And in the boo of Enoch also we have similar descriptions. But up to the present time we have been able to find no statement in holy Scripture in which the Holy Spirit could be said to be made or created, not even in the way in which we have shown above that the divine wisdom is spoken of by Solomon, or in which those expressions which we have discussed are to be understood of the life, or the word, or the other appellations of the Son of God. The Spirit of God, therefore, which was borne upon the waters, as is written in the beginning of the creation of the world, is, I am of opinion, no other than the Holy Spirit, so far as I can understand; as indeed we have shown in our exposition of the passages themselves, not according to the historical, but according to the spiritual method of interpretation. (Book I, Chapter 3, Part 3)

Even for this long-time skeptic of the trinity, I have understood the Holy Spirit to be the same as the Breath of God. I have taken this for granted.

Origen could take nothing for granted. Nothing had been established. All was new.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, "Although the Holy Spirit is often named instead of God (e.g., in Sifre, Deut. 31 [ed. Friedmann, p. 72]), yet it was conceived as being something distinct. The Spirit was among the ten things that were created on the first day (Ḥag. 12a, b). Though the nature of the Holy Spirit is really nowhere described, the name indicates that it was conceived as a kind of wind that became manifest through noise and light."

It is easy to critique. It is more difficult to imagine being at the beginning and doing our best to make sense.

The tone and approach of Origen is exploratory rather than dogmatic. He is working with us to understand and organize as best we can. In humility and openness to other possibilities, this is entirely worthwhile.