CHAPTER 15: Evidence that the seven spirits depicted as resting upon Christ, per prophecy, represent the Holy Spirit Himself, refuting Akindinus's claim that the Holy Spirit is merely a created being. Akindinus, stubborn in his misrepresentation, attempts to classify these seven spirits, as prophesied by Isaiah, as creations, disregarding the authoritative prophetic declaration: "A rod shall come forth out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall spring up from its root, and the Spirit of God shall rest upon it" (Isaiah 11:1-2). The prophet clarifies the nature of this Spirit of God, identifying Him as "The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and strength, the spirit of knowledge and godliness, the spirit of the fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2-3). These spirits are therefore the Spirit of God, yet Akindinus refers to Him as a creature when he labels them as such.
Gregory, a distinguished theologian, affirms that these seven spirits signify the Holy Spirit Himself, as he elaborates in his “Homily on Holy Pentecost.” He states, "This Holy Spirit was proclaimed by the prophets, as in the phrases, 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; for He has anointed me' (Isaiah 61:1) and 'the seven spirits rest upon him' (Isaiah 11:1-2).” Furthermore, as he articulates, "The Holy Spirit has always existed, exists now, and will continue to exist," and shortly thereafter emphasizes, "The Spirit of wisdom, intelligence, understanding, knowledge, godliness, counsel, and strength" found in Scripture are all aspects of the Holy Spirit. Gregory also notes, "It pleased Isaiah to designate the energies of the Spirit as spirits," expressing equivalence between "the wisdom and might of the Spirit" and "the spirit of wisdom and might." How could the wisdom and might of the Spirit be creations?
Moreover, Athanasius states that "The Spirit is one and the same, from whom all divisions originate, and He remains inseparable in His essence." One of the energies of the Spirit is referred to by the Lord in the Gospels, as noted by Luke, when He calls it "the finger of God" (Luke 11:20), and according to Matthew, "the Spirit of God" (Matthew 12:28). After enduring severe plagues, the magicians in Egypt admitted, "This is the finger of God" (Exodus 8:19). Basil the Great, in his “Words of Objection,” indicates that "this finger represents one of the distinct gifts of the Holy Spirit." Which created being could be termed the finger of God? By what Spirit did the Lord cast out demons, if not by "the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 12:28)? Is the Holy Spirit simply a separate gift? If He is one, then so too are the others.
Thus, in the “Chapters of Objection,” Basil consolidates the gifts of the Spirit alongside what Paul designates as His fruits (Galatians 5:22). He summarizes that none of these attributes the Holy Spirit possesses are acquired; rather, He has them eternally, as the Spirit of God, emanating from God in hypostatic form, while their manifestations are his energies. Hence, the divine energies are manifold, yet they are fundamentally unified and do not constitute multiple essences. The energy of the divine Spirit rests on the "flower from the root of Jesse," which indicates the Lord's honor, suggesting that such spirits cannot be creations, for what is taken by the Master through Him is brought into being only by divine agency.
Maximus, wise in spiritual matters, asserts that the Lord possesses these energies naturally, being both God and the Son of God. How could the natural energies of the Son be understood as creatures? Should we not recognize that attributing creation status to these natural energies of God also diminishes the divine essence by equating it to creation? Akindinus, lacking reverence for God, foolishly questions how this fear could be uncreated unless the deity also experiences fear, as if the divine essence was something inherent or essential.
CHAPTER 16. Exploring the nature of the fear of the Spirit: its essence and emergence in those honored by God.
While Akindinus ought to be ashamed for his previous claims in the theological discourses, contending that these energies are intrinsic to the Son, he asserts that "fear is pure" (Psalm 18:10), existing without sorrow over transgressions and enduring eternally, as it is inherently embedded by God in creation, showcasing His natural superiority over all dominions and authorities. “The fear of the Lord abideth pure forever” (Psalm 18:10). The spirit of this fear denotes God's natural worthiness and His inherent frightfulness. How could God's inherent worthiness be viewed as a creation?
The Son of God also embodied this fear. Anyone who believes fear is not part of God's essence insinuates that Christ too lacked it, thereby accusing the prophet of falsehood. Whom did Christ fear, if it is written that "the spirit of fear" (Isaiah 11:3) rested upon Him? John the Beloved teaches that "Fear casts out fear because fear is torment; perfect love casts out fear" (1 John 4:18). Thus, the assertion that the "spirit of fear" resting on the Lord is a creation, contradicts the truth that it pertains to the One who possesses this spirit, suggesting that the sinless God-Man, equal to the Father, is no better than those who are spirit-bearers. Hence, alongside the other energies, we must regard the spirit of fear as eternal, despite what Akindinus contends. God's nature does not embody a creaturely fear, irrespective of how he misguidedly insists otherwise.
Isaiah, while elucidating these spirits, deliberately indicates the divine essence of this fear. In contrast to other spiritual gifts, he adds, "the spirit of the fear of God shall fill Him" (Isaiah 11:3). Was the Spirit who filled the 'Flower', in whom "the fullness of the deity dwells" (Colossians 2:9), a creation? Such a claim is blasphemous! By his addition, the prophet guided understanding, clarifying what this spirit of God signifies. By proclaiming, "the spirit of the fear of God shall fulfill Him," he subsequently states, "He shall not judge by what He sees, nor reprove by what He hears" (Isaiah 11:3). Isn't this the awe-inspiring action demonstrated by Christ, who, perceiving the thoughts of those He encountered, confronted the illustrious Pharisees, saying, "What are you thinking in your hearts?" (Luke 5:22)?
This spiritual fear, prevalent among those richly endowed with the Spirit's gifts, enables them to discern deeply as they inspire reverence in others. Paul observes that "the secrets of hearts will be revealed, and so falling down, they will worship God, affirming that God is indeed among them" (1 Corinthians 14:25). Those without such gifts, having sensed the profound worthiness of the Spirit, experience a preparatory fear to avert them from sinning against God, consequently obtaining a steadfastness that comes through diligence in embracing this knowledge.
Basil the Great identifies one of the energies of the Holy Spirit as the spirit of fear, which imparts the divine Spirit's immutability. How could this essential energy of the Spirit, which grants us part of its unchangeable quality, be viewed as a creation?
The prophet Zechariah also refers to these seven energies, declaring, "These seven are the eyes of the Lord, which scan the whole earth" (Zechariah 4:10). Meanwhile, the most esteemed disciple, whom the Lord cherished, writes in “Revelation”: "Grace to you and peace from God, and from the seven Spirits that are before the throne of God, and from Christ" (Revelation 1:4-5). Does this not clearly signify to all believers that these are the Holy Spirit Himself?
CHAPTER 17. Further reflections on these seven spirits and their incorruptibility, including an explanation of Akindinus's flawed testimony against them. In this chapter, we shall also delve into the meanings of the terms "create" and "act."
Akindinus, audaciously challenging God and dismissively equating His Spirit to creations, misuses the theologian's phrases when asserting "He is the Spirit of sonship" (Romans 8:15), "the Spirit of truth" (John 14:17), "the Spirit of liberty" (2 Corinthians 3:17), and the Spirit of wisdom, understanding, knowledge, godliness, counsel, strength, and the fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2-3), claiming that He is the origin of their creation. He then hastily concludes that if the Holy Spirit is responsible for their workings, these energies could not possibly be incorporeal or co-eternal with God. He erroneously declares not just fear, but all the energies of the Spirit as created.
After quoting Gregory the Theologian, he misrepresents him as he accuses his thought and spoken word, claiming that "this Spirit works" the entirety of manifestations (1 Corinthians 12:11): "as He wills, so He acts." Such erroneous conclusions serve to suggest that the energies of the Spirit are creations, neglecting that the verbs "to create" (ποιείν) and "to act" hold various meanings. These verbs do not merely entail invention or the bringing into existence from non-being; they can also signify natural actions—akin to saying that the sun creates daytime since it naturally brings it forth. Basil the Great illustrates this point as he observes, "The reward of virtue is to become a god and to be clothed with the purest light, becoming a son of this day, uninterrupted by darkness. This day produces another Sun, which disperses true light."
Gregory the Great similarly posits that the Spirit serves as the initial source for the intrinsic and natural energies manifested. The rays of true light are ultimately non-creative in themselves, regardless of another Sun, God, who creates and "acts" upon them. The "Spirit of truth" and the energies listed alongside it remain inherently non-creative, as they reflect the natural workings of the energies of the Holy Spirit. If we are made sons because of our association with true light, as Basil speaks, then true light must symbolize the "Spirit of sonship."
This clarification by Gregory emphasizes that the Spirit indicated in friendship with the Son is indeed the Holy Spirit. If this connection is substantiated, is it not an affront to the divine Spirit and true light for Akindinus to wage war against these spirits?
Yet Akindinus mimics Arius, attempting to diminish the energies of the Spirit by categorizing Him as created through terminology. To this, we respond in the spirit of our noble ancestors, arguing that redefinitions arise from the true essence of the matter rather than mere nomenclature; paradoxically, the essence begets the name, as opposed to the name sufficiently representing the essence. Thus, when a created thing emerges from nothingness and is referred to as "created," "arisen," or "acted upon," these descriptors convey its status as created.
However, when such terms are applied to what inherently resides in God or emanates from God, with its efficacy attributed to the Holy Spirit, as Basil articulates: "When we contemplate the dignity of the Spirit, we collectively identify Him with the Father and the Son, but when focusing on the grace imparted to participants, we acknowledge the Spirit as residing within us." Attributes of the Spirit, such as being the "finger of God" (Exodus 8:19; Luke 11:20), "the fruit" (Galatians 5:22), "the eye" (Zechariah 3:9), "the spirit of truth" (John 14:17; John 16:13), and "sonship" (Romans 8:15), like the proclamations from Moses (Exodus 8:15) and Isaiah (Isaiah 11:2-3), as well as the teachings of Paul (Romans 8:15) and interpretations by the great Basil, affirm that these energies maintain a nature that is neither creative nor demeaning.
When the same entity is described as both “created” (ποιούμενον) and “acted upon,” referencing its manifestation in "the fullness of the Godhead" (Colossians 1:19, 2:9), how could we, with clear understanding, regard it as creation simply due to the terminology employed? Shall we also declare the genuine light a creation merely because Basil captured this concept, asserting that another sun produces the everlasting day, providing true light?