J
jochoa
Guest
Thank you very much for sharing your understandings! I gained greater knowledge from your words. I especially liked, “and not only a manifestation of God!”No problem!
I would define a manifestation as something that makes a thing manifest, or visible. So, when a person does something charitable for another person, then that is a manifestation of God’s love (or, as it were, God is made manifest in the way we love one another). However, when you perform a charitable act, it’s not like God is literally present there (in any way that He wasn’t already).
It’s my understanding that the B’ahai consider a number of prophets the manifestations of God; they don’t think that these prophets are actually God, but are like mirrors, through which one is able to see God reflected.
On the other hand, incarnation means a “being made flesh”: Jesus is the Incarnation of the Logos, the 2nd person of God. In other words, it’s not as if the 2nd person of God was reflected in Jesus, it’s literally that Jesus (in a way unlike anything we’ve ever experienced before or after!) was made a physical being – both fully man and fully God.
Now, don’t get me wrong – when Jesus came to live among us, God was made manifest to us. However, since ‘manifestation’ can mean something less literal than ‘incarnation’, and I know you’re very precise in the way that you want to use words, I don’t want there to be any mistake: Jesus is the literal incarnation of the Logos, and not only a manifestation of God!
However, this does bring us back to the original concept:
If Jesus is Fully God (not just a subset of God) and the Fullness of God is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then doesn’t this mean Jesus IS the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (modalism), as well as 3 distinct and co-existing persons? We just need to find the perspectives which validate both.