Is the Holy Spirit the angel Gabriel?

[YieldedOne]

SalamChristian:
And, looking at everything that I have proved, I am now going to make a very solid argument that the Holy Spirit resides within the Angel Gabriel, as it resides within Jesus and all other Holy beings, and that a great amount of textual evidence exists that Gabriel is the preferred transmitter of it from Heaven, and that he was the one who transmitted it onto Mary at the birth of Jesus.

Wait a second. This is a different argument that you were making before. Before you seemed to be saying that the Holy Spirit was ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL TO the created angel, Gabriel. You're not saying that now. Now you seem to be saying that the angel Gabriel is a MEDIUM of sorts for the Holy Spirit's activity.

Which claim are you trying to make?

PS: Check out what I've put on the "paraclete" thread. I think you will be interested.

 

[SalamChristian]

Which claim are you trying to make?

You sound like a Pharisee, lol. Tell me exactly what you are claiming! Haha, just kidding, but seriously check out what I say below:

For those who claim that the "paraclete" is simply the Holy Spirit and nothing else, a serious exegetical problem arises:

In John 20, Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to the disciples:

"And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit." John 20:22

Jesus gives the Holy Spirit before he leaves.

In John 16 we are told:

"But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." John 16:7

Thus, the Paraclete cannot simply be the Holy Spirit, because Jesus blows the Holy Spirit onto the Apostles before he leaves, but the Paraclete cannot come to them until after. Of course, we are told also that the Paraclete is the Holy Spirit (John 14:26).

Exegetically, we have to find a solution to this problem. The only solution I am seeing is that the Holy Spirit is greater than the Paraclete, but the Paraclete is one with the Holy Spirit (completely filled with it), similar in the relation of Jesus to the Father. This has precedent in the mystical language Jesus consistently uses (parables, prophecies). Consider this verse:

"That which is born of The Spirit is Spirit." John 3:6

"My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity." John 17

It is important to understand that this oneness which Jesus describes repetitively in the same language that he describes his oneness with the Father not only occurs through the Holy Spirit, but it is the Holy Spirit. We are all filled with the Spirit, so that God may be all in all, and yet each is distinct in their being, though not in their Spirit.

Indeed, this fits with our common understanding of the Spirit being within everyone, but also greater than that which resides within any single person.

Thus, the Paraclete is the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit is distinct from simply being the Paraclete, because the Holy Spirit of John 20:19 is not the Paraclete.

Moreover, when we look, we see that Messengers are given the name paraclete. Jesus himself is called Paraclete in 1 John 2:1, and paraclete has a distinct meaning of intercessor (which squares perfectly with the fact that the Holy Spirit is transmitted by touch and breath of beings who have it), among the others mentioned. Lastly, Jesus himself says that he will send "another Paraclete" in John 14:16, meaning there was a Paraclete before this one. If the Holy Spirit is eternal, this is especially problematic for the traditional interpretation that the Paraclete is simply a synonym for Holy Spirit and in no other way distinct.

Taking all of these things together, the simple understanding of the Paraclete as the Holy Breath, as it was breathed onto the Apostles by Jesus in John 20, is inadequate. The Paraclete must come in a distinct form of one who transmits/intercedes physically the Holy Spirit from itself, sent from the Father to the church at the request of Jesus, only after he is within heaven.

Peace

 

[YieldedOne]

We're gonna play a little game called "Then and Now"!

Exact quote time.

THEN...

YO:
My question is as follows, SC:
When David talked about God's Holy Spirit in Psalm 51, was he specifically talking about the created angel, Gabriel? If so, upon what relevant Scriptures do you base that?

SalamChristian:
The Title of this thread is: Is The Holy Spirit the Angel Gabriel? My answer was yes. All of the scriptures I have quoted are available for everyone to see on this thread. If you think Psalm 51 fits that category, then my answer would be yes.


NOW...

SalamChristian:
And, looking at everything that I have proved, I am now going to make a very solid argument that the Holy Spirit resides within the Angel Gabriel, as it resides within Jesus and all other Holy beings, and that a great amount of textual evidence exists that Gabriel is the preferred transmitter of it from Heaven, and that he was the one who transmitted it onto Mary at the birth of Jesus.


^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)^o)

 

[YieldedOne]

So, SalamChristian. Are you FORMALLY disagreeing with the claims of the following website?

What Is Meant by the Holy Spirit in the Qur'an?

Part of it...

It should be clear from the above that the Holy Spirit is the Angel Jibreel sent by Allah to assist His chosen servants in their divinely ordained missions."

Or this one?

In conclusion, the "Holy Spirit" in the Quran refers to the angel Gabriel and has nothing to do with Trinity or part of a Trinity.

 

[YieldedOne]

More of the "Then and Now" game..


THEN (3 days ago):
SalamChristian to FiveSolas in the "Paraclete" thread:
Why does Jesus have to leave before the "Paraclete" can come? The Holy Spirit plainly is in the world while Jesus is there, in the Gospels. Doesn't this preclude the Holy Spirit from even possibly being the "paraclete?"


NOW:
SalamChristian:
Thus, the Paraclete is the Holy Spirit...

My brother, my brother. You seem to flip more than a politician in election year! Mad love...

LOL!!!

:haha:

 

[SalamChristian]

My brother, my brother. You seem to flip more than a politician in election year! Mad love... LOL!!!

Hahaha, I am Human, just like you! lol. Plus, I SAID from the beginning, that I was merely inspired to consider the ideas of Muslims in these threads. I never said that I had a complete system of proof from the beginning of this long Holy Spirit, Gabriel, "paraclete" discussion--quite the opposite in fact:

Then, at the beginning:

I want to know what you think (that's why I wrote the thread)! What are the thoughts of the Christians on the forum? What are the thoughts of the Muslims?

I admit, that I haven't been in perfect righteousness and understanding from my birth, lol. But, if I bring you the Truth, you would do well to not reject it for my being human.

You have not exegetically reconciled the verses I have pointed out with your interpretation. Also, I would like to know if you have received the points I made about the Holy Spirit and Gabriel in the previous post, and if not, on what grounds you reject them. We have brought up all of the relevant verses I know of, and this exegesis is the one which makes comprehensive sense to me.

You asked:

So, SalamChristian. Are you FORMALLY disagreeing with the claims of the following website?

I will deal with Islam in full when you and I establish what the Exegesis of our scripture leads to first. Give me responses on that.

I will say, however, that I am curious whether Islam's understanding isn't fully reconcilable and indeed equivalent to the one we are ending up with after our honest exegesis in this thread. Here is a quote from the website you posted:

"The Holy Spirit mentioned in the above verse refers to the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel), also known as Jibraaeel; he is the message-bearer par excellence from Allah, the Lord of Glory and Grace; he is also the conduit of divine support and assistance bestowed on Prophets, Messengers as well as righteous people who strive in the path of Allah."

Of course, Muhammad also serves most of these functions, brings them from Gabriel to the Ummah, and to unbelievers.

Of course, I formally disagree with the claim that he has a monopoly on the role of "conduit of divine support," because the Holy Spirit can also be transmitted by believers on this earth and is transmitted by Jesus to the Apostles. But we should take the Qu'ran as the authority, if we want to know what the Qu'ran preaches, and not anyone else. So let's save that, like I said, until I get a response from you on my TWO very LONG posts.

Peace brother

 

[YieldedOne]

SalamChristian:
I will deal with Islam in full when you and I establish what the Exegesis of our scripture leads to first. Give me responses on that.

Honestly, bro, I'm having some issues with your form of exegesis. I disagree with a number of your interpretations. Let me just give ONE example. One.

You said:
LASTLY, if we take the text literally, then Gabriel's visit to Mary and Elizabeth in the text specifically states that Gabriel transmits the Holy Spirit on Mary via embrace:

Luke 1:35: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the Power of the Most High will overshadow/embrace you."

The name Gabriel does mean Power/Strength/Might/Force of the Most High (among other senses), and he stands in the presence of God. Indeed, this is probably why Hebrew speaking Jews accepted the claim in Enoch that Gabriel "presides over all that is powerful" as scripture. Indeed, the Greek "dunamis" literally means power/(physical)strength/might, which are all meanings within the umbrella term "geber," "gabor," "gabrah" which Gabriel is built from, giving a lot of weight to this linguistic analysis, as they share numerous connections and not simply a peripheral one. As I said earlier, Gabriel=Geber(Power/Might/Strength/Force)-el(God).

Now, let's dissect this a bit.

First of all, if we JUST took the text, all that it says is that Gabriel merely TALKED to Mary...and nothing more.

I'm gonna put the whole encounter...

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?”

And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God.” And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.

Now, we can get the Greek if you like, but I don't think there's any reason to. There is no textual evidence of Gabriel doing anything AT ALL except talking to her. Just like he was sent by God to TALK to Zechariah about Elizabeth's imminent pregnancy with John the Baptist. (Luke 1:8-23)

Nah...let's go to the Greek. The word used for "overshadow" is episkiazó. If you look the etymology deals SPECIFICALLY WITH the idea of shade or shadow at it's root. Like the tree "casts shade" on the ground.

It has NOTHING...I repeat...NOTHING to do with "embracing" at all! Not one iota.

So you are WRONGLY interpreting the word, forcing it to mean what it clearly doesn't. As such, your whole idea (that the Holy Spirit was transmitted to Mary via his physical "embrace" of her) is not textually justified in the least!

Then you go on to attempt to justify this by some etymological excursion into Gabriel's name. Basically, your argumentation goes thusly:

The etymology of Gabriel's name involves "power" and "might"...so we can conclude that the "Power of the Most High" that Gabriel is talking about involves himself in some way.

But this is completely unwarranted. Completely. It seems like outright exegetical gymnastics towards a intended agenda: aligning Gabriel directly with the Holy Spirit.

And, bro...this is ONE instance. ONE.

Do you see why I may have issues trying to deal with ALL the Scriptures you mention?

Seriously. :hmm:

I ain't trying to be harsh or anything like that, my brother. I just want to show you where I'm coming from, ya dig? :shade:

 

[SalamChristian]

It has NOTHING...I repeat...NOTHING to do with "embracing" at all!

overshadow. "From epi and a derivative of skia; to cast a shade upon, i.e. (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy; figuratively, to invest with preternatural influence -- overshadow"


I want you to understand where they are getting "envelop" from--the word "skia" does mean shadow, but specifically in the sense of the outline of the shadow. When I say "embrace" my point is that it does have a distinct meaning of close contact, and of transmitting something. Obviously I don't mean that the Angel Gabriel had sex with Mary. Even Muslims don't believe that.


From Getting in God's Face by Dutch Sheets:


"'Overshadow' is the Greek Word episkiazo, which means to cast a shade upon; to envelop in a haze of brilliancy; to invest with a supernatural influence. It's the same word that's used in Acts 5:15 when people are trying to get close to Peter--in his shadow--so they would be healed. Have you ever wondered why Peter's shadow could heal anyone? It didn't. What was actually happening was that the Holy Spirit was "moving" out from Peter--overshadowing--and when people stepped into the cloud or overshadowing, they were healed."


I'm don't mean for it to hurt you, but the evidence is actually very strong, and it's not coming from me but from the scripture.



Peace

 

[YieldedOne]

SalamChristian:
When I say "embrace" my point is that it does have a distinct meaning of close contact, and of transmitting something. Obviously I don't mean that the Angel Gabriel had sex with Mary. Even Muslims don't believe that.

I didn't say anything about sex. I'm talking about ANY AMOUNT of touching, embracing, or physical contact at all. In other words, there is nothing textual to even suggest that Gabriel had any physical contact with Mary at all. At all. This is what you've said...

"The Paraclete must come in a distinct form (even if identical in Spirit) of one who transmits/intercedes physically the Holy Spirit from itself, sent from the Father to the church at the request of Jesus, only after he is within heaven."

These are your exact words, bro. You've mentioned transmission of the Holy Spirit via physical contact. THAT'S what I understood when you said "embrace", not sex.

What I'm trying to tell you, homie, is that this is NOT JUSTIFIED by the etmyology of the word episkiazo. Not even your quote from Dutch Sheets even says that. It says nothing about physical embrace. As a matter of fact, the word in Acts 5:15 SPECIFICALLY talks about Peter's SHADOW "falling" on the people. And all Dutch Sheets did was make an ANALOGY between the Holy Spirit's activity through Peter's shadow...and the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit.

None of this has anything to do with physical touching at all...let alone embracing. Do you really not see this? Really?

 

[SalamChristian]

None of this has anything to do with physical touching at all...let alone embracing. Do you really not see this? Really?

It does refer specifically to transmission of the Holy Spirit. It is the same language that is used in Acts 5:15.

SPECIFICALLY talks about Peter's SHADOW "falling"

No, it does not specifically talk about a shadow. That's the point that Dutch Sheets makes. A better way to say it would be to say that the aura or "haze of brilliancy" (As Strong's defines it) from Peter that comes out from Peter to others. They must be within it in order to receive the Holy Spirit. It does not refer specifically to a simple shadow, such as the sun might cast. As I said earlier, the embracing was about "having a distinct meaning of close contact, and of transmitting something." "The Power of the Most High will be cast upon you" is equivalent to the point I have been trying to make in the last 3 posts, but you are attacking the metaphor I gave you instead of the point.

Peace

 

[YieldedOne]

SC:
As I said earlier, the embracing was about "having a distinct meaning of close contact". "The Power of the Most High will be cast upon you" is the point I have been trying to make in the last 3 posts, but you are attacking the metaphor I gave you instead of the point.

Oy vay. :skeleton:

Let's just play this your way. Let's also leave out the word "embrace", ok?

1) What SPECIFICALLY is the "close contact" to which you refer between Mary and the "Power of the Most High"? Does it have anything at all to do with PHYSICAL proximity and/or touch?

and...

2) HOW is Gabriel involved in this "close contact" at all? Does his involvement have anything at all to do with PHYSICAL proximity and/or touch?

Please be very, very specific. My brain's hurtin' now. :exhausted

 

[YieldedOne]

SC:
It does refer specifically to transmission of the Holy Spirit. It is the same language that is used in Acts 5:15.

Woooooow. Are you saying that Act 5:15 means that Peter TRANSMITTED the Holy Spirit to those sick people via his shadow, not just that the Holy Spirit worked through his shadow to heal others?

Ok. Turn me over, I'm done. You win. :heated:

-----------------

LASTLY, if we take the text literally, then Gabriel's visit to Mary and Elizabeth in the text specifically states that Gabriel transmits the Holy Spirit on Mary via embrace: Luke 1:35: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the Power of the Most High will overshadow/embrace you."

 

[SalamChristian]

TRANSMITTED the Holy Spirit to those sick people via his shadow, not just that the Holy Spirit worked through his shadow to heal others?

That is exactly what I am saying. Paul transmits the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands in Acts 19:6. In fact, this whole episode with Peter is pre-figured in the woman who touches the hem of Christ's garment. "I felt the power go out/forth from me."

not just that the Holy Spirit worked through his shadow to heal others?

It was transmitted out through contact with the "haze of brilliancy" (strong's) which came from Peter to those who were sick. Notice that they were trying to get within this aura, because they had to be touched by it to receive the healing.

The idea of Laying on of Hands, breathing the Holy Spirit, et cetera is not foreign at all to our understanding of the Spirit.

Let's also leave out the word "embrace", ok?

Sure thing!

HOW is Gabriel involved in this "close contact" at all?

Let's read the words in question:

"The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you."

1. "eperchomai"=come on with the specific sense of staying on you/unable to be taken off = so let's say invested (this is the only English word I can think of which fits these requirements)
2. "Power of the Most High"=Gabriel=geber (power, might, strength, force) + el (God) // "geber" isn't just peripherally a synonym for "dunamis"--they both have meanings of "might, strength, force, and power" Moreover, Hebrew speaking Jews recognized this in Enoch--Gabriel was identified as the "angel that presides over all that is powerful."
3. "overshadow"=episkiasei=cast upon you such that it transmits (i.e. the Holy Spirit), as we have shown is most fitting.

ALTOGETHER

"The Holy Spirit will be invested in you, and Gabriel will be cast upon you/transmit (it)."

Peace

 

[YieldedOne]

SalamChristian:
3. "overshadow"=episkiasei=cast upon you such that it transmits (i.e. the Holy Spirit), as we have shown is most fitting.

Can I show you something? And I really, really hope that this works. Do you know why Strong's uses the analogical term "haze of brilliancy? Let's look, ok? Please follow the thinking. I'm gonna try this. Lord, help.

If you look at all of the forms of episkiazó used in the Bible (By Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, that's only FIVE times)...THREE of those FIVE times all deal with different Gospel variations of the SAME EVENT: the Transfiguration of Jesus when the the Disciples were "overshadowed" by the brilliant cloud on Mt. Tabor. The OTHER two times is Luke 1:35 (the Mary passage)...and then the Peter passage you've mentioned.

So, the reason why Strong's defines it ANALOGICALLY they way that it does is because of the way the word is used with respect to the brilliant cloud on Mt. Tabor. It has NOTHING TO DO with the etymology of the word itself. That's why the Strong's says "(by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy"

So...to try to take this "haze of brilliancy" analogical note from Strong's and impose it on the Luke 1:35 passage is problematic at best. To make this "haze of brilliancy" idea attempt to mean "transmission" of some type. Well, I just don't know what to say about that.

Had to give it one more shot.

Peace, brother.

-------------------------------------------

overshadow.

From epi and a derivative of skia; to cast a shade upon, i.e. (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy; figuratively, to invest with preternatural influence -- overshadow.

see GREEK epi
see GREEK skia

ἐπεσκίαζεν (epeskiazen) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπεσκίασεν (epeskiasen) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπισκιάζουσα (episkiazousa) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπισκιάσει (episkiasei) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπισκιάσῃ (episkiasē) − 1 Occurrence

 

[SalamChristian]

So, the reason why Strong's defines it ANALOGICALLY they way that it does is because of the way the word is used with respect to the brilliant cloud on Mt. Tabor.

Nah. The 3rd definition sense provided here is "to invest with preternatural influence" which again fits with the invest point I made about "eperchomai" in the preceding phrase. It is the act of transmitting/investing the Holy Spirit, metaphorically viewed in the sense of a shadow or a brilliant haze or an aura or whatever metaphor you want to provide. The verses you quote strengthen the interpretation, because language does not exist in a vacuum but pulls meaning from all of its linguistic senses.

Have you heard of the aura which saints are said to give off? Notice how artistically they are always portrayed with a halo (i.e. aura)?

Asalaam Alaikum to you too, brother

P.S. What did you think about all of the other points I made about the nature of the Holy Spirit/Gabriel? I saw your post about the "paraclete" on the other Thread, and I am going to respond to it there.

 

[YieldedOne]

SC:
1. "eperchomai"=come on with the specific sense of staying on you/unable to be taken off = so let's say invested (this is the only English word I can think of which fits these requirements)

Let the reader decide for him/herself...

eperchomai

Original Word: ἐπέρχομαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: eperchomai
Phonetic Spelling: (ep-er'-khom-ahee)
Short Definition: I approach, overtake, attack
Definition: I come to, arrive, come on, come upon, attack.

--------------

1904 epérxomai (from 1909 /epí, "on, fitting" and 2064/erxomai, "come") – properly, come upon, i.e. what comes and leaves its appropriate, inevitable effects that build on the particular coming. (Note the prefix epi, showing the action as the "epi-center" of what happens.)

1904/epérxomai ("come upon, apt-coming") stresses the "fitting results" of the coming – even more than the initial impact of the coming itself.

[1904 (epérxomai) is an intensification of the base-term (2064/erxomai, "coming").]

------------------------------

Word Origin

from epi and erchomai

Definition
to come to or upon

NASB Word Usage
attacks (1), came (1), come (5), coming (2).

------------------------------------

come in, come upon.

From epi and erchomai; to supervene, i.e. Arrive, occur, impend, attack, (figuratively) influence -- come (in, upon).

see GREEK epi

see GREEK erchomai

ἐπεισελεύσεται (epeiseleusetai) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπελεύσεται (epeleusetai) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπέλθῃ (epelthē) − 2 Occurrences

ἐπελθόντος (epelthontos) − 1 Occurrence

ἐπελθὼν (epelthōn) − 1 Occurrence

 

[SalamChristian]

1904 epérxomai (from 1909 /epí, "on, fitting" and 2064/erxomai, "come") – properly, come upon, i.e. what comes and leaves its appropriate, inevitable effects that build on the particular coming. (Note the prefix epi, showing the action as the "epi-center" of what happens.) 1904/epérxomai ("come upon, apt-coming") stresses the "fitting results" of the coming – even more than the initial impact of the coming itself. [1904 (epérxomai) is an intensification of the base-term (2064/erxomai, "coming").]

Shalom

 

[siam]

YO---have to disagree with you once again---
Muslims do not worship God's "attributes"---We worship God alone. God is an indivisble "reality"---not a triune reality.
....also..."attributes" do not take on the forms of animals or humans.....

 

[YieldedOne]

Siam:
YO---have to disagree with you once again---
Muslims do not worship God's "attributes"---We worship God alone. God is an indivisble "reality"---not a triune reality.

Woodrow understood what I was saying...and it seemed that he understood very clearly. He seems like a very intelligent fellow. Just because a reality is indivisible doesn't mean that it doesn't have different "facets".
Dude, are you just disagreeing just because? Man...

*********************************

Yo, SalamChristian. Do what you do, bro.

Actually, you know what? I know a coupla seminary professors here in St. Paul. Professors from Bethel Seminary. I'm gonna bring up your argument in it's fulness the next time we talk and see what they say. I'll put it right here when I do, ok? I can't wait to see what they say. Wow.

 

[Woodrow]

Siam:


Woodrow understood what I was saying...and it seemed that he understood very clearly. He seems like a very intelligent fellow. Just because a reality is indivisible doesn't mean that it doesn't have different "facets".
Dude, are you just disagreeing just because? Man...

At this point I want to reiterate that an attribute or facet is no more and no less then one aspect of the whole. An attribute does not exist separately nor independent of the whole.