Jacob J, thanks for the info about the “dwell in us” phrase–I didn’t know about that. But that actually makes more sense to me; I’ve always found the idea of a personage somehow dwelling in us to be a bit strange.

tk said:

I think this phrase has the relationship backwards. God doesn’t need the Holy Ghost to communicate for him, thus identifying a limition with God; I believe God gave us the Holy Ghost so we could hear God. It is based on our limition not His.

I’d agree that, generally speaking, our inability to hear God is likely due to our own limitations, rather than his. And yet, if the HG can communicate with us in our limited state in a way that HF can’t–that suggests that the HG has a particular ability (i.e., that of communicating with limited mortals) that HF lacks. That’s what I was trying to get at here.

Lecture 5 of the Lectures on Faith, that gomez mentions, is definitely interesting. Warning: wild, unsupported speculation to follow! I’ve sometimes wondered–Joseph Smith came out of a Protestant background, and he at least to some extent used traditional trinitarian-sounding language (e.g., AoF 1). But the First Vision was just the Father and the Son, and then there’s this statement from the Lectures on Faith about the Godhead being made up of two (though I realize that Joseph Smith’s role in authoring them isn’t entirely clear). But is it possible that at least to some extent, our notion of the Holy Ghost–and, for that matter, our belief in a Godhead made up of three–is simply a kind of a carryover from traditional Christianity? Kiskilili was reminding me recently that the doctrine of the Holy Ghost was a relatively late development in early Christianity–from an LDS perspective, then, possibly post-Apostasy. Of course, if I were going to go in that direction, I’d still need to deal with D&C 130.

Another thing that I find striking is that you don’t really hear people talk about developing a personal relationship with the Holy Ghost, the way they do with the other members of the Godhead. You’re encouraged to live worthy of it, of course, and to learn to discern it, but that generally seems to be in the service of developing a relationship with HF and/or Christ. We talk about the Holy Ghost as an individual personage, but do we really treat it like one? Even angels whose role is to convey messages from God get names. (Hmm, I don’t buy the HG=HM idea, but I can see how people come up with it!)

Actually, though, I enjoyed your discussion on the topic — very good analysis, as always. Also, I’m going to find a way to use “pneumatology” in a sentence, next time I teach class.

3. Q. How many personages are there in the Godhead?

A. Two: the Father and the Son (Lecture 5:1).

15. Q. Do the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute the Godhead?

A. They do (Lecture 5:2).

I had assumed that the answers to these questions can be interpreted to mean that the Holy Ghost is not a personage. Of course, this contradicts D&C 130.22 which is a later revelation and canonized.

The following 2 questions answered in lecture 5 are also interesting:

13. Q. Do the Father and the Son possess the same mind?

A. a. They do.

14. Q. What is this mind?

A. a. The Holy Spirit.

The whole lecture seems to suggest that rather than being a personage of exact dimensions the Holy Spirit is the mind of the Father and the Son, a far more abstract concept.

While I can understand why one might go in the direction that you have gone, it seems wholly inconsistent with our doctrine, because women, as men, are destined for resurrection and, we would hope, exaltation. Both require a body, which the Holy Ghost does not have.

And as a general comment, the thought I have had more than once is that in the end, I think it’s like the atonement. We don’t know *how* it all works, but we do know it does. Ray said something similar above, and I will say it in my own way here. I don’t know *how* the Holy Ghost works, or who he is, or how his spirit-ness fits into the plan of salvation teachings that we have about the need for a body for eternal progress. But I do know that his power and influence is real, and makes all the difference in my life.

A comment on your comment.

1. We are taught that the Holy Ghost does not dwell in us.
2. We are taught that the Holy Ghost can only be in one place at a time.
3. We are taught that the Holy Ghost utilizes the “the light of Christ” to fulfill His purpose.
4.The apostles and prophets declare doctrine:

Then the scriptures say that “the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones,” as do the Father and the Son, “but is a personage of Spirit.” To this is added the somewhat enigmatic statement: “Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.” (D&C 130:22.)

Knowing as we do that the Holy Ghost is the Minister of the Father and the Son—appointed by them, because he is a spirit, to perform a specialized service for men—the meaning of these passages becomes clear. No member of the Godhead dwells in us in the literal sense of the word, but all of them dwell in us figuratively to the extent that we are like them. If we have “the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16), which we receive by the power of the Holy Ghost, then Christ dwells in us. If the love of God abides in our souls, which love is a gift of God that comes by the power of the Holy Ghost, then God dwells in us. In some way beyond our comprehension, all of this is possible by the power of the Holy Ghost.

New Witness for the Articles of Faith, P. 271
——————————————————————————–
As a Spirit personage the Holy Ghost has size and dimensions. He does not fill the immensity of space, and cannot be everywhere present in person at the same time.
Doctrines of Salvation Vol 1, P. 31.

I also find it interesting that men have a role model for eternal progression while women don’t have any clear indication of a role model. Men understand that while using their priesthood power through leadership, ministering, governing and counseling they are in fact refining skills they will need as they move down the path toward exaltation.

When I think about how the Holy Ghost functions in our lives, it’s a wonder to me that men and women haven’t made the connection that the very skills women refine in this life are ones used by the Holy Ghost. For example:
–Comforting
–Guiding
–illuminating truth
–giving us feelings of love, safety and peace
–testifying of the truth
–teaching us to discern truth
–helping us with our “internal dialogue”
–strengthening and supporting the “father” role in children’s lives

the list goes on and on…… the more one thinks about it, the more the idea of some random male taking on these private, personal and intimate roles sounds illogical. Our Mother seems more likely to have both the capacity and the desire to fulfill this task.

The question I ask myself is- If I knew the Holy Ghost was a role I was training for in my road towards exaltation, how would this knowledge change me? Would my mothering take on a new dimension? Would I have a better relationship with my husband? How would my own spiritual strivings change?

How would it effect my relationship with the Holy Ghost??? I can only assume it would deepen and become more personal.

Also, if MEN believed the Holy Ghost was a woman, how would this change THEIR relationships with the women in their lives? How would this change the way women were viewed and treated in the church? I believe it would could be the very thing that restored the dysfunctional relationship that exists between men and women’s roles in the church today.

The sad thing is, although I am very respected in my ward and teach Gospel Doctrine every week, I would be committing social suicide if I ever brought any of these ideas up. I would be looked at as a total lunatic……sad, but true. Thank heavens for blogs!

Well, now, i feel like an idiot for missing that. Sorry.

I do think that there is something about Him being able to dwell in us that allows for changes us. I have no idea how that comes about, but it sort of makes sense to me that since the Savior can’t physically be with all of us, that there be a vehicle of the blessings of the Atonement.