Is Christ equal to God?

[DivineNames]

"I must say a little about this New Testament basis of the belief, although it would require a whole week, or more likely a whole year, to discuss it properly. But most New Testament scholars today do not believe that Jesus, the historical individual, claimed to be God incarnate. That doesn’t mean that they don’t believe that Jesus was in fact God incarnate, but they don’t think that he himself taught that he was. In case this comes as a surprise to some, I will give some brief quotations. I’m going to quote only from distinguished New Testament scholars who personally believe strongly that the Church has been right in believing that Jesus was God incarnate. They believe this with their whole heart. But nevertheless they hold, on the basis of the evidence, that Jesus did not himself claim this. Referring first to those New Testament sayings which I quoted a minute ago - ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life . . .’ etc. - Professor Charlie Moule of Cambridge, the doyen of conservative British New Testament scholars writes (in The Origin of Christology, 1977, p. 136), ‘Any case for a “high†Christology that depended on the authenticity of the alleged claims of Jesus about himself, especially in the fourth Gospel [i.e. John’s], would indeed be precarious’. Also in Cambridge Canon Brian Hebblethwaite of Queen’s College, a notable defender of the orthodox doctrine, says (The Incarnation, 1987, p. 74) that ‘it is no longer possible to defend the divinity of Jesus by reference to the claims of Jesus’. Then the late Archbishop Michael Ramsey (previously a New Testament professor) said in his book Jesus and the Living Past (1960, p.39), ‘Jesus did not claim deity for himself’. Again, perhaps the leading New Testament scholar in this country today, Professor James Dunn of Durham, after examining minutely every relevant text, in all four Gospels, and indeed throughout the New Testament, writes (Christology in the Making, 1980, p. 60) that ‘there was no real evidence in the earliest Jesus-tradition of what could fairly be called a consciousness of divinity’. These are all people who accept the traditional Incarnation doctrine, but who are also part of the scholarly consensus that the historical Jesus did not himself teach this. It is generally held today that the great ‘I am’ sayings of the fourth Gospel, which I quoted a minute ago, cannot be attributed to the historical Jesus but are words put into his mouth by a Christian writer some 60-70 years later, and also that Jesus’ sayings in the Synoptic Gospels cannot be taken to constitute a claim to be God incarnate - as Dunn says, ‘there was no real evidence in the earliest Jesus-tradition of what could fairly be called a consciousness of divinity’. If this comes to anyone as a bit of a shock, that is because although theologically educated ministers of the church know this, they do not mention it in their sermons. And I must confess that I myself have never said it in a sermon, but only in settings such as this."


John Hick, Is Christianity the only true religion, or one among others?

http://www.johnhick.org.uk/article2.shtml


According to this article it may not merely be 'liberals' who question it.

 

[Imagican]

When you say that Christ Himself did not claim to be God, and take in to consideration 'who' Christ 'did' say that He was, what does that leave us? Not only the words of Christ Himself, but those of Paul also. There are obvious distinctions between the two throughout the New Testament and very little indicating anything other than TWO SEPERATE ENTITIES. The same message, but one being the creator and the other being created to deliverer it.

Exactly what does, "The ONLY begotten...." mean? :o

 

[Orthodox Christian]

When you say that Christ Himself did not claim to be God, and take in to consideration 'who' Christ 'did' say that He was, what does that leave us? Not only the words of Christ Himself, but those of Paul also. There are obvious distinctions between the two throughout the New Testament and very little indicating anything other than TWO SEPERATE ENTITIES. The same message, but one being the creator and the other being created to deliverer it.

Exactly what does, "The ONLY begotten...." mean? :o

Monogenni, translated only begotten, means 'one of a kind.

Christ is the Word of God. The Person of the Father begets His Word as the origin of that Word. But this cannot mean that there was a time when the Father had no Word, for then He would have changed. The Word proceeds from the Father in order, not time.

Modalists and Oneness adherents will forevermore be arguing the Trinity from Earth Standard Time, as if God were a man.

 

[McQuacks]

The epistles of Paul attest to the belief in Jesus as God, and they are widely held as fairly early writings. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb3.htm (scroll down to "Comparison of the beliefs of conservative and liberal theologians".) To suggest that the writers of the gospels would knowingly attribute sayings and claims to Jesus that He never made is hard for me to believe. They would be hypocrites and knowingly leading people to put their whole faith and trust and eternal destiny in a man whom they knew was just that - a man.
-McQ 8-)

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Jesus is not equal to the Father but yet he is God. The way that I see it is that Jesus is a limited avatar of the Father. God has three manifestations: the Father who created the universe through the Son; the Son who is God in human form; and the Holy Spirit who is God as a spiritual force. The Father is more unlimited and infinite than the Son. The Father is also the original, preexistent, form of the Divine since, "the Son proceeds form the Father." That is why Jesus is not equal to the Father because He has human limitations.

 

[Free]

The problem is Gendou is that there is no such thing as a 'limited' or 'less infinite God,' that is a contradiction. Either someone is God or they are not.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Confusion sweeps over me in waves of liquid fire. The Godhead is a brutal subject to grasp and my view of it is changing from day to day; literally. From reading John 17 it seems that the same relationship that Jesus has with the Father; we will also obtain.

that they all may be one, as Thou Father [art] in me, and I in Thee; that they also in us may be one, that the world may believe that Thou didst send me. And I, the glory that thou hast given to me, have given to them, that they may be one as we are one (John 17:21-22)

He is Not, nor ever will be the Father. However, He can be called God in the sense that He is one with God in spirit and unity of purpose. Jesus is not one with the Father in Person, but is one with the Father in spirit and purpose. --Ken Eckerty

 

[Orthodox Christian]

"I must say a little about this New Testament basis of the belief, although it would require a whole week, or more likely a whole year, to discuss it properly. But most New Testament scholars today do not believe that Jesus, the historical individual, claimed to be God incarnate. That doesn’t mean that they don’t believe that Jesus was in fact God incarnate,

In point of fact, many, if not most, of the pre-eminent biblical scholars are essentially agnostic. This does not by any means discredit their scholarly work, but the quote above is somewhat deceptive.

In contrast to what BradtheImpaler wrote above, critical texts do not support the notion that there have been theological edits, save Matthew 28 where it is written that baptisms should be done in the name of Father, Son, Holy Spirit. There are a number of ancient documents that do not contain that formula.

This doesn't mean that the formula was an edit, only that it is possible.

but they don’t think that he himself taught that he was. In case this comes as a surprise to some, I will give some brief quotations. I’m going to quote only from distinguished New Testament scholars who personally believe strongly that the Church has been right in believing that Jesus was God incarnate. They believe this with their whole heart. But nevertheless they hold, on the basis of the evidence, that Jesus did not himself claim this. Referring first to those New Testament sayings which I quoted a minute ago - ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life . . .’ etc. - Professor Charlie Moule of Cambridge, the doyen of conservative British New Testament scholars writes (in The Origin of Christology, 1977, p. 136), ‘Any case for a “high†Christology that depended on the authenticity of the alleged claims of Jesus about himself, especially in the fourth Gospel [i.e. John’s], would indeed be precarious’. Also in Cambridge Canon Brian Hebblethwaite of Queen’s College, a notable defender of the orthodox doctrine, says (The Incarnation, 1987, p. 74) that ‘it is no longer possible to defend the divinity of Jesus by reference to the claims of Jesus’. Then the late Archbishop Michael Ramsey (previously a New Testament professor) said in his book Jesus and the Living Past (1960, p.39), ‘Jesus did not claim deity for himself’. Again, perhaps the leading New Testament scholar in this country today, Professor James Dunn of Durham, after examining minutely every relevant text, in all four Gospels, and indeed throughout the New Testament, writes (Christology in the Making, 1980, p. 60) that ‘there was no real evidence in the earliest Jesus-tradition of what could fairly be called a consciousness of divinity’. These are all people who accept the traditional Incarnation doctrine, but who are also part of the scholarly consensus that the historical Jesus did not himself teach this. It is generally held today that the great ‘I am’ sayings of the fourth Gospel, which I quoted a minute ago, cannot be attributed to the historical Jesus but are words put into his mouth by a Christian writer some 60-70 years later, and also that Jesus’ sayings in the Synoptic Gospels cannot be taken to constitute a claim to be God incarnate - as Dunn says, ‘there was no real evidence in the earliest Jesus-tradition of what could fairly be called a consciousness of divinity’. If this comes to anyone as a bit of a shock, that is because although theologically educated ministers of the church know this, they do not mention it in their sermons. And I must confess that I myself have never said it in a sermon, but only in settings such as this."

Did you catch that? These scholars suggest that the o ohn (I am) was not spoken by Jesus, but these words were placed in his mouth by a writer of the 4th gospel some 60-70 years later.

We know writing that as the gospel of St John. These 'believing,' 'orthodox' scholars believe the synoptics, but are skeptical of John's gospel.
I respect their scholarship and their skeptical approach, but referring to the words of the 4th gospel as words "placed in the mouth" of Jesus does not strike me as 'orthodox' in any sense of the word.

Parenthetically, John's gospel is the first book in the Eastern Orthodox New Testament, as it was historically in the lectionary texts. It is fitting, for when one opens our gospel book, it begins "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

According to this article it may not merely be 'liberals' who question it.

Scholars should all take a critical view to their studies. That being said, I would think that a view which embraces the synoptic gospels and questions the veracity of the Iohannine gospel is not the view of a skeptic, but something a bit more capricious.

In that sense, this view is far more liberal than any view held by those who are called liberals.

My two cents worth.

 

[McQuacks]

He is Not, nor ever will be the Father. However, He can be called God in the sense that He is one with God in spirit and unity of purpose. Jesus is not one with the Father in Person, but is one with the Father in spirit and purpose. --Ken Eckerty

We're not arguing that Jesus is the Father, but that He is just as much God as the Father is.
In reference to John 10:30, Josh McDowell's book "More Than a Carpenter," on page 10 says, "Greek scholar A. T. Robertson writes that the "one" is neuter, not masculine, in the Greek, and does not indicate one in person or purpose but rather one in "essence or nature."

The verses that you mentioned, John 17:21-22, I believe, are where Jesus is trying to drive home the point that Christians should be united just like He and the Father are - we should be one in everything, just as they are.
"As the Son and the Father are one, have one work, one kingdom, one spirit, one interest, so must all that are Christ's. We must "keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." There is "one body" and "one Spirit," as there is "one Lord." http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentarie ... 7#Joh17_21

"as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee.
There is a mutual in being of the Father and the Son, who are one in nature and essence, in power and will, and in understanding and affection; which union, though it infinitely transcends any kind of union among men, or that can be conceived of by men, yet is the exemplar of the saints' union one with another, and to the divine persons; and which must be understood not of an equality, but a likeness." http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentarie ... 7&verse=21
-McQ 8-)

 

[DivineNames]

According to this article it may not merely be 'liberals' who question it.

Scholars should all take a critical view to their studies. That being said, I would think that a view which embraces the synoptic gospels and questions the veracity of the Iohannine gospel is not the view of a skeptic, but something a bit more capricious.

In that sense, this view is far more liberal than any view held by those who are called liberals.

The point is, in relation to what had previously been said, if they accept the orthodox doctrines then its difficult to see how they can be accused of bias.

If you wish to pass judgment on their works, have you read them?

 

[Orthodox Christian]

According to this article it may not merely be 'liberals' who question it.

[quote="Orthodox Christian":025f0]

Scholars should all take a critical view to their studies. That being said, I would think that a view which embraces the synoptic gospels and questions the veracity of the Iohannine gospel is not the view of a skeptic, but something a bit more capricious.

In that sense, this view is far more liberal than any view held by those who are called liberals.

Do they accept the orthodox doctrines? It depends on what one includes among 'orthodox doctrines.' A rejection of John's gospel as sufficient in itself is anything but orthodox, according to Orthodox theology.

The point is, in relation to what had previously been said, if they accept the orthodox doctrines then its difficult to see how they can be accused of bias.

If you wish to pass judgment on their works, have you read them?[/quote:025f0]
Hi Divine Names:
Actually, I was assessing the premise, as opposed to the actual scholarly work. I have not read the particular work you cited, so as I said, I was responding to Hicks premise, which is as follows:
He uses the Synoptics as the proof texts, against which the Iohannin Gospel is compared. The "I Am" portions of John are rejected by Hicks because they are not found in the Synoptics. This is a partial approach to Divine Inspiration, which is more liberal than a complete rejection of same.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, (Colossians 1:14-15)

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Jesus Christ is the image of the "Invisible God" He is the first-born of all creation. Jesus is the Father's first perfected son. Yes, that's right. Jesus Christ was created. We will one day all be perfected and conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. We will be the body of the assembly and Jesus Christ will be the head.

And himself is the head of the body -- the assembly -- who is a beginning, a first-born out of the dead, that he might become in all [things] -- himself -- first, (Colossians 1:18)

Jesus Christ is not God. He never was and never will be in the sense that most people think of Him. This passage plainly states who and what position Jesus Christ holds.

for even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth -- as there are gods many and lords many -- yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through Him; (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)

I really don't think that needs much explaining.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, (Colossians 1:14-15)

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Jesus Christ is the image of the "Invisible God" He is the first-born of all creation. Jesus is the Father's first perfected son. Yes, that's right. Jesus Christ was created. We will one day all be perfected and conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. We will be the body of the assembly and Jesus Christ will be the head.

And himself is the head of the body -- the assembly -- who is a beginning, a first-born out of the dead, that he might become in all [things] -- himself -- first, (Colossians 1:18)

Jesus Christ is not God. He never was and never will be in the sense that most people think of Him. This passage plainly states who and what position Jesus Christ holds.

for even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth -- as there are gods many and lords many -- yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through Him; (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)

I really don't think that needs much explaining.

Using Paul's letters to deny the Gospel of John. Remember, a house divided cannot stand.

 

[McQuacks]

in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, (Colossians 1:14-15)

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Jesus Christ is the image of the "Invisible God" He is the first-born of all creation. Jesus is the Father's first perfected son. Yes, that's right. Jesus Christ was created. We will one day all be perfected and conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. We will be the body of the assembly and Jesus Christ will be the head.

I was actually debating with a JW not too long ago about this verse, check this out:
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=582 and
http://www.godandscience.org/cults/jesuscreated.html
To quote from the latter verse:

The word "firstborn" in this verse does not refer to a physical birth, but refers to Jesus' position to inherit the creation. In Jewish law, the firstborn inherited the lion's share of his father's estate. Jesus is to inherit the creation. It has nothing to do with being created. Verse 18 from this chapter of Colossians goes on to directly contradict Jesus being created describing Him as "the beginning."2 This same verse describes Jesus as being the "firstborn from the dead" and defines Jesus as having "first place in everything," demonstrating that "firstborn" refers to position and not creation.

-McQ 8-)

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Oh, I made a mistake and said that Jesus Christ is not God; He is. But all of His authority and power was given to Him by the Father.

 

[Free]

in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, (Colossians 1:14-15)

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Jesus Christ is the image of the "Invisible God" He is the first-born of all creation. Jesus is the Father's first perfected son. Yes, that's right. Jesus Christ was created.

.......

Oh, I made a mistake and said that Jesus Christ is not God; He is. But all of His authority and power was given to Him by the Father.

So then you admit that Jesus wasn't actually created and therefore"firstborn" must mean something else. Also, if Jesus is God, as you claim, then he could not have been created.

The answer to "firstborn" is found in verse 18, and we cannot forget verse 16:

"16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--â€Âall things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent."

Jesus Christ is not God. He never was and never will be in the sense that most people think of Him. This passage plainly states who and what position Jesus Christ holds.

You admit that Jesus is God, but you say "he never was or will be in the sense that most people think of Him." So just in what sense has he been and/or will be God?

You don't seem to understand that no one can be made into God; they either are God, and always have been, in every sense of the word, or they never will be God in any sense of the word.

for even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth -- as there are gods many and lords many -- yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through Him; (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)

I really don't think that needs much explaining.

So you believe that the Father isn't Lord?

Matthew 4:7, "Jesus said to him, Again it is written, You shall not put the Lord your God to the test."

Jesus refers to the Father as Lord and there are numerous instances of God being referred to as Lord in the NT. I think you do need to do some explaining.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Me, being in the infancy of my spiritual journey, am not wise enough to adequetly debate this. But you can check out this site, it holds my basic befiefs and will do a much better job explaining the subject than I can,

http://bible-truths.com/trinity.html

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Me, being in the infancy of my spiritual journey, am not wise enough to adequetly debate this. But you can check out this site, it holds my basic befiefs and will do a much better job explaining the subject than I can,

http://bible-truths.com/trinity.html

Hi Gendou: Essentially, the core beliefs expressed at that site are what is known in theological circles as modalism. It is so called because they describe God as being in different modes. We see this when 'Ray' replies to Brett "Jesus is the Father."

One endorsement of this statement is when Jesus tells Phillip that, having seen Him, Phillip has seen the Father.

There are numerous problems with modailsm:

"Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, 'Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.'" (John 17 1-5). "
Now, Jesus was praying to His Father, and specifically spoke to Him in the second person. Was this relationship temporary, or eternal?

"... and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, 'You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased'" (Luke 3:22).
Ask yourself, Gendou- who is speaking to Jesus in this scripture?

On the cross, Jesus prayed, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)
To whom is Jesus praying?

Here is a link that raises these questions, and many more
http://www.forerunner.com/orthodoxy/X0005_4._Trinity.html

I wish you the best in considering scriptural, theological truth. The support for the Trinity from scripture is overwhelming.

James

 

[Gendou Ikari]

I thought that I was going to back out of this argument and leave it be but I feel that I must defend my God.(Not that He needs defending after all He is Omnipotent but you know what I mean.) Anyway, I don't believe in Modalism. I used to but that turned out to be heresy. I believe that the Father and the Son are two seperate entities and the Holy Spirit is not even a peronsality, more of a persence; don't really want to argue that.

And Orthodox Christian the verse that you gave me even support my claims. Let's examine.

These things spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to the heaven, and said -- `Father, the hour hath come, glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son also may glorify Thee, according as Thou didst give to him authority over all flesh, that -- all that Thou hast given to him -- he may give to them life age-during; and this is the life age-during, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and him whom Thou didst send -- Jesus Christ; I did glorify Thee on the earth, the work I did finish that Thou hast given me, that I may do [it].`And now, glorify me, Thou Father, with Thyself, with the glory that I had before the world was, with Thee; (John 17:1-5)

First, Jesus is praying to His Father. If God was really a trinity then why would He need to pray to Himself. Second, the Father hath given the Son authority over all flesh; the Son did not have that authority, it was given to Him. Last, the Son was also given life age-during. Jesus was not immortal; it was a gift from the Father. I would like to go into a little more detail but it is getting late and I still have more points to make.

and about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a great voice, saying, `Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?' that is, `My God, my God, why didst Thou forsake me? (Matthew 27:46)

Who is Jesus's God? He is certainly not saying, "Why did I forsake myself." No, He is saying, "Why did My God(The Father), my God(The Father), forsake me."

And if this is not proof enough that the trinity is the traditions of men, just for the sake of it, I will add a few more verses.

Blessed [is] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who did bless us in every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, (Ephesians 1:3)

Blessed [is] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to the abundance of His kindness did beget us again to a living hope, through the rising again of Jesus Christ out of the dead, (1 Peter 1:3)

We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, always praying for you, (Colossians 1:3)

Again I would like to discribe how Jesus is still God but it's late; I'll try and do it tomorrow. I will however leave you with this one verse; think about it.

therefore doth a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife, and they have become one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Anyway, I don't believe in Modalism. I used to but that turned out to be heresy.

That reminds me of the heresy that came about some time in the 2nd century called Modal Monarchianism or Modalism, which Wikipedia defines as such:

Modalism considers God to be one person appearing and working in the different "modes" of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The chief proponent of Modalism was Sabellius, hence the view is also called Sabellianism. It was also been labeled Patropassianism by it opponents, as it makes God the Father suffer on the cross.

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism)

The following is also interesting to me: Oneness Pentecostal is pretty much a rehash of Modal Monarchianism, Jehovah’s witnesses are a rehash of Arianism, and Christian Science is some what a rehash of some forms of Gnosticism.

I believe that the Father and the Son are two seperate entities and the Holy Spirit is not even a peronsality, more of a persence; don't really want to argue that.

Interesting, look at the following verses:

- Holy Spirit has a will
1 Corinthians 2:11 (New American Standard Bible):
11“For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.â€Â

- Holy Spirit speaks
Acts 13:2 (New American Standard Bible)
2‘“While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.â€Â’

- Holy Spirit loves
Romans 15:30 (New American Standard Bible):
30“Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me,â€Â

- He can be grieved
Ephesians 4:30 (New American Standard Bible):
30‘“Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.â€Â’

- He convicts of sin
John 16:8 (New American Standard Bible)
8 ‘“And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;

- He creates - Gen. 1:2; Job 33:4
Genesis 1:2 (New American Standard Bible):
2“The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.â€Â

Job 33:4 (New American Standard Bible):
4‘“The Spirit of God has made me,
And the breath of the Almighty gives me life.â€Â’

- He gives gifts
1 Corinthians 12:8 (New American Standard Bible):
8“For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit;â€Â

- He Intercedes
Romans 8:26 (New American Standard Bible):
26“In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;â€Â

- He teaches
John 14:26 (New American Standard Bible):
26 ‘“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.â€Â’

- He testifies of Jesus
John 15:26 (New American Standard Bible):
26 ‘“When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,â€Â’

- He baptizes
1 Corinthians 12:13 (New American Standard Bible):
13“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.â€Â

- He guides
John 16:13 (New American Standard Bible):
13 ‘“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.â€Â

- He encourages
Acts 9:31 (New American Standard Bible):
31‘“So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria enjoyed peace, being built up; and going on in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it continued to increase.â€Â

- He empowers
Micah 3:8 (New American Standard Bible):
8“On the other hand I am filled with power--
With the Spirit of the LORD--
And with justice and courage
To make known to Jacob his rebellious act,
Even to Israel his sin.â€Â

- He gives joy
- Romans 14:17 (New American Standard Bible):
17“for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spiritâ€Â

- He comforts
John 14:16-26 (New American Standard Bible):
16‘“I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;â€Â
17“that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.â€Â
18““I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.â€Â
19“After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also.â€Â’
20‘“In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.â€Â’
21‘“He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.â€Ââ€Â
22‘“Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, “Lord, what then has happened that You are going to disclose Yourself to us and not to the world?â€Â’
23‘“Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.â€Â’
24 “He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.â€Â’
25‘“These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you.â€Â’
26‘“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.â€Â’

- The Holy Spirit indwells the believer (Rom. 8:11)
Romans 8:11 (New American Standard Bible):
11“But ifhe Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.â€Â

- and continues to work in him to bring about sanctification (Rom. 15:16).
Romans 15:16 (New American Standard Bible):
16“to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.â€Â

(Outline from Carm.org, source link: http://www.carm.org/doctrine/christiandoctrine2.htm)