As precise and accurate as that sounds, I really believe it falls short of the truth. It seems to somehow make angels appear to be lacking something humans have. In other words, we have a spiritual soul and a body, whereas the angels only have a spiritual being, and almost seem to lack a soul as well in that definition.
In my thinking, the angels are a far more sublime creation than man.
They can “take on” a body when they desire (as they have done in Scripture.) and they can easily affect changes in the physical world as well. They are powerful and mighty, with an exalted intelligence, and all this is beatified with an extraordinary holiness and virtue, along with what may be a far more clear vision of God than man may ever be capable of, even in heaven.
So getting back to our original debate, I know we think of souls as not just a spiritual “part” of us that receives (name removed by moderator)ut from our body, but also that it is the most individual part of us, that is uniquely created directly by God, and gives us our special character and attributes. This idea of a soul, although it may not be a “part” of an angel like it is in a lowly human, yet it may be united substantially with his spiritual nature, and so does indeed have a soul, but not in the human sense, or in the “part” sense.
So to sum, I’m not averring a component soul, but more a “heart” or inner distinction, comparable to our soul.
Yes Ron, I’m just saying what you did, but using more words.