A.N. Hendriks writes a paper on the Person and work of the Holy Spirit, stating in his introduction that this subject needs to be further explored by the church. He shows from all the Scripture how there are two lines, one from the Holy Spirit towards Christ and then alternatively one from Christ to the Holy Spirit. Although he demonstrates the former as a Biblical concept, he posits that the church has been correct in arguing, in its creeds, theology, and catechisms, for the latter being the better concept because of what the Bible says about the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and from the Son.

Source: Met de oog op de gemeente (Van den Berg Kampen). 7 pages. Translated by Wim Kanis.

  • Share

Christ and the Spirit

Timeliness⤒🔗

At the end of his life, the Swiss theologian Karl Barth, expressed the wish that someone, and perhaps for a considerable length of time, would be given the opportunity to develop a ‘theology of the Holy Spirit’, a theology that Barth himself could only see as from a distance – similar to how Moses was shown the promised land.1Barth had already come to the conviction that the Christological concentration that he had experienced in his dogmatic thinking, did not do full justice to what the Scripture says about the Person and the work of the Holy Spirit.

Although a theology of the Spirit, as envisaged by Barth, is still awaiting us, it is undeniable that in theological circles more attention has been paid to the Holy Spirit in recent decades. A growing number of publications confirm this.2The increasing influence of Pentecostal groups and of the charismatic movement has certainly contributed to this. Reference can also be made here to thinking from the perspective of the religious experience that plays such an important role in modern theology.3Wherever the heart of man enters the discussion, attention is also immediately directed to the work of the Holy Spirit, whose work it is, after all, to give shape to salvation in our existence.

It needs no argument that the question about the relationship between Christ and the Spirit will receive new topicality as a result of this development. Many people ask critical questions about the doctrine concerning the Holy Spirit (Pneumatology), as it had been developed in dogmatic manuals of reformational persuasion.4Does this traditional doctrine of the Spirit do justice to the proper reality of the Holy Spirit and his work? In this traditional doctrine, does Christology not outshine Pneumatology, and is it really necessary and desirable to have the doctrine of the Holy Spirit preceded by the doctrine about Christ?

The two lines←⤒🔗

In this contribution we want to reflect more closely on the relationship between Christ and the Spirit, and especially to address the latter question. In doing so we take our starting point from what the New Testament says about the relationship between Christ and the Spirit. The Old Testament will of necessity also be included. After all, the teaching of the New Testament has its roots in revelation, as it comes to us in the Old Testament (see John 5:39; Heb. 1:1). Here too we need to respect the unity of Scripture.

In the New Testament we find first of all a very clear line from the Holy Spirit toward Christ.5In this line the Spirit emerges as subject, while Christ is object here. According to the New Testament, it is the Spirit who conceives the Messiah, who descends on him, and who leads him in everything.

The background of this line is the prophecy of the Old Testament about the Servant of the LORD. In this prophecy the Servant of the LORD (the Messiah) is portrayed as the Pneumatophore, the Bearer of the Spirit. We read in Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations.” And in Isaiah 61:1 we hear the coming Messiah say, “The Spirit of the LORD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the broken-hearted...”

When the New Testament proclaims that Jesus was conceived through the Spirit (see Luke 1:35) and anointed with the Spirit (see Matt. 3:16), there is clear fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. According to the prophecy, Jesus is proclaimed by the Spirit as Messiah, yes, all his activities as Messiah are possible only because the Holy Spirit rests on him.

It is the Spirit who prepares Jesus for his office, who leads him (cf. Matt. 4: 1) and guides him (cf. Luke 10:21).

Because Jesus does not have the Spirit in moderation, everything he does is the proper fulfillment of his Messianic office.6Through the Spirit Jesus can go the way the Father shows him. So we read in Hebrews 9:14 that Christ, through the eternal Spirit, has offered himself to God as a sacrifice without blemish.

It has rightly been pointed out that the line from the Spirit to Christ has often received too little attention in the thinking about the relationship between Christ and the Spirit.7If we want to do justice to the teaching of the New Testament, we will have to take into account that the Messiah with his work is the miracle of the Holy Spirit!

However, in the New Testament we also clearly discover a second line, that from Christ toward the Spirit. In this line the Messiah is the subject and the Holy Spirit is the object. The Spirit then emerges as a gift from Christ.

This line too has its roots in the Old Testament prophecy. There is mention in this prophecy about an outpouring of the Spirit (see Joel 2:28) or of an outpouring of the Spirit in the future (see Zech. 12:10)..

This outpouring is connected with the time of salvation that will come about with the activity of the Messiah (see Isa. 44:3 with Isa. 61:1,2; Ezek. 36:27 with Ezek. 34:23, 24). In the prophecy the Bearer of the Spirit is designated as the Giver of the Spirit.

It is in line with the Old Testament prophecy that the New Testament in various places identifies the Spirit as gift of the Messiah.

In John 1:33 we find the word of the Baptist, “I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’”

To what extent the coming of the Spirit is the fruit of Jesus’ Messianic work is evident from John 7:39, where the apostle John writes very concisely, “For as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”

Also in John 14 and 16 we find this connection between Jesus’ glorification and the coming of the Spirit. That the Holy Spirit is a gift from the glorified Christ, we also read in Luke 24:49, “And behold, I [Christ] am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.”

So we come to understand that Peter is preaching Jesus as the risen Lord on the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2: 14-36). Pentecost is the feast of Christ who then baptizes with the Holy Spirit, who pours out the Spirit as the great gift of his Messianic work.

It is no coincidence that the apostle Paul calls the Spirit, “the Spirit of God’s Son” (see Gal. 4:6) or “the Spirit of Christ” (see Rom. 8:9). We owe it to Christ that the Spirit dwells in us (see 1 Cor. 3:16), fills us (see Eph. 5:18), guides us (see Rom. 8:14), and seals us (see Eph. 4:30). Behind all of this stands the immaculate sacrifice that he has presented to God.

How much the Spirit, according to the New Testament, is a gift of the glorified Messiah becomes clear in the book of Acts. In this book, Luke tells us about the acts of Christ who ascended into heaven. The book carries a Christological tone.8The outpouring of the Spirit is proclaimed as an act of Christ (see Acts 1 and 2). It is the Spirit of Jesus who puts the apostles to work and guides them on their missionary journeys (see Acts 16:7).

When the Heidelberg Catechism starts with Christ both in the treatment of the church and the sacraments as well as in the life of gratitude, this is entirely in accordance with the New Testament. It is Christ who gathers his church through his Spirit and Word (see answer 54) and it is Christ who renews us to his image through his Spirit (see answer 86).

In the footsteps of Calvin9, the line from Christ to the Spirit has always received great emphasis in reformed theology and practice. That is entirely justified for when one loses sight of this line, one becomes deeply confused when it comes to sharing in the Holy Spirit and the way he is working.

The Anabaptists did not know what to do with the preaching and the office of the Spirit, because they separated the Spirit from Christ.

The uncertainty with regard to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the low regard for the preaching in forms of christianity where there is a heavy emphasis on experiential pious lives have their roots in separating the clear redemptive-historical bond that exists between the work of Christ and the coming and work of the Holy Spirit.

The way out of much uncertainty about the work of the Spirit is that we start to look to Christ. The Bearer of the Spirit is also the Giver of the Spirit! The indwelling of the Spirit in the hearts of believers is the fruit of Christ’s laborious work. It is Christ who continues to work on earth through the Spirit. Through Christ people come to the Spirit.

Participating in Christ and possessing the Holy Spirit is such an inseparable unity to Paul that he writes, “Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” ​​(Rom. 8:9).

Christology and Pneumatology←⤒🔗

Reformed theology has always strongly emphasized the line from Christ to the Spirit. In dogmatic reflection, therefore, Pneumatology followed Christology. From the doctrine of Christ people moved on to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit.

The question arises: are there other ways? We also discovered the line from the Spirit to Christ in Scripture. Does this line not justify a reversal of the traditional sequence? Would it not be possible from the Pneumatology to approach Christology? Some have answered this question in the affirmative.10

In my opinion, this is not possible if one pays attention to inter-trinitarian relationships and reverently takes into account what the Lord God reveals about himself and his works in Scripture.

From Scripture we come to know God as the Three-in-One, with the Father as the first Person, the Son as the second Person and the Holy Spirit as the third person (see the order in the Great Commission, Matt. 28:19). This is how the church spoke about the Lord God in her confessions.

The Father has life in himself (see John 5:26); the Son has life from the Father (see John 5:26). The church professes the eternal generation of the Son from the Father.

In the essence and works of God, the Holy Spirit also has something specific: it is he who proceeds from the Father (see John 15:26), who is sent by the Father (see John 14:16).

The New Testament also tells us that the Spirit is sent by Christ (see John 15:26; 16:7). He is called the Spirit of the Son (see Gal. 4:6). The church has recognized that behind this sending of the Spirit by Christ there lies an eternal relationship between the Spirit and the Son – a relationship that the church indicates as “proceeding”.11

The Spirit proceeds from eternity not only from the Father, but also from the Son.

At this time we will not be discussing the struggle that took place about the “filioque” (the confession that the Spirit also proceeds from the Son).12It is important to conclude that with the confession of the filioque, the church has set a limit to any independence of the work of the Holy Spirit vis-à-vis Christ and his work.13

The Spirit always comes to earth as the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son.

It was Calvin, in particular, who repeatedly emphasized this. Precisely because Calvin took the filioque so seriously, he spoke of the Spirit of the Son and the Spirit of the Mediator, Jesus Christ.14

It seems to me that respect for the filioque prevents us from reversing the order of Christology and Pneumatology. For this reversal one cannot rely on the line from the Spirit to Christ, which we find in the New Testament. Also behind this line lies the mystery that the Spirit proceeds from the Son from eternity!

W. van ‘t Spijker writes, “It is very striking that almost all statements about the Paraclete in his relationship to Christ can be made in exactly the same way about Christ in his relationship to the Father.

Of the Paraclete (Helper, Counsellor, Advocate) it is said that he is given by the Father (John 14:16). We read the same of Christ (John 3:16). A total of at least fifteen of these statements can be put side by side. Their work is the same.

The Paraclete and Jesus have the same Sender. The same work, the same purpose, the same salvation, in short, here things cannot be accentuated without constantly considering that the question of the relationship between Christ and the Spirit needs to be addressed much deeper than usually happens in the texts about the Paraclete.”15In my opinion, Van ‘t Spijker quite rightly says that the question of the relationship of Christ and the Spirit can only be answered from the confession of the Trinity.

Clearly, the Messiah is conceived by the Spirit. He is anointed by the Spirit and is qualified through the Spirit. His birth is the miracle of the Holy Spirit.

Still, based on what the Scripture says about the Trinity, we will have to maintain in this case, that the Spirit who is working here is the Spirit who proceeds from the Father and from the Son. It is also the Spirit of the Son who posits the Messiah! When we respect this, it will be clear that Christology cannot be preceded by Pneumatology (on the basis of the first line).

The sacred order of the three Divine Persons also appears in the work of redemption.16
The Father sent his Son (see John 3:16; 5:37), the Son became flesh (see John 1:14) and the Holy Spirit caused the Messiah to be born from Mary (see Luke 1:35) and equipped him for his work (see Matt. 3:16,17).

H. Bavinck once wrote, “The heartbeat of the Christian religion lies in the confession of the Trinity; every error flows from or can be traced back to a deviation in the doctrine of the Trinity.”17

In my opinion, Bavinck here verbalized a profound truth. We see Bavinck’s expression confirmed in history. The mysticism of the Eastern Orthodox churches finds its root in the denial of the filioque by these churches, the improper understanding of the relationship between Christ and the Spirit.18

The plea for a Pneuma-Christology, as we encounter this today among modern theologians, comes at the expense of the confession of the Trinity that we find in the earliest confessions of the christian church.19

Anyone who does not see the redemptive-historical connections between Christ and the Spirit as coming from the eternal relationship between the Son and the Spirit, will irrevocably loose track of the right Scriptural course!

The Athanasian Creed calls us to honour the Unity in the Trinity and the Trinity in the Unity of God. This also applies to our reflecting on the relationship between Christ and the Spirit.

Endnotes←⤒🔗

  1. ^ Cf. E. Busch, Karl Barth: his life from letters and autobiographical texts, Philadelphia (1976).
  2. ^ J. Veenhof, De Parakleet (The Paraclete). Some reflections on the Paraclete-promise in John’s gospel, and its theological significance, Kampen 1974, provides an overview.
  3. ^ Cf. H. Berkhof, Bruggen en bruggehoofden (Bridges and bridge heads) - a selection from the articles of prof. Dr. H. Berkhof from the years 1960-1981, Nijkerk (1981), p.210, 211: “These days, dogmatics is considered a stab in the dark if it is not based on experience. Since about 1970 the experience of Cinderella has been elevated to a princess in our profession”.
  4. ^ Cf. H. Berkhof, De leer van de Heilige Geest (The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit), Nijkerk, 19652, p.20.
  5. ^ Cf. J.P. Versteeg, Christus en de Geest (Christ and the Spirit), in: J. Veenhof et al., Op het spoor van de Geest (In the tracks of the Spirit), Kampen 1978, p.17f.
    Cf. also L. Floor, De doop met de Heilige Geest (The baptism with the Holy Spirit), Kampen 1982, p.35f
  6. ^ Cf. Herman Ridderbos, De komst van het koninkrijk (The arrival of the kingdom), Kampen 1950, p.93; cf. also G.C. Berkouwer, Het werk van Christus (The Work of Christ), Kampen 1953, p.68.
  7. ^ H. Berkhof, De leer van de Heilige Geest (The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit), writes: “That first relationship is particularly neglected in the current tradition of the church and theology” (p. 19).
    Cf. the remark of H. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatic II, Kampen 19284, p.277, “The doctrine of the Holy Spirit has always been treated in christian theology as only a sequel to the doctrine of the Son”.
  8. ^ Cf. A. Noordegraaf, Creatura Verbi -The growth of the congregation according to the Acts of the Apostles, The Hague 1983, p.17: “While Luke tells in his gospel, how salvation is revealed in the Word and work of Jesus, the book of Acts shows how there exists a tight connection between the saving activity of Jesus and the later generation.” D.K. Wielenga, De akker is de wereld (The field is the world), Amsterdam 1971, writes, “He (Christ) is indeed the central figure in this book. Luke indicates this himself, when he immediately draws attention to the fact that he has written in the first book about what Christ began to do and teach. Therefore he now wants to give an account of what Christ continues to do through the Apostles.”  
  9. ^ S. van der Linde, De leer van den Heiligen Geest bij Calvijn (The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit according to Calvin), Wageningen 1943, says about Calvin’s pneumatology: “... his doctrine of salvation, which is doctrine of the Holy Spirit, cannot be described except by counting with Christ right from the beginning to the end, who indeed meant everything to Calvin” (p.85).
  10. ^ Cf. A.A. van Ruler, De vervulling van de wet (The fulfillment of the law), Nijkerk 19742, p.79: “In itself it is very conceivable that an attempt is made to approach through the gate of pneumatology into the mystery of Christ and thus to understand all truth as spiritual truth, as truth in the Spirit. There is even much to be said for that.”
  11. ^ The church has not further specified this ‘proceeding’.
    ​What is the difference between the generation (or ‘begetting’) of the Son and the proceeding of the Spirit? Remarkable in this regard is the quote from Augustine: “See, that is what I know, but to distinguish between the generation of the One and the proceeding of the Other I do not know; I cannot do it, I do not feel capable of it” (quoted by A.D.R. Polman, Onze Nederlandse Geloofsbelijdenis (Our Belgic Confession of Faith), II, Franeker n.d., p.33).
  12. ^ For this struggle and the inclusion of the filioque in the Nicene Creed, cf. G.P. van Itterzon, The filioque in later church history, in: J. de Graaf et al., De Spiritu Sancto - Contributions to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, Utrecht 1964, p.89f. Cf. also the extensive presentation by Karl Barth, Die Kirchliche Dogmatik I-1, Zollikon-Zürich 1947, p.501f.
  13. ^ A.A. van Ruler argued for a “relatively independent” pneumatology, but at the same time he called the filioque an “academic issue” (cf. A. A. van Ruler, Theological Work, VI, Nijkerk 1973, p.23).
    G.C. Berkouwer, Ibid., p.239 note 138 rightly establishes a link between the two.
    Cf. also A.N. Hendriks, Kerk en ambt in de theologie van A.A. van Ruler (Church and office in the theology of A.A. van Ruler), Amsterdam 1977, p.247f.
  14. ^ Cf. G.P. Hartvelt, IJle balans (Tenuous balance), in: J. Veenhof et al., Op het spoor van de Geest (In the way of the Spirit), p.44: “The filioque indicates the structure of pneumatology - that much is clear with Calvin”. Cf. also W. Krusche, Das Wirken des Heiligen Geistes nach Calvin, Göttingen 1957, p.14.
  15. ^ W. van ‘t Spijker,  De Heilige Geest als Trooster (The Holy Spirit as Comforter), Goudriaan-Kampen 1986, p.67.
  16. ^ Cf. H. Bavinck, Ibid., p. 286: “All external works of God have one principium, i.e. God, but they come about through the cooperation of the three persons, who both in the works of creation and in those of redemption and sanctification take their own place and fulfill their own task. Everything proceeds from the Father, is accomplished by the Son, and is completed in the Holy Spirit. Yes, to a certain degree the external workings are divided among three persons.”
  17. ^ H. Bavinck, Ibid., p.254-255
  18. ^ We see this cohesion strongly in the liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox churches: in the epiclesis the Spirit is invoked, but not as the Spirit of Christ, cf. K. Deddens, Annus liturgicus?, Goes 1975, p.181-182.
    ​G.P. van Itterzon says about the position of these churches, “While the East made a distinction between the eternal, immanent procession of the Spirit from the Father and the temporary revelation of the Holy Spirit having been sent out by the Father and the Son, the West rejected this distinction and saw no difference between procession and mission” (Ibid., p.106)
  19. ^ G.C. van de Kamp, Pneuma-christologie: an old answer to a current question? Amsterdam 1983, discusses various modern theologians. Van de Kamp also criticizes the classical christological dogma, although he would like to build on the ‘basic affirmation’ of it (p.244f).

Add new comment

(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.
(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.