The Old Testament Doctrine of the Spirit of God.

By Rev. P. A. Nordell,

New London, Conn.


The Old Testament doctrine of the Spirit centers in the significance and use of the word ru(a)h. It is the only word through which the Hebrew mind gave expression to its conception of that energy which penetrates and moulds not only the concrete forms of external nature, but the entire intellectual and spiritual life of man. A comprehensive biblico-theological apprehension of this doctrine must rest, therefore, upon a clear understanding of the meaning and use of this word. It occurs altogether 369 times. Among these occurrences there are about 75 in which the word is either directly connected with Elohim or Jehovah by the construct state, or else by means of suffix pronouns, or the context is directly referred to him. There are, beside these, 10 or 15 passages where the reference is somewhat doubtful.

The primary meaning of ru(a)h is wind, like the Greek pneuma and the Sanscrit atma. It designated alike the gentle evening zephyr, the ru(a)h hayyom, Gen. II., 8, and the violent hurricane, the ru(a)h gedholal vehazaq, I Kgs. XIX., 11. It was used primarily, then, to describe that invisible force which is felt by us, and the effects of which are perceived in the physical world. The vital breath was also identified with ru(a)h, but as this was expired at death it became associated with the idea of life itself, with the anima as distinguished from the animus, and was more fully, though tautologically described .as the ru(a)hz hayyim, Gen. VI., 16. Accordingly the ru(a)h bene ha'adham is the spirit of the sons of man that goeth upward, and the ruah habbehema is the spirit of the beast that goeth toward the earth (Eccl. III., 21). In general it became the designation of the inner spiritual life of man, and of its various manifestations through the emotions, intellect, will, and conscience. From this conception of the living principle in man as ru(a)h the transition was short and natural to that Infinite Spirit whose energy, invisible and illimitable like the wind, creates and perpetuates the visible order of the universe. In each advance in meaning the underlying conception of the word is still that of an invisible, immaterial force, cognizable through its effects. Such, in brief, is the Hebrew usage of the word. A closer analysis of its etymology, or of its use in cognate languages, affords no aid in determining the psychological conception of spirit in the Hebrew mind. We pass, then, to an examination and classification bf the passages where*the word stands in immediate connection with the divine activity. A glance shows that they fall into three general classes: The Divine Spirit in relation to the Cosmos; in relation to Man; and in relation to God himself.


There are several passages in the Old Testament where the active work of creation is directly or indirectly attributed to the Spirit of God. Such is Gen. I., 2: "And the Spirit of God brooded on the face of the waters." It would be rash to pronounce definitely on the nature of the activity here indicated by the word merahepheth. Certainly it does not mean vivifying in the sense of incubation, a meaning which smuggles into the word the entirely foreign idea of a "world-egg." Nor does it describe a mechanical blowing of the wind over the primeval ocean, for this would be wholly inadequate to the production of the subsequent effects. On the contrary, it points to the Spirit of God as a constructive, life-imparting energy transforming the formless waste, the tohu, into a habitable world, and evolving by the accessory divine act of volition the accompanying manifoldness of organic life. No reference to creation is made in Job XXVI., 13, sometimes quoted in this connection, but to the wind, the physical representative of the Spirit, which scatters the clouds after a tempest, and makes the heavens serene. In the o04th psalm, the psalm of creation, there is, however, a very explicit reference to the agency of the Divine Spirit in creation. To the poet's eye, "the existence, passing away, and origin of all beings is conditioned by God. His hand provides everything: the turning of his countenance toward them upholds everything; and his breath, the creative breath animates and renews all things. The spirit of life of every creature is the disposing of the Divine Spirit ['Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, and they are created,' verse 30], which hovered over the primordeal waters and transformed the chaos into the Kosmos" (Delitzsch in loc.). In Job XXXIII., 4, the creation of man is directly referred to the Spirit. "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." Here the two-fold origin of man's life is distinctly asserted in harmony with Gen. II., 7. For his life is not merely the life of the animal which individualizes the breath of the Divine Spirit already existing in matter, but it is in a peculiar sense a neshama, "an inspiration directly coming forth from God the personal being, and therefore forming a person" (Del. in loc.).

The activity of the Spirit in the cosmos is displayed not only as a creating energy, but as preserving, perpetuating, upholding the order already brought into existence. "Thou takest back their breath, they expire, and return to their dust" (Ps. CIV., 29), points as unmistakably to the upholding activity of the Spirit, as the next verse—"Thou sendest forth thy Spirit and they are created, thou renewest the face of the ground"-points to the Spirit's originating, creating activity. He is the cosmical basis of life.


The Spirit of God, in the next place, enters into a variety of relations with the life of man. He is in him the source and principle of life in common with the organic kingdoms below him. He is the "fountain of lives," hayyim, to whom they return again at the moment of death (Eccl. XII., 7). While it may not be possible to exclude entirely from this and similar passages (Ps. CIV., 29, Job XXXIV., 14), a conception of the spirit of life in man as in some sense an emanation from the Spirit of life in God, yet it must not be inferred that the Old Testament identifies the two. The Divine Spirit is indeed conceived of as the final cause of all life, not as pantheistically immanent or indwelling as Spinoza ventured to affirm, "cum antiquis omnibus Hebraeis," but as transcendent, passing over into other forms of life; and these, although of necessity dependent on their original source, are not identical with it, but distinct individualities. We perceive, moreover, in such a passage as Job XXXIII., 4, already quoted, a sharp antithesis between the free creating Spirit of God and the free created spirit of man. In Zech. XII., 1, it is said that Jehovah "forms the spirit of man within him." Personality is set over against personality: "The Spirit lifted me up, and took me, and I went bitterly, and in the heat of my spirit; and the hand of the Lora was strong upon me" (Ezek. III., 14). This individuality of the human spirit is still further emphasized in the use of the plural ruhoth, wherein men are contemplated as individual entities, and not as temporary segregations of one common spirit.

However sharply this antithesis may be drawn, the Spirit of God nevertheless remains the original source to which every endowment of man's physical, mental and moral life is referred. This Divine energy becomes in Bezaleel a "spirit of God in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship," Exod. XXXI., 3; in Joseph a spirit of wisdom in the interpretation of dreams, Gen. XLI., 38; in Caleb a spirit of wisdom in counsel, Num. XIV., 24; in Othniel and Gideon a spirit of courage in battle, Judg. III., 10, XIII., 24, and of rulership among the tribes, VI., 34; in Samson a spirit of extraordinary physical strength; and in David a spirit of skill in poetry and song, 2 Sam. XXVIII., 2. To the Hebrew mind every form of physical power, artistic skill, and intellectual activity became the exhibition of this one Divine energy operating in manifold variety of forms. Is not the source of all extraordinary wisdom and genius traceable to the direct influence of the Divine Spirit upon the human, as enunciated in Job XXXII., 8, "It is the spirit [of God] in man, even the inspiration of the Almighty that giveth him understanding"? Especially in the Theocracy the presence and influence of this Spirit was recognized in raising up deliverers, and in bestowing upon them and others in authority the necessary endowments and qualifications for their office. So also the Spirit is represented as coming upon Saul and David when they were anointed by Samuel to be kings over Israel.

In the later history of the monarchy the influence of the Spirit is seen most strikingly in connection with the peculiar phenomena of prophecy. The prophets were conscious of being moved by a power above and external to themselves. This power enabled them not only to discern the drift and outcome of complex social, political and religious movements in which they themselves were actors, but to penetrate the distant future and reveal movements and events of which there were no signs in the horizon of their own times. This cannot be explained as mere political sagacity, or "vague presentiment, or pious deductions from the moral government of God"; for no felicitous intuition, or scientific prevision, or co-ordination of social or political laws has enabled the astutest statesmen of that or any subsequent age to forecast the future with the bold and unerring precision characteristic of the Hebrew prophets. This peculiar endowment was the gift of that Divine Spirit who transported the prophet to supernatural [altitudes from which he surveyed the unfolding of divine purposes in nature and in history. From these altitudes his eye swept over intervening centuries and beheld Him who fulfilled in himself the Levitical types and shadows, who became the " end of the law for righteousness unto all who should believe," and of whose kingdom, embracing a restored and spiritual Israel, there should be no


end. Thus we are told that " the Spirit of the Lord came upon Azariah, the son of Oded; and he went out to meet Asa" with warnings and promises from God, 2 Chron. XV., 1-2. Ezekiel also, XI., 5, attributes his prophetic power to the Spirit of the Lord which " fell upon" him. Sublimely conscious of his relation to the eternal medium of prophecy, Isaiah exclaims, "The Lord and his Spirit hath sent me." Where veruho is to be taken as nominative, and not accusative, " The Lord hath sent me and his Spirit," i. e. accompanied by his Spirit. Micah speaks of himself, in contrast with the false prophets, as filled with power, and judgment, and strength by the Spirit of God "to declare unto Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin" (III., 8); and Zechariah (III., 12) represents the people as making their heart like adamant, lest they should hear the word which the Lord of Hosts had sent in his Spirit by the former prophets.

In this connection we may note a distinction in the use of the phrases ru(a)h 'elohim and ru(a)h yehova(h). The latter applies exclusively to the operations of the Spirit within the Theocracy. The former is often used in the same restricted sense, but, being more comprehensive, it is used also to describe the cosmical and ethnical relations of the Spirit. Hence we find that creative activity is uniformly ascribed to the former but never to the latter; and accordingly it is the ru(a)h 'elohim that constrains Balaam the Midianite against his will to become a medium for the revelation of the will and purpose of God.

Such was the extraordinary effect of the Spirit on the prophet that at times his mere presence would, by a species of spiritual contagion, cast those near him under a powerful prophetic influence, as in the case of Saul's messengers, I Sam. XIX., 20-21; at other times, as in the case of Saul himself, the recipient of the Divine Spirit was so overpowered by it as to fall into a trance-like condition in which he remained a day and a night. Whether this effect was of the same nature as that witnessed at the present day in seasons of strong religious excitement is not altogether clear.

The phrase "the hand of the Lord" is synonomous with "the Spirit of God." We have seen that the fundamental understanding of ru(a)h in the Hebrew mind was wind or invisible power, a dynamic force exhibiting its presence by its effects. The hand, on the contrary, is an active visible instrument whereby volitional power is exerted, and as such it became to the oriental mind the symbol of power. The transition from the invisible force to the visible symbol was easily made. "The hand of the Lord was upon Elijah" I Kgs. XVIII., 46), as he ran before Ahab to the royal residence in Jezreel. Sometimes it happened that "the hand of the Lord " could not work at once through the prophet's consciousness, which needed a certain measure of preparation or clarification, whereby it was fitted to receive and transmit the revelations of the Spirit. In the case of Elisha this necessary preparation was made through the use of sacred minstrelsy and song. "Bring me a harper: and it came to pass as the harper harped that the hand of the Lord came upon him" (2 Kgs. III., 15), and he began to prophesy. This form of metonomy is a favorite with Ezekiel. He repeatedly represents "the hand of the Lord" as "upon," or "with" him. This expression passes over also into the New Testament usage.

Brought into such extraordinary relations to the divine energy, the prophet becomes emphatically the man of the Spirit. He is the medium through whom the Spirit speaks, hence also he is called nabhi', the passive form indicating that he does not speak from himself, but as "the instrument of another." The influence of the Spirit upon the prophet exalted him in every intellectual and spiritual capacity, transforming the man and renewing the heart (I Sam. x., 69). "Thus prophecy was also an anticipation of the kaine ktisis of the new covenant,—a circumstance which explains the saying of Moses, Num. xI., 29, 'Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his Spirit upon them.'" (Oehler.)

The Spirit is furthermore represented as participating in God's covenant relations with Israel. When Israel went up out of Egypt God put "his holy Spirit within him" (Isa. LXIII., 11). After the close of the wilderness wanderings " the Spirit of the Lord caused him to rest" Isa. LXIII., 14) in the fruitful land of promise. Notwithstanding Israel's repeated lapses into idolatry, God's holy Spirit is never wholly withdrawn from them: "According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my Spirit remaineth among you" (Hag. II., 5). When the nation returns from its captivity, the Spirit of the Lord will "lift up a standard" against the overwhelming force of the enemy, and lest the people might imagine that their success and prosperity resulted from their own strength, Zerubbabel is reminded at the laying of the foundations of the second temple, that it was to be completed not by Israel's might nor power, but "by my Spirit, saith the Lord" (Zech. IV., 6). With the restored Israel' God enters into a new covenant: whereby "My spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and forever" (Isa. LIX., 21).

While Gen. VI., 3, "My spirit shall not always strive with man" shows the Spirit of God in an ethical relation to man as hindered and obstructed by the sinful autonomy of the race, yet of his effective agency in the sanctification of the righteous we perceive no intimations in the Pentateuch. First in the Psalms this doctrine is clearly announced, while its full development is found only in the prophets and in the New Testament.


We pass, thirdly, to a consideration of those passages from which we may gather something as to the Spirit's relation to God. And here we perceive that God gives the Spirit. "Thou gavest also thy good Spirit to instruct them" (Neh. IX., 20), and also withdraws his Spirit when provoked by man's sin. "Take not thy holy Spirit from me" is David's prayer in the fifty-first psalm. God sends his Spirit also to apostate Israel to testify against them through the words of the prophet (Neh. IX., 20).

That the Spirit not only is divine, but is God, may be inferred from Ezek. III., 24-27. "Then the Spirit entered into me, and set me upon my feet, and spake with me, and said unto me, go, shut thyself within thy house, . . . . . . But when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth and thou shalt say to them [the rebellious house of Israel]. Thus saith the Lord God," etc. Here the Spirit who enters into the prophet and speaks with him explicitly identifies himself with the Lord God. From this and other passages where his activity is manifestly that of a person, such as sending prophets, lifting up a standard, being vexed, fighting against Israel, setting Ezekiel on his feet and speaking to him, we may legitimately infer his personality. As a personality there are also divine attributes ascribed to him. He is omnipresent, Ps. CXXXIX., 7; good, Neh. IX., 20, Ps. CXL., 10; holy, Ps. LI., 11 (13), Isa. LXIII., 10, 11, and as such he is also "the source of an ethically right spirit in man"; he knows the future, Ezek. III., 24, and is wholly independent of human control, Isa. XL., 13.

In relation to the Messiah it is said, "The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him," Isa. II., 2, and "I have put my Spirit upon him," Isa. XLII., 1, and again "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor, Isa. LX., 1. In these passages the Messiah is three times spoken of as endued with the Spirit of the Lord, and hence his words and his works may be known to be from Jehovah. Accordingly the New Testament representations of the Spirit are primarily in the theocratic and Old Testament fashion. He is represented as being begotten by the Holy Spirit, endued with the Spirit according to prophecy, led, restrained by, and baptized into the Holy Spirit.

We have thus passed in review the chief passages in the Old Testament which refer to the Spirit of God. It remains to present several


A. The Hebrew conception of the Spirit of God was not that of a Personality, but of a divine energy.

We find the word ru(a)h at the very beginning of the Hebrew literature, where in connection with the narrative of creation we are told that the ru(a)h 'elohim moved or brooded upon the face of the waters. The phrase must already at that time have received its fixed religious signification. For a revelation of the existence and activity of a Divine Spirit could not be reduced to writing until a nation's language was sufficiently advanced in culture to receive and express the conceptions imparted in a special revelation. And yet we must not overlook the fact that all abstract conceptions are not primarily abstract, but concrete. As thought and speculation advance, the mind passes gradually from the concrete, material substance to the ideal concept. Every abstraction is built on a sensuous substratum. Now while it is true that the word ru(a)h has its physical or sensuous side, it has also its purely dynamic or spiritual side. The one has ever suggested the other. The unseen wind has ever been to the human mind a symbol of that invisible spirit which is even mightier in its effects. To understand ru(a)h as "wind," and so to translate it, is too materialistic; we need not, on the other hand, project upon the word a refined Aristotelian abstraction which evacuates it of all sensuous affiliations.

The exact nature of the activity displayed by this cosmical potency cannot, as already intimated, be deduced with any certainty from the word merahepheth. From the antithesis between the Spirit and the formless, homogeneous chaos it may be gathered that he is in some way a constructive, architectural force in the unorganized thehom. This finds support in the meaning of the word bhara' compared with 'asah and yatsar. The first of these is used exclusively to designate creative acts proceeding from God, and as such is properly used in Gen. I., I, where the act of creation is referred to Elohim himself. But after the introduction of the ru(a)h 'elohim in the second verse the verbs 'asah and yatsar, which are essentially constructive or formative in meaning, are employed in describing the nature of those operations whereby the possibilities and potencies included in the first creative act were developed in constantly increasing manifoldness and complexity of product. And yet the Spirit is more than a Demiurge who fashions a world out of the unformed material ready at hand. The Spirit is conceived of as an energy immanent in nature, in history, in thought, interpenetrating and moving the world with the fulness of divine life, but itself remaining free, unhampered, undefiled by the cosmical relations into which it enters. "He is," as Rothe says (Ethik. I., 124), "the active agent in creation and in the government of the world, by whose might God penetrates at every instant the play of finite causes, and is omnipotently present at every moment at all points in his unlimited domain." By thus postulating the free Spirit of God as the immanent and active agent in creation, the Hebrew mind found a true starting-point from which a satisfactory solution of the rise and origin of all things may proceed. In so doing it escapes the perils both of a polytheistic cosmogony which knows not how to reconcile the antagonistic elements in the kingdom of nature, and of a pantheistic hylozoism in which the half-conscious soul of the world is never able to cast away entirely its material garment and emerge into the light and freedom of the kingdom of the Spirit. In this conception of the Spirit as free energy transcendent over the abyss of matter, and at the same time immanent in it as an organific principle of life, we touch the point where the Hebrew thought sharply differentiated itself from every form of deism on the one hand, or of pantheism on the other. For the doctrine of an absolute divorce between God and the world finds as little support in Hebrew thought as that of God's identity with the world. Greek thought in its highest reach never worked its way beyond the conception of a powerful Demiurge imprisoned in the world, and gradually fighting his way to self-consciousness. On the contrary, the first verses of Genesis revealing the Divine Spirit as both transcendent and immanent, and the world both as creatura and natura, furnish what heathenism has never yet discovered, viz., a starting-point both natural and supernatural from which a satisfactory philosophical survey of the universe may proceed.

B. From the Hebrew conception of the Divine Spirit just noted, it follows, in the next place, that the Divine Being himself is conceived of as an absolute spirit. It is true that the Old Testament nowhere gives a direct affirmation of this truth. The purposes of the Old Testament revelation did not include this. It is nevertheless fundamental to its conception of God, which excludes from the divine existence every trace of corporeity. He is not simply a spiritual force, but a spirit self-conscious and self-determined.

C. The Old Testament does not reveal but suggests the doctrine of the trinity. We must not forget that one purpose underlying the revelation given to Israel was to impress a sense of the divine unity in distinction from the polytheistic beliefs and practices of surrounding nations. During the long twilight from the giving of the law on Sinai to the full glory of the Gospel day, Israel's watchword seemed to be, " Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God." From their entrance into the land of promise, alike under the theocracy and the monarchies, Israel's besetting sin was a falling away from the worship of the one God into' the worship of many Gods. This idolatrous tendency was finally and forever checked by the severe discipline of the captivity. Until this doctrine of the divine unity had thus become ineradicably fixed in the Jewish mind, a revelation of the doctrine of the trinity must have been premature, and might have been disastrous. Not until this primary monotheistic conception of God had been established beyond controversy were they prepared for its development into the higher conception of trinity in unity. Hence we may not look for an unmistakable revelation of this obscure and mysterious doctrine in the Old Testament. Indeed this doctrine is not one of direct revelation either in the Old Testament or in the New. It is nowhere in Scripture formulated or put into explicit statement. From first to last it is an indirect or inferential revelation and subject, perhaps more than any other doctrine, to the conditions of history.

We must not conclude, however, that the doctrine of the trinity is wholly foreign to the Old Testament Scriptures because not fully developed there. Every mature doctrine of the New Testament is found germinally even in Genesis. In the progress of revelation this doctrine, like all others, gathered strength and fulness, even though its true nature remained unrecognized until its efflorescence in the summer-radiance of the new dispensation. Reading the Old Testament, a posteriori in the light of the New, it is easy to see how this doctrine runs through it, obscured, indeed, but not hidden by the greater prominence of other truths. Hence those passages in the Old Testament which seem, when viewed from the standpoint of the New, to teach unmistakably though inferentially the personality of the Spirit, must be interpreted as personifications of that divine energy which has its source in the free, personal life of God. To introduce the doctrine of a personal Divine Spirit into the Old Testament would be an unwarranted prolepsis in respect to an ontological distinction in the divine nature, a distinction which is at best only half revealed in the New.

D. The doctrine of the Spirit is peculiar to the divine revelation. Rueckert affirms (Com. on Corinthians, Vol. I., p. 80) that "the biblical conception of pneuma is wholly unknown in Hellenism, and is first announced to the world in Christianity." This is not strictly true. For this conception of the Spirit is already found in the Old Testament, which contains a very full and explicit revelation of the Spirit as one and singular, operative in the sphere of created phenomena, and yet clearly distinguished alike from them and from everything else designated by the word ru(a)h. Without an acknowledgment of this fact the rest of revelation cannot be understood, and it ceases to be of any practical use. The one hundred-fourth psalm is "a psalm of nature," as Delitzsch happily calls it, "but such as no poet among the Gentiles could have written. The Israelitish poet stands free and unfettered in the presence of nature as his object, and all things appear to him as brought forth and sustained by the creative might of the One God" (Del. in loco.). But the heathen mind at once loses itself in a degrading polytheism, or in an attenuated pantheism. It loses God in the world, or the world in God. Not even Plato was able to rise to the idea of a divine, self-existent, omnipresent Spirit, creating, upholding, and directing the universe of conscious and unconscious being. For such a conception the human mind is wholly dependent on a supernatural revelation. It is found nowhere outside of the Bible or the literature inspired by it. And thus, as Kleinert most forcibly remarks, "we perceive from this that the doctrine of the Spirit of God becomes in the Old Testament the mightiest vehicle for a monotheistic contemplation of the world."1 Nor is there any need, as he further suggests, of an imagination reveling in mythological fancies either to spiritualize, or to solve, the manifoldness of superficial phenomena by attributing them to a manifoldness of life-imparting divinities.

E. We perceive, finally, that in the Old Dispensation the Spirit in relation to man was conceived of as an external guidance or investiture, rather than as an indwelling power. This is clearly shown by the manner in which the Spirit is represented as coming upon, resting upon, falling upon those who became its recipients. Isaiah speaks of "putting on" the Spirit (XLII., 1). The Spirit's relation to man as an external investiture is unmistakably indicated in Isa. XXX., 1, "Woe unto the rebellious children that. . . . . . cover with a covering, but not with my Spirit, that they may add sin unto sin." From this it will be seen that the peculiar New Testament doctrine of the indwelling Spirit was not reached in the progress of Old Testament revelation. Expressions that seem to indicate the contrary are either prophetic, or they refer to the revival of courage or the renewal of physical strength. In some of these prophetic passages the vast superiority of the coming dispensation is clearly set forth in that the Spirit is no longer to be regarded as an external covering or investiture, but an indwelling Spirit of holiness, interfusing and commingling itself with the mind of the believer. "Then . . . . . . will I put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes" (Ezek. XXXVI., 27). Indeed among the prophets Ezekiel seems to attain the clearest, almost evangelical, apprehension of the Holy Spirit's ethical relations to man as an inward cleansing, regenerating, illuminating power. For among the pre-eminent blessings of Christ's kingdom he perceives the fulfillment of the promise, "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh," XXXVI., 26. It does not follow because the operation of the Spirit during pre-Christian times was conceived of as external to and separate from the mind, that this operation was in reality different from that of later times.

It was the same operation differently apprehended. The Spirit could not impart himself in his fulness until after the completion of the Messiah's earthly mission. To this the mission of the Spirit was supplementary. His work, while doubtless identical under both dispensations in regenerating and illuminating the souls of men, was, by its very restrictions under the Old, prophetic of those mighty tides of self-communication which characterize the later and distinctive dispensation of the Spirit.  



1) ZUR ALTTESTAMENTLICHE LEHRE VOM GEISTE GOTTES. Jahrbuecher fuer Deutsche Theologie, 1867, p. 8.