How do angels jibe with the Holy Spirit?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Roger316 said:
@GWH In the New Testament the term "comforter" doesn't mean what we think of "comforter" today. The key point is this: in the New Testament, a comforter is not primarily someone who soothes sorrow but someone who stands beside you as your legal advocate. The Greek term paraklētos—traditionally rendered “Comforter”—refers to a figure summoned to one’s side in a judicial setting, a defender who speaks on behalf of the accused and secures their vindication. In the ancient world, this was the role of a court‑advocate, not a therapist. When Jesus promises the coming of the paraklētos in John’s Gospel, he is describing the Spirit as the one who argues the believer’s case, exposes the world’s false judgment, and upholds the truth of Christ. The Spirit “comforts” not by mere emotional support but by defending, testifying, and securing the believer’s standing before God and the world. Recovering this legal dimension restores the sharpness of the term: the Comforter is our advocate in the divine courtroom.
Click to expand...

Yes, and per John 16:7-16 the Holy Spirit's roles include convicting souls of sin, righteousness and judgment/condemnation and guiding Christians into all spiritual truth/God's Word. Jesus indicated that he would be seen by his disciples when they received the Holy Spirit, which would be revealed following his resurrection and ascension on the day of Pentecost per Acts 1:4-2:4.

This is why I apply John 3:30 regarding the relationship of John and Jesus to this relationship between angels and the Holy Spirit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger316
GWH said:
Yes, it seems to me that angels subbed for the Holy Spirit during the Old Testament era before the ministry of the Holy Spirit was revealed, and now that we realize the presence of the Holy Spirit in our lives, who needs angels? Seems redundant at least.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I just realized that the conversation began in March and so my comments were a bit behind the conversation. Sorry about that.

You might consider something that you may not have thought about before. Remember the Transfiguration? It is indeed possible—given the narrative flow of the Gospels—that the Transfiguration functions as a moment of divine ministry to Jesus as he turns toward the suffering of the cross. The scene is not merely a revelation of glory to the disciples; it is a strengthening of the Son. Moses and Elijah appear not as random figures but as representatives of the Law and the Prophets, the entire story of Israel now standing beside Jesus to affirm the path he is about to walk. Luke even tells us explicitly that they “spoke of his exodus,” his impending departure through death and resurrection—a conversation meant for Jesus’ encouragement, not the disciples’. In this light, the Transfiguration becomes a moment where heaven itself ministers to Christ: the Father’s voice reaffirms his identity, the prophetic witnesses confirm his mission, and the glory he will return to is briefly unveiled before he descends the mountain to suffer. It is a scene of strengthening, confirmation, and divine companionship, not merely spectacle.
 
  • Heart
  • Pray
Reactions: dkontner and Ruthie
Roger316 said:
I'm sorry, I just realized that the conversation began in March and so my comments were a bit behind the conversation. Sorry about that.

You might consider something that you may not have thought about before. Remember the Transfiguration? It is indeed possible—given the narrative flow of the Gospels—that the Transfiguration functions as a moment of divine ministry to Jesus as he turns toward the suffering of the cross. The scene is not merely a revelation of glory to the disciples; it is a strengthening of the Son. Moses and Elijah appear not as random figures but as representatives of the Law and the Prophets, the entire story of Israel now standing beside Jesus to affirm the path he is about to walk. Luke even tells us explicitly that they “spoke of his exodus,” his impending departure through death and resurrection—a conversation meant for Jesus’ encouragement, not the disciples’. In this light, the Transfiguration becomes a moment where heaven itself ministers to Christ: the Father’s voice reaffirms his identity, the prophetic witnesses confirm his mission, and the glory he will return to is briefly unveiled before he descends the mountain to suffer. It is a scene of strengthening, confirmation, and divine companionship, not merely spectacle.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the event is devoid of angels. Perhaps the transfiguration prefigures the transition from the old era/revelation/angels to the new era of cooperation with the indwelling Spirit of Jesus per "he would be seen by his disciples when they received the Holy Spirit, which would be revealed following his resurrection and ascension on the day of Pentecost per Acts 1:4-2:4."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger316
GWH said:
Yes, and per John 16:7-16 the Holy Spirit's roles include convicting souls of sin, righteousness and judgment/condemnation and guiding Christians into all spiritual truth/God's Word. Jesus indicated that he would be seen by his disciples when they received the Holy Spirit, which would be revealed following his resurrection and ascension on the day of Pentecost per Acts 1:4-2:4.

This is why I apply John 3:30 regarding the relationship of John and Jesus to this relationship between angels and the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
I don't see the parallel between John's statement about the diminishing of his ministry and the diminishing of the Angelic ministry. But now that you mention it, I will keep my eye out for it as I study.

Here is another thing that you might consider.

In Hebrews, the term translated “angel” (angelos) must be read in its literary and theological context, and that context suggests that Paul is not speaking of created heavenly beings but of theophanies—the visible manifestations of God that appear throughout Israel’s history. If this is right, then Hebrews is addressing a real first‑century expectation: many Jews believed the Messiah would come as a theophanic figure, a divine messenger, an angelos in the sense of God’s own appearing. Paul’s argument, then, is deliberately corrective. By insisting that the Son is superior to the angels, he is disabusing his readers of the idea that the Messiah is merely another theophany or heavenly envoy. The Son is not one more manifestation of God’s presence; he is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of his nature, categorically above every theophanic messenger. Paul’s point is sharp: the Messiah is not an angelic appearance but the divine Son himself.
 
Roger316 said:
I don't see the parallel between John's statement about the diminishing of his ministry and the diminishing of the Angelic ministry. But now that you mention it, I will keep my eye out for it as I study.

Here is another thing that you might consider.

In Hebrews, the term translated “angel” (angelos) must be read in its literary and theological context, and that context suggests that Paul is not speaking of created heavenly beings but of theophanies—the visible manifestations of God that appear throughout Israel’s history. If this is right, then Hebrews is addressing a real first‑century expectation: many Jews believed the Messiah would come as a theophanic figure, a divine messenger, an angelos in the sense of God’s own appearing. Paul’s argument, then, is deliberately corrective. By insisting that the Son is superior to the angels, he is disabusing his readers of the idea that the Messiah is merely another theophany or heavenly envoy. The Son is not one more manifestation of God’s presence; he is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of his nature, categorically above every theophanic messenger. Paul’s point is sharp: the Messiah is not an angelic appearance but the divine Son himself.
Click to expand...

Yes, I had forgotten about theophanies. Using that terminology, the multiple theophanies in Israel's history could be viewed as coalescing and being superseded by THE ONE ultimate theophany aka the incarnation of Jesus, which should be magnified now
as the old fades (cf. John 3:30, Heb. 7:11-10:1).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger316
Roger316 said:
I don't see the parallel between John's statement about the diminishing of his ministry and the diminishing of the Angelic ministry. But now that you mention it, I will keep my eye out for it as I study.

Here is another thing that you might consider.

In Hebrews, the term translated “angel” (angelos) must be read in its literary and theological context, and that context suggests that Paul is not speaking of created heavenly beings but of theophanies—the visible manifestations of God that appear throughout Israel’s history. If this is right, then Hebrews is addressing a real first‑century expectation: many Jews believed the Messiah would come as a theophanic figure, a divine messenger, an angelos in the sense of God’s own appearing. Paul’s argument, then, is deliberately corrective. By insisting that the Son is superior to the angels, he is disabusing his readers of the idea that the Messiah is merely another theophany or heavenly envoy. The Son is not one more manifestation of God’s presence; he is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of his nature, categorically above every theophanic messenger. Paul’s point is sharp: the Messiah is not an angelic appearance but the divine Son himself.
Click to expand...

I recently noticed that John's statement not only applies to angels but also to Judaizers/Torahists,
who need to realize that God no longer requires anyone to follow the Torah in order to be saved (Rom. 3:20-5:11).

God required the Jews to follow Torah until Jesus fulfilled it (Heb. 7:11-10:10), but now God requires everyone
to accept Jesus as Messiah and cooperate with His loving Holy Spirit in believers' hearts (Acts 2:12-42).

Messianic Jews need to transition from the Old Covenant to the NC/Gospel,
becoming more Christian and less Pharisaic (John 3:30).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger316
GWH said:
I recently noticed that John's statement not only applies to angels but also to Judaizers/Torahists,
who need to realize that God no longer requires anyone to follow the Torah in order to be saved (Rom. 3:20-5:11).

God required the Jews to follow Torah until Jesus fulfilled it (Heb. 7:11-10:10), but now God requires everyone
to accept Jesus as Messiah and cooperate with His loving Holy Spirit in believers' hearts (Acts 2:12-42).

Messianic Jews need to transition from the Old Covenant to the NC/Gospel,
becoming more Christian and less Pharisaic (John 3:30).
Click to expand...
I generally agree with what you say. All of us whether Jew or Gentile should follow and obey Jesus Christ. In addition, Messianic Jews should also follow and obey the Torah. That is God's will for them. They are believers in Christ who also follow Moses. Nothing wrong with that.
 
Roger316 said:
I generally agree with what you say. All of us whether Jew or Gentile should follow and obey Jesus Christ. In addition, Messianic Jews should also follow and obey the Torah. That is God's will for them. They are believers in Christ who also follow Moses. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

It is wrong for Messianic Jews to believe obeying the Torah is how they are saved.
As I posted to @BenAvraham on another thread:

No one is disputing that the OT/Torah prepared the way for the NT Gospel or that sometimes the OT moral laws of Moses overlap/are reaffirmed by the new command of Jesus (love).

The issue per NT teaching is that obedience of laws is the old/childish/immature/inferior way of describing the relationship between God and believers.

The NT/mature/Christian/superior and thus superseding way (per Heb. 7:11-10:10) is cooperation/consensus/mutual submission/
love of the Holy Spirit.

If Torahists would speak of walking in the Spirit instead of obeying the Torah (applying John 3:30),
they could avoid the charge of seeming to be Pharisaic and there would be no problem.

Right?
 
GWH said:
It is wrong for Messianic Jews to believe obeying the Torah is how they are saved.
As I posted to @BenAvraham on another thread:

No one is disputing that the OT/Torah prepared the way for the NT Gospel or that sometimes the OT moral laws of Moses overlap/are reaffirmed by the new command of Jesus (love).
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree.
GWH said:
The issue per NT teaching is that obedience of laws is the old/childish/immature/inferior way of describing the relationship between God and believers.

The NT/mature/Christian/superior and thus superseding way (per Heb. 7:11-10:10) is cooperation/consensus/mutual submission/
love of the Holy Spirit.

If Torahists would speak of walking in the Spirit instead of obeying the Torah (applying John 3:30),
they could avoid the charge of seeming to be Pharisaic and there would be no problem.

Right?
Click to expand...
Right. Paul was in full agreement with those who wished to remain Kosher, for example. His problem is with those who project the idea that this makes them better than the others. If I think about it, the false gospel mentioned in Galatians wasn't about keeping Moses as such, it was about classifying the Apostolic Gospel as inferior.

Christian culture is guilty of the same kinds of "Phariseeism" , which is a rule-based Gospel. A person's commitment to Christ is suspect if they don't pray, give tithes, attend church on Sunday (or Saturday), and give to charity. In my friend's day, a good Christian didn't smoke, dance, go to the movies or hold hands in public. In my day, a good Christian smoked Christian smokes, danced Christian dances, attended Christian movies, and held Christian hands. Pharisaism is all about how we define ourselves and set ourselves apart from others.
 
Roger316 said:
I wholeheartedly agree.

Right. Paul was in full agreement with those who wished to remain Kosher, for example. His problem is with those who project the idea that this makes them better than the others. If I think about it, the false gospel mentioned in Galatians wasn't about keeping Moses as such, it was about classifying the Apostolic Gospel as inferior.

Christian culture is guilty of the same kinds of "Phariseeism" , which is a rule-based Gospel. A person's commitment to Christ is suspect if they don't pray, give tithes, attend church on Sunday (or Saturday), and give to charity. In my friend's day, a good Christian didn't smoke, dance, go to the movies or hold hands in public. In my day, a good Christian smoked Christian smokes, danced Christian dances, attended Christian movies, and held Christian hands. Pharisaism is all about how we define ourselves and set ourselves apart from others.
Click to expand...

Yes, as though John said, "I must grow greater while He grows lesser."
Yes, all forms of Pharisaism/legalism are wrong.
 
GWH said:
And so this study of angels ends with a song celebrating the Spirit of the Lord...

https://groovykerygma.bandcamp.com/track/spirit-of-the-lord

...unless someone wants to add something; Happy trails until we learn about angelology in heaven!
:love:
Click to expand...

On another thread questions about Satan were asked that are appropriate to consider here, perhaps by way of a P.S.:

1. Should Satan be blamed for souls' sins?
2. Does Satan rule the earth?
3. How is it merciful for God to unleash demonic forces upon the world and then blame the natural and instinctive forces He unleashed?

Your answers?
 
GWH said:
On another thread questions about Satan were asked that are appropriate to consider here, perhaps by way of a P.S.:

1. Should Satan be blamed for souls' sins?
2. Does Satan rule the earth?
3. How is it merciful for God to unleash demonic forces upon the world and then blame the natural and instinctive forces He unleashed?

Your answers?
Click to expand...
Satan is not blameworthy for our sins, we are blameworthy for our own sins.

Paul argues that Satan is the prince of the power of the air. And what does he mean? In Greek, there were two kinds of air: the thin air at higher altitudes and the thicker air at lower altitudes, which we typically call "fog." Sailors at sea and drivers on the highway know how thick fog can become, and Paul is using the Greek word for "thick air:aeros" as a metaphor for deception. In other words, Satan is the prince who controls this world system, and he does it through obfuscation, confusion, propaganda, and doubt

Satan's ability and tactic to deceive would not be effective if mankind didn't want to be deceived. But mankind wants to be deceived. Mankind is being held prisoner by their own desires because they love wickedness more than the truth. And God has given them over to their wickedness.

To wonder about demonic forces is to wonder about weeds. God was not merciful to leave mankind to imprison himself in his own desires. They want to be deceived because the truth will convict them that a real God will hold them morally responsible. Demonic forces are like weeds because it takes effort to remove them and defeat them. Those who love the truth can easily defeat them because they have no power over them.
 
Roger316 said:
Satan is not blameworthy for our sins, we are blameworthy for our own sins.

Paul argues that Satan is the prince of the power of the air. And what does he mean? In Greek, there were two kinds of air: the thin air at higher altitudes and the thicker air at lower altitudes, which we typically call "fog." Sailors at sea and drivers on the highway know how thick fog can become, and Paul is using the Greek word for "thick air:aeros" as a metaphor for deception. In other words, Satan is the prince who controls this world system, and he does it through obfuscation, confusion, propaganda, and doubt

Satan's ability and tactic to deceive would not be effective if mankind didn't want to be deceived. But mankind wants to be deceived. Mankind is being held prisoner by their own desires because they love wickedness more than the truth. And God has given them over to their wickedness.

To wonder about demonic forces is to wonder about weeds. God was not merciful to leave mankind to imprison himself in his own desires. They want to be deceived because the truth will convict them that a real God will hold them morally responsible. Demonic forces are like weeds because it takes effort to remove them and defeat them. Those who love the truth can easily defeat them because they have no power over them.
Click to expand...

Yes, Satan has no more power on earth than humans choose to grant him (Jam. 4:7).
Amen, love of truth is the choice that defeats Satan (2Thes. 2:10, 1Tim. 2:3-4).
 
GWH said:
Yes, Satan has no more power on earth than humans choose to grant him (Jam. 4:7).
Amen, love of truth is the choice that defeats Satan (2Thes. 2:10, 1Tim. 2:3-4).
Click to expand...

Call me blind, but I had not connected Jam. 4:7 with 2Thes. 2:10 before,
which as a truthseeker I should have seen, so thanks for prompting that insight!
The lie of Satan desires to murder the truth of God (Gen. 3:1-3, John 8:42-44).
 
@DavidLamb on another thread implied by saying the unfallen angels did not sin that Jesus was no better than they,
because (per Hebrews) his moral perfection is what makes him superior to humans and qualified to atone for sins.

The Bible does not explain angelology, which is why we have questions that are appropriate for this thread:

Are angels robots, programmed to obey God? If so, then how did a third of them fall?

Their fall implies MFW, and MFW implies ability to sin and to repent of sin, does it not?

Perhaps the unfallen angels did not commit the mortal/damning sin of hating God?

And they confess/confessed their minor sins immediately and so are/were forgiven rather than expelled from heaven?

Forgiven on the basis of belief in Christ's atonement, who is sinless and therefore their superior?

Any thoughts/opinions?
 
Or maybe it has to do with 'after 6 days', two wittnesses and the Day of the Lord? It's prophecy. Jesus saves.
 
GWH said:
@DavidLamb on another thread implied by saying the unfallen angels did not sin that Jesus was no better than they,
because (per Hebrews) his moral perfection is what makes him superior to humans and qualified to atone for sins.

The Bible does not explain angelology, which is why we have questions that are appropriate for this thread:

Are angels robots, programmed to obey God? If so, then how did a third of them fall?

Their fall implies MFW, and MFW implies ability to sin and to repent of sin, does it not?

Perhaps the unfallen angels did not commit the mortal/damning sin of hating God?

And they confess/confessed their minor sins immediately and so are/were forgiven rather than expelled from heaven?

Forgiven on the basis of belief in Christ's atonement, who is sinless and therefore their superior?

Any thoughts/opinions?
Click to expand...
Your thread began with a discussion of angels as ministering spirits, which I found interesting. The angel that immediately comes to mind is Gabriel, who appears in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.
 
Roger316 said:
Your thread began with a discussion of angels as ministering spirits, which I found interesting. The angel that immediately comes to mind is Gabriel, who appears in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.
Click to expand...

Howdy Rog, yes, and I still find angelology to be problematic and tend to view them as a primitive foreshadowing of the Holy Spirit, even though the archangel is mentioned in 1Thes. 4:16 as accompanying the Lord when He returns.

What are your thoughts about the questions mentioned in my previous post?

BTW, I also still find Revelation to be problematic, raising more questions than it answers after studying it systematically beginning on page 8 of this thread.
 
GWH said:
Howdy Rog, yes, and I still find angelology to be problematic and tend to view them as a primitive foreshadowing of the Holy Spirit, even though the archangel is mentioned in 1Thes. 4:16 as accompanying the Lord when He returns.

What are your thoughts about the questions mentioned in my previous post?

BTW, I also still find Revelation to be problematic, raising more questions than it answers after studying it systematically beginning on page 8 of this thread.
Click to expand...
I haven't studied angelology, so take what I say here with a grain of salt. :)

Are angels robots, programmed to obey God? If so, then how did a third of them fall?
I don't think angels are programmed robots. Your instincts seem correct: since some of them fell, they have free will and can be deceived. But I am not an Angel so I don't know what argument Satan might make to convince his angels to rebel against God.

Their fall implies MFW, and MFW implies ability to sin and to repent of sin, does it not?
We can never know the answer to this because, according to Jude, they have already been judged and reside in a prison of darkness. For them, there is no opportunity to repent,

Perhaps the unfallen angels did not commit the mortal/damning sin of hating God?
Scripture never explicitly says that unfallen angels are “forgiven” for minor offenses. In fact, the Bible doesn’t even present forgiveness as part of the angelic economy the way it does for humanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back