A Difference that Makes a Difference Between the Role of the Holy Spirit in the OT & NT

  From a seminar at Bethel Seminary titled, Use of the OT in the NT Part I

Lecture Five, various assigned and unassigned biblical passages, and certain sections in this week’s secondary reading highlight the centrality of the Spirit of God as an underlying source of communication to God’s people in both testaments.  In short, the Holy Spirit, like the New Covenant was not a New Testament innovation—nor is a great deal else according to the various authors we are encountering in this course.  The breaking in of the Spirit of God as a  foundational event in both testaments testifies to its centrality, namely, the descent of the Holy Spiirt in Acts 2:2-3 at Pentecost as the disciples awaited their marching orders from the risen Christ, and at the instruction of the great Lawgiver after issuing the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai, where “the Lord spoke…out of the midst of the fire [where] you heard the sound of the words, but saw no form, you only heard a voice” (Deut 12:11-12).  Through resonating language and imagery, both events heralded a theophany of God of major proportions, in which God emphatically spoke to God’s people (https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-ultimate-theophany/).

 The articulation of the breaking in of the Holy Spirit at the inauguration of the early church is depicted in Peter’s first sermon as the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy that God will pour down his Spirit on his people—a vision in both texts is characterized by dreams, prophecy, and visions.  The common key event is the “pouring down of God’s Spirit on all flesh” with wonders in the heavens above and signs in the earth beneath” (NKJV).  Whatever minor variations, Peter (Luke) made in appropriating Joel’s last days prophecy may be significant for certain exegetical purposes, the main point here is the pouring down of God’s Spirit as reflected in Acts 2: 17-21 and Joel 2:28-32.  While there may be no qualitative difference in the theophonous power of the most holy God that inhabited both Joel and Luke (Peter), a significant difference resides in the focal point of each text; namely, in Acts, “the miracles, wonders, and signs… God did through him (added emphasis) whom God raised up, having loosened the pains of death, because it was not possible that he should be held by it” Acts 2:22-24).

 As noted in the Lecture and elsewhere, the emphasis on the Spirit of God was more than a passing phenomenon in the OT, rooted in Israel’s deepest discourse, particularly passages in Deuteronomy, Isaiah, and Psalm 119, to say nothing of the profound pathos of Hosea 11.  The emphasis on the holiness of God is a central OT theme—one that underlies and presupposes the power of the Spirit of God.  One approach to this question is to explore the deepest themes of each testament in which God spoke to his people. This emphasis reinforces the argument of Boyarin that Christianity, however unique on its own terms, is one important variant within the religious culture of Second Temple Judaism, in which, if we are able to move back a bit from the pervasive Judaism/Christianity polarity, we would grasp profound commonalities that have the capacity to enrich both faith traditions.  The Spirit of the Lord speaking to God’s people is one such commonality.

In accepting all of this, I still want to speak of a distinction of no minor consequence, as highlighted in the Acts 2:22-24 citation, namely, the linkage of the Holy Spirit to Jesus Christ, the Son of Man, the Son of God, the Lord of human history.  On this, Romans 8:9-11 is a favorite passage of mine, in which the Spirit of God and Spirit of Christ are mutually highlighted. Verse 11 merits particular mention: “But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.”  Clearly, it is God, the father, who does the raising, but is it Christ, the Son who dwells with us and gives life to our mortal bodies. 

 In his discussion of Daniel 7, Enoch, and Fourth Ezra, Boyarin did a nice job in demonstrating various late second temple manifestations of an incarnational understanding of God in two persons, in which the vision of Jesus in Acts and throughout the NT is one such manifestation. Fair enough as far as it goes, in which one could evaluate this common second temple discourse from a purely historical, third person perspective, but what, in itself, would that have to do with any first-person significance, with which one needs to come to grips for any personal encounter with the still living Christ. 

 While other texts could be drawn, consider the stunning passages in John 14-17 and the interlacing of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, in which “the helper” mediates God’s presence to believers through his Son. Key verses include 14:6, 9-11, 15:1-10, 26, 16: 23-24 and the entirety of Ch 17, in which the faithful are intimately invited into divine communion with Father and Son. 

 “And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:  I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me” (John 17:22-23).

 Throughout all of these passages, the Holy Spirit is a central presence, sometimes spoken of, sometimes not in the intermingling discourse of the three persons of the Trinity, in which we get to participate.  This is clearly a novum of major proportions.  However much the roots of this Trinitarian discourse are grounded in an overarching second temple historical, textual, and religious common idiom, the differences are significant enough—including the differences in the particular manifestation of the Holy Spirit that through the living Christ a difference that has made a difference in the lives of millions over the millennia, has come into the world.