fallen upon none of them’ (v. 16). jt may have been that the experience of the Apostles, as empowered first by the risen Christ (John 2022), and then by the Pentecostal descent ( Acts 2:4). , led them to distinguish stages in the reception of theSpirit, and that the apparent discrepancy would be removed by a fuller knowledge of the facts. But this uncertainty does not invalidate the positive evidence which connects the ministration of the Spirit with either ordinance. See also LAYiNa on ov Hands.

J. G. Simpson.

Homam

See Hemam.

Hosier

See Weights and Meabubes.

Homicide

See Crimes, § 7. Refuge [Cities or].

HONEST, HONESTY,— In 2 Esdras 16:49 ‘honest’ has the meaning of ‘chaste.’ Elsewhere it means either ‘honourable’ or ‘becoming.’ For the meaning ‘honourable’ compare Ruth 1:22 Cov. ‘There was a kinsman also . . . whose name was Boos, which was an honest man’; and, for ‘becoming,’ Isaiah 52:1 Cov. ‘Put on thine honest rayment, O Jerusalem, thou citie of the holy one.’

‘Honesty’ in l Ti22, its only occurrence, means ‘seemliness’ (RV ‘gravity’).

Honey

The appreciation of honey by the Hebrews from the earliest times, and its abundance in Canaan, are evident from the oft-recurring description of that country as a ‘land flowing with milk and honey’ (Exodus 3:8, 17 onwards). In the absence of any mention of bee-keeping in OT, it is almost certain that this proverbial expression has reference to the honey of the wild bee (see Bee). The latter had its nest in the clefts of rocks, hence the ‘honey out of the rock’ of Deuteronomy 32:13, in hollow tree-trunks (1 Samuel 14, but the Heb. text is here in disorder), and even, on occasion, in the skeleton of an animal (Judges 14:8 ff.). in later times, as is evident from the Mishna, bee-keeping was widely practised by the Jews. The hives were of straw or wicker-work. Before removing the combs the beekeepers stupefied the bees with the fumes of charcoal and cow-dung, burnt in front of the hives.

In Bible times honey was not only relished by itself (cf. Sirach 11:3 ‘the bee is little, but her fruit is the chief of sweet things’), and as an accompaniment to other food (Matthew 3:4, Mark 1:6 ‘locusts and wild honey,’ Luke 24:42. AV with fish), but was also largely used in the making of ‘bakemeats’ and all sorts of sweet cakes (Exodus 16:31), sugar being then, of course, unknown. Although it formed part of the first-fruits presented at the sanctuary, honey was excluded from the altar, owing to its liability to fermentation.

Honey for domestic use was kept in earthen jars (1 Kings 14:3 EV ‘cruse’), in which, doubtless, it was also put for transport (Genesis 43:11) and export (Ezekiel 27:17). Many scholars, however, would identify the ‘honey’ of the two passages last cited with the grape syrup (the Arab, dibs, equivalent of the Heb. debash, ‘honey’) of modem Syria, which is produced by the repeated boiling of grape juice (for details see art. ‘Honey’ in EBi col. 2105). Indisputable evidence of the manufacture of dibs in early times, however, is still lacking.

In addition to the proverbial expression of fertility above quoted, honey, in virtue of its sweetness, is frequently employed in simile and metaphor in Heb. literature; see Psalms 19:10 119, Proverbs 16:24 24; Song of Songs 4:11 5:1, Sirach 24:20 49:1 etc. A. K. S. Kennedy.

Hoods

Only Isaiah 3:23 AV, for which RV has rightly ‘turbans.’ See Dress, § 6.

Hook

1 . vav, a hook or ring with a spike driven into wood (Exodus 26:32 etc.). 2. Isaiah 19:8, job 41:1. Amos 4:2. Matthew 17:27. The hook used in fishing was of course attached to a hne, but whether the latter was simply held in the hand or was attached to a rod cannot be decided.

Hoopoe

(Leviticus 11:19, Deuteronomy 14:18 RV; AV ‘lapwing’). The hoopoe ( Upupa epops) is a common spring visitor in Palestine, where its striking plumage, its tall crest and odd movements, make it conspicuous. Various folklore tales exist in the Talmud and among the feilahln regarding it. It was an ‘unclean’ bird (Leviticus 11:19), possibly because of its habit of haunting dunghills, but it is eaten to-day by the fellahln.

E. W. G. Masterman.