"The god of this age"

[InvestigateTruth]

Investigate Truth,
A modicum of logic first: If the God spoken of at 2Cor 4:4 were the True God, or even Jesus, why would either of them blind the minds of anyone? .

Because they were no sincere. Period.
Let's ask this logical question: if there is a truth. Do we think those who are not sincere, should see the truth, just as those who are sincere?
How would the just God treat the sincere and unsincere equally?
Do we think those who were tyranny, or their purpose was to reject the truth, were they as deserving as those sincere ones?
If both can see the truth, then what is the difference between sincere and those who are after their own selfish desires and raise against the Truth? Thus God blinds the eyes of the unbelievers, those who reject the Truth.
Second question: why did Jesus spoke in Parabols? (see conversation between desciples and Jesus, when they asked Jesus: "why do you speak in parabols")

 

[John Martin]

The unbelievers whose minds have been blinded by the God of this world so that they cannot see shining the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor.4.4).
The God of this world:
This statement of St. Paul has to be understood according to his spiritual vision. The vision St. Paul proposing is the New Covenant: Jeremiah 31:31-34.
A New Covenant
31 [a] “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant which they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” (Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE).
Human beings are endowed by the grace of God with the possibility to transcend external relationship with God and discovering inner relationship with God. It is discovering the kingdom of God within. It is journey from the God of authority, scripture, religions, theological and philosophical systems into the God of freedom, inner truth, beyond religions, theological and philosophical systems. It is a journey from our limited and ignorant self to our true self which is the image and likeness of God.
St. Paul had this experience of this New Covenant and he was inviting people to come to this New Covenant. Only in our image and likeness of God we experience the New Covenant and St. Paul was inviting everyone to discover the image and likeness of God.
Unbelievers are those who do not accept the message of St. Paul, which is the message of Christ coming through St. Paul.
God does not blind any one. God desires the spiritual growth of human beings.
The God is this world is not Satan.
The God of this world is
Any philosophical system
Any theological system,
Any scripture,
Any religion
Any religious institution
That blocks this spiritual growth. These are all constructions of the human mind, of course by the grace of God. There are like houses built within the infinite space. They are all relative and like fingers that point to the moon. When these systems and institutions are made absolute then they blind the human consciousness and block the spiritual evolution.
In fact, these systems by themselves, do not blind the unbelievers, but it is the human mind that considers the relative as absolute and blinds itself.What makes human mind to consider relative as absolute? It is ignorance. Hence it is ignorance that blinds the unbelievers.
The God of this world is ignorance that blinds unbelievers so that they cannot open their hearts to the truth of the gospel that the fullness of God is present in their their image and likeness of God. It keeps them to remain in their ignorance and fragmented self.
The message is: never absolutize the relative truth. Be always open, ready and willing to grow into higher divine-human relationship.

 

[Shermana]

Who is the "The god of this age" in the following passage of Bible:

"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." 2 cor. 4:4

I know that it is generally interpreted as satan. But my question is how do you know it is meant satan, and not God? If scriptures want to say "satan" it would say satan. Why using the word "God" here? Please make your point based on scriptures and logical arguments.

Besides the fact that even most Orthodox Trinitarian scholars have agreed that it's referring to Satan, we have a few clues.

First off, the word "god" means more than just THE god. Angels and 'Divine beings" are in fact called "gods" in many books of the OT. The word "God" is often articulated to indicate that he's the "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) and not just any other "god".

Second off, why would God blind people so that they couldn't see the truth of Christ? Theologically, would this imply that one must blindly believe first, throwing all reason and caution to the wind in order to see the truth? Does God not want people to reason themselves to come to Christ? If that's the case, what about the Bereans?

Third off, "Satan" doesn't need to be referred to as "Satan", he is also referred to as "The Prince of the Air", so he's got titles in addition to his name. Even "Satan" is not really his name, but a title.

Fourth off, why would THE God just be "the god of this age" (note, some translations say world but that's plainly incorrect and generally probably done to avoid reference to Satan or the idea of other gods which they tend to be oversensitive to)? Does that mean that THE god is no longer god once this age is over?

All the evidence indicates that it's clearly Satan, who is in fact "a god", arguably the most powerful god underneath Jesus and the Father.

 

[Shermana]

Yes, this is true, however, God is both punishing and rewarding.
The verse that talks about, "the God of this Age has blinded the minds of unbelievers" has done this as a punishment.
This is confirmed by the following verse:

"Jesus said, "I came into this world for judgment, that those who don't see may see; and that those who see may become blind."" John 9:39

I see you have used John 9:39 in a few places as your proof text to say it's not Satan. The context here is in reference to the Pharisees. If you want to use John 9:39 as the basis of "that they may become blind", then your context starts and stops with the Pharisees and applies to no one else, since Jesus was referring clearly to those who thought they knew religious truth and denied Jesus for their own sake, not just anyone in general. So if you want to believe that 2 Corinthians 4:4 also only applies to the Pharisees, that's the route you'll have to take. Otherwise you'll have to acknowledge a major contextual difference. Technically though, 2 Corinthians 4:4 COULD be only applying to the Pharisees and no one else, but you're still stuck with some major problems like "The god of this age" not being a valid title for THE god who is the god of ALL TIME, not just "the age", as well as it not applying to any other kind of non-believer.

 

[WyattDerp]

When these systems and institutions are made absolute then they blind the human consciousness and block the spiritual evolution.

You might find this quote interesting:

The whole concept of alienation found its first expression in Western thought in the Old Testament concept of idolatry. The essence of what the prophets call "idolatry" is not that man worships many gods instead of only one. It is that the idols are the work of man's own hands -- they are things, and man bows down and worships things; worships that which he has created himself. In doing so he transforms himself into a thing. He transfers to the things of his creation the attributes of his own life, and instead of experiencing himself as the creating person, he is in touch with himself only by the worship of the idol. He has become estranged from his own life forces, from the wealth of his own potentialties, and is in touch with himself only in the indirect way of submission to life frozen in the idols. The deadness and emptiness of the idol is expressed in the Old Testament: "Eyes they have and they do not see, ears they have and they do not hear," etc. The more man transfers his own powers to the idols, the poorer he himself becomes, and the more dependent on the idols, so that they permit him to redeem a small part of what was originally his. The idols can be a godlike figure, the state, the church, a person, possessions. Idolatry changes its objects; it is by no means to be found only in those forms in which the idol has a socalled religious meaning. Idolatry is always the worship of something into which man has put his own creative powers, and to which he now submits, instead of experiencing himself in his creative act. Among the many forms of alienation, the most frequent one is alienation in language. If I express a feeling with a word, let us say, if I say "I love you," the word is meant to be an indication of the reality which exists within myself, the power of my loving. The word "love" is meant to be a symbol of the fact love, but as soon as it is spoken it tends to assume a life of its own, it becomes a reality. I am under the illusion that the saying of the word is the equivalent of the experience, and soon I say the word and feel nothing, except the thought of love which the word expresses. The alienation of language shows the whole complexity of alienation. Language is one of the most precious human achievements; to avoid alienation by not speaking would be foolish -- yet one must be always aware of the danger of the spoken word, that it threatens to substitute itself for the living experience. The same holds true for all other achievements of man; ideas, art, any kind of man-made objects. They are man's creations; they are valuable aids for life, yet each one of them is also a trap, a temptation to confuse life with things, experience with artifacts, feeling with surrender and submission.

Erich Fromm, "Marx's Concept of Man"

 

[John Martin]

Wyert Derb,
Thank for sharing the quotation from Eric Fromm. It is very interesting and confirms my thinking.Thank you.

 

[Shermana]

You might find this quote interesting:



Erich Fromm, "Marx's Concept of Man"

One thing to keep in mind as much as I may agree with the work of human hands being held in higher importance than God Himself being considered a form of idolatry, is that foreign gods were not always formed in the shape of idols. There was an actual worship of such beings through the form of altars and sacred poles and groves and communal gatherings that may not always have involved idols. The "idol", I don't believe was ever thought to be the god itself but a vehicle of interacting with the actual being. In some of the Apocrypha, especially the NT apocrypha, we see that there was a belief that Demonic spiritual beings resided in the idols. So the second commandment is an extension of the first by the fact that one is to not have any other beings who are "gods" BEFORE the chief god.

 

[WyattDerp]

Wyert Derb,
Thank for sharing the quotation from Eric Fromm. It is very interesting and confirms my thinking.Thank you.

No, thank you for "making" me search for "erich fromm on idolatry"! I read things along those lines from Fromm before (he's kinda becoming my favourite author), but not the above itself. Cheers!

 

[WyattDerp]

One thing to keep in mind as much as I may agree with the work of human hands being held in higher importance than God Himself being considered a form of idolatry, is that foreign gods were not always formed in the shape of idols. There was an actual worship of such beings through the form of altars and sacred poles and groves and communal gatherings that may not always have involved idols. The "idol", I don't believe was ever thought to be the god itself but a vehicle of interacting with the actual being. In some of the Apocrypha, especially the NT apocrypha, we see that there was a belief that Demonic spiritual beings resided in the idols. So the second commandment is an extension of the first by the fact that one is to not have any other beings who are "gods" BEFORE the chief god.

Those things are still concepts though, ideas; or at best, parts of creation (just not our creation, but worshipping God's creation is still idolatry, right?). And you can easily, in a snap, even turn the one true living God into an idol just by the way you think about or relate to it. Reminds me of Meister Eckhart saying that "even the smallest creature-ish [sorry, I don't know how to translate "kreatürlich"] image" is "as big as God", because "when an image enters into the soul, God leaves".

 

[rusra02]

No rusra02, I don't think so. This is it:

"Jesus said, "I came into this world for judgment, that those who don't see may see; and that those who see may become blind." John 9:39

I think so. Jesus did not say he blinded their eyes. Rather, by his ministry and preaching he revealed the spiritual blindness of the religious leaders of his day, who claimed to understand and teach God's law. "And Jesus said: “For [this] judgment I came into this world: that those not seeing might see and those seeing might become blind.” Those of the Pharisees who were with him heard these things, and they said to him: “We are not blind also, are we?” Jesus said to them: “If you were blind, you would have no sin. But now you say, ‘We see.’ your sin remains.” (John 9:39-41) Their blindness resulted from their wicked desires and actions, according to John 8:43,44.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

First off, the word "god" means more than just THE god. Angels and 'Divine beings" are in fact called "gods" in many books of the OT. The word "God" is often articulated to indicate that he's the "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) and not just any other "god".

It is True that god is not only a reference to God the Creator, and that in other places we see Angels, or even Moses was "a god".
But, there is nowhere in scriptures that actually calls satan a god, except as per interpretations. again I repeat, except as per interpretations.
Every time a Divine Prophet appears in an Age, He is a Manifestation of God. Even Moses was called a god. Jesus was also called an image of God.
So, the God of this Age, is a reference to Jesus who had appeared in that Age.

Second off, why would God blind people so that they couldn't see the truth of Christ? Theologically, would this imply that one must blindly believe first, throwing all reason and caution to the wind in order to see the truth? Does God not want people to reason themselves to come to Christ? If that's the case, what about the Bereans?

Making them blind was the consequence of their own pride. Because of they were not sincere and fought with truth.
How could they be deserving to know the Truth?

Third off, "Satan" doesn't need to be referred to as "Satan", he is also referred to as "The Prince of the Air", so he's got titles in addition to his name. Even "Satan" is not really his name, but a title.

If you are refering to "The Prince of this World", it is again not Satan. That is again based on misinterpretations in my view.
In fact Baha'is Believe that was a Prophecy regarding Baha'u'llah:

"Thou didst ask as to chapter 14, verse 30 of the Gospel of John, where the Lord Christ saith, ‘Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.’ The Prince of this world is the Blessed Beauty; and ‘hath nothing in Me’ signifieth: after Me all will draw grace from Me, but He is independent of Me, and will draw no grace from Me. That is, He is rich beyond any grace of Mine. "
Bahá'í Reference Library - Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Pages 169-172

Fourth off, why would THE God just be "the god of this age" (note, some translations say world but that's plainly incorrect and generally probably done to avoid reference to Satan or the idea of other gods which they tend to be oversensitive to)? Does that mean that THE god is no longer god once this age is over?

In each Age a Manifestation of God appears. The God of that Age was a reference to Jesus, who was the image of God that appeared in that Age. The One He himself had said "I came to make the seeing blind" (according to john). I cannot see any more clear interpretation, when He said it with His own mouth.

 

[CG Didymus]

In somewhat a support of Investigate Truth, I'd ask who is the "god" of this age right now. If the Baha'i Faith is true, then we are all blinded by either the darkness of our own evil, selfish desires or blinded by the light of what we think is "truth" and "God." The way we get locked in to our religions does "blind" us to the truth in another religion. Is our religion the absolute truth? Is it making us better? Is it making the world better? Or, is it just comfortable?

A new religion always challenges those that believe they know the "truth." The Pharisees had "the" truth and were comfortable in it. But, what is it that they did? Took some things too literal? Believed their interpretation to be the only right one? Were hypocrites and didn't live up to the standards that they professed for others to follow? That's what makes the Baha'i Faith so interesting, we all are a little like the Pharisees in some respects. Are we blind to the new truth?

 

[Shermana]

It is True that god is not only a reference to God the Creator, and that in other places we see Angels, or even Moses was "a god".
But, there is nowhere in scriptures that actually calls satan a god, except as per interpretations. again I repeat, except as per interpretations.
Every time a Divine Prophet appears in an Age, He is a Manifestation of God. Even Moses was called a god. Jesus was also called an image of God.
So, the God of this Age, is a reference to Jesus who had appeared in that Age.

Satan is an Angel, which would by definition make him a god.

Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that the Divine prophets are "manifestations of God". Moses being called "a god" doesn't make him a "Manifestation" of THE god". Are the Angels manifestations of God? Jesus being "The image of god" does not make him the "Manifestation" either. Even if Jesus was a manifestation of God, which he isn't, that would still imply that he's somehow no longer such a manifestation at the end of the age. How does this manifestation concept work exactly, do they take shifts? Does he lose his God powers every few hundred years?

Making them blind was the consequence of their own pride. Because of they were not sincere and fought with truth.
How could they be deserving to know the Truth?

See my second post, by your logic, this verse ONLY applies to the Pharisees.

If you are refering to "The Prince of this World", it is again not Satan. That is again based on misinterpretations in my view.
In fact Baha'is Believe that was a Prophecy regarding Baha'u'llah:

So you're saying that Bahai's believe that Bah'uallah is an evil villainous being who shall be "cast out"? Fascinating!!

"Thou didst ask as to chapter 14, verse 30 of the Gospel of John, where the Lord Christ saith, ‘Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.’ The Prince of this world is the Blessed Beauty; and ‘hath nothing in Me’ signifieth: after Me all will draw grace from Me, but He is independent of Me, and will draw no grace from Me. That is, He is rich beyond any grace of Mine. "
Bahá'í Reference Library - Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Pages 169-172

Extremely interesting exegesis of what it means to "have nothing in me" to somehow mean "All will draw grace from me but he is independent of me". I can guess we can find all sorts of ways to use gymnastics with what is otherwise a plain verse about a being who has absolutely no place with Jesus and Jesus is going to be mostly silent because of his short-upcoming arrival. Apparently Jesus was being silent in regards to a being who would be coming 1800 years later and not at all regarding someone who was going to be working against him very soon.

In each Age a Manifestation of God appears. The God of that Age was a reference to Jesus, who was the image of God that appeared in that Age. The One He himself had said "I came to make the seeing blind" (according to john). I cannot see any more clear interpretation, when He said it with His own mouth.

Jesus was not a manifestation of God, he was a representative of God who was a different being altogether, this concept is not found anywhere in scripture, makes use of incorrect understandings of what "a god" means, and implies that Jesus himself has blinded people for merely being "insincere" which is not so much indicated in the text as much as non-believers in general, which would by your own logic only apply to the Pharisees and no other unbeliever or insincere believer.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Satan is an Angel, which would by definition make him a god.

Satan is not a real existance. It is metaphorical for our own selfish desire that forces us to do sinfull acts.

Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that the Divine prophets are "manifestations of God". Moses being called "a god" doesn't make him a "Manifestation" of THE god". Are the Angels manifestations of God? Jesus being "The image of god" does not make him the "Manifestation" either.

The Manifestation of God does not mean, incarnation of God.
The Manifestation of God can be explained with an anology.
If we place a Perfect Mirror in front of the Sun, we see, the Sun is Manifested in the Mirror. It doesn't mean, the Sun has moved from sky and physically went inside the Mirror.
Likewise, a Manifestation of God, is a Perfect Mirror, who Manifests the "Will" and "Attributes" of God into the World. But He is a Seperate Being, and is created by God.
The early Christians were familiar with this concept:

the great theologian Origen (185-254 C.E.), citing the Book of Wisdom, called Christ 'the spotless mirror' of God's workings (Origen, On First Principles 26).

Moreover, the following verses from the Bible confirm this:

"and we all, with unvailed face, the glory of the Lord beholding in a mirror, to the same image are being transformed, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." 2 cori 3-18

and

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature" - Colossians 1:14-15

and again:


“The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” Hebrew 1-3


According to Clarke commentary of Bible, the interpretation of Image of God:


The brightness of his glory - Απαυγασμα της δοξης The resplendent outbeaming of the essential glory of God. Hesychius interprets απαυγασμα by ᾑλιου φεγγος, the splendor of the sun. The same form of expression is used by an apocryphal writer, Wis. 7:26, where, speaking of the uncreated wisdom of God, he says: "For she is the splendor of eternal light, απαυγασμα γαρ εστι φωτος αΐδιου, and the unsullied mirror of the energy of God, and the image of his goodness." The word αυγασμα is that which has splendor in itself απαυγασμα is the splendor emitted from it; but the inherent splendor and the exhibited splendor are radically and essentially the same.


And according to Gill’s exposition:

so the phrase , "the brightness of his glory", is used of the divine Being, in the Chaldee paraphrases (r); see the Apocrypha.
"For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.'' (Wisdom 7:26)
And the express image of his person; this intends much the same as the other phrase; namely, equality and sameness of nature, and distinction of persons; for if the Father is God, Christ must be so too; and if he is a person, his Son must be so likewise, or he cannot be the express image and character of him;


In fact, Baha'i Scriptures calls them Mirrors. The Term Manifestation is just another term for the Mirrors.

"these primal Mirrors which reflect the light of unfading glory, are but expressions of Him Who is the Invisible of the Invisibles. By the revelation of these gems of divine virtue all the names and attributes of God, such as knowledge and power, sovereignty and dominion, mercy and wisdom, glory, bounty and grace, are made manifest." Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

Even if Jesus was a manifestation of God, which he isn't, that would still imply that he's somehow no longer such a manifestation at the end of the age. How does this manifestation concept work exactly, do they take shifts? Does he lose his God powers every few hundred years?

If today we have a Mirror that Reflects the Image of the Sun, and yesterday we had another Mirror that refelcted the image of the Sun, then the same God that appeared through Jesus, is the same God that appeared in Baha'u'llah. But each one in a different Age. Hence, return of Divine Prophets, is return of the same "attributes of God" in two alike Mirrors, who came to express the Will of God for their own Age.


"These Prophets and chosen Ones of God are the recipients and revealers of all the unchangeable attributes and names of God. They are the mirrors that truly and faithfully reflect the light of God. Whatsoever is applicable to them is in reality applicable to God, Himself, Who is both the Visible and the Invisible. The knowledge of Him, Who is the Origin of all things, and attainment unto Him, are impossible save through knowledge of, and attainment unto, these luminous Beings who proceed from the Sun of Truth." Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan






Hence the Will of God is expressed periodically in different Ages.


"the Mirrors reflecting the light of divine Unity, in whatever age and cycle they are sent down from their invisible habitations of ancient glory unto this world, to educate the souls of men and endue with grace all created things, are invariably endowed with an all-compelling power, and invested with invincible sovereignty." Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

So you're saying that Bahai's believe that Bah'uallah is an evil villainous being who shall be "cast out"? Fascinating!!

How did you conclude that? (is this sarcastic?)

Apparently Jesus was being silent in regards to a being who would be coming 1800 years later and not at all regarding someone who was going to be working against him very soon.

He had Prophecies about His own Age as well as future.
For example, He said "Think not I came to bring peace, but I came to bring a sword"
He predicted that in His age, after He leaves the World, there will be many wars, and peace will not come at that time.

But going back to the topic of "Blinding", Baha'u'llah said the same thing to some of the People of this Age:

"Thus hath God blinded your eyes in requital for your deeds, would ye but understand. Day and night ye transcribe the verses of God, and yet ye remain shut out, as by a veil, from Him Who hath revealed them." Baha'u'llah, Súriy-i-Haykal

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Are we blind to the new truth?

I think Blindness can be relative, because seeing truth is relative.
Baha'u'llah says, the more we clean our Heart, the more we can understand Truth:

"But, O my brother, when a true seeker determineth to take the step of search in the path leading to the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse and purify his heart, which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments of satanic fancy."

"The understanding of His words and the comprehension of the utterances of the Birds of Heaven are in no wise dependent upon human learning. They depend solely upon purity of heart, chastity of soul, and freedom of spirit."

- Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

 

[CG Didymus]

Satan is not a real existance. It is metaphorical for our own selfish desire that forces us to do sinfull acts.

That is a big problem. God's adversary is real to many if not most Christians. Jesus is the one that is going to destroy him in the end. Like you say, Revelation and other "end times" quotes are written in symbolic language. When I was a Christian I assumed the devil was in Judaism also. I expected God's true message to be consistent. But, to my shock, the devil is not part of Judaism. He is "found" by Christians here and there, like a morning star or Prince of Tyre in Isaiah, but it is by taking verses and making them symbolic and figurative.

However, when a person "turns to the dark side" what is that evil feeling that surrounds them and takes them over? It feels real. Like there is a spiritual evil reality. Is it all in their minds? If so, then what about the good? When we feel the Holy Spirit or God--Is that only in our mind also? I know the Baha'i explanation is something like the "absence" of good is all bad is. Like darkness is the absence of light, but is there a real spirit-being that is the embodiment of evil? Christians really do belief there is, and believe he is the "god of this age." So what are some more of the Baha'i "proofs" that he doesn't exist?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So what are some more of the Baha'i "proofs" that he doesn't exist?

The biggest prove is that Religion must be in harmony with science and logic.
Clearly science has proved that for example our body has certain hormones that makes us have some desires. SO, this temptation is from our own physical body, not the influence of someone else, Mr. Satan.

 

[Shermana]

Satan is not a real existance. It is metaphorical for our own selfish desire that forces us to do sinfull acts.

Ah, so Satan in the Book of Job wasn't real either, nor when he tempted David to do a census without offering the appropriate offering of a shekel per head, what was the metaphor in those instances? Was it a metaphor for Job secretly being a sado-masochist and inflicting massive pain and suffering on himself by killing his family and his servants and destroying his wealth and blaming it on God?

The Manifestation of God does not mean, incarnation of God.
The Manifestation of God can be explained with an anology.
If we place a Perfect Mirror in front of the Sun, we see, the Sun is Manifested in the Mirror. It doesn't mean, the Sun has moved from sky and physically went inside the Mirror.
Likewise, a Manifestation of God, is a Perfect Mirror, who Manifests the "Will" and "Attributes" of God into the World. But He is a Seperate Being, and is created by God.
The early Christians were familiar with this concept:

If anything you're speaking close to the idea of Arianism, which is in that case something I can agree with. But you're still stuck with a lot of holes. How long is an age exactly? Why does a manifestation count as THE god himself?

the great theologian Origen (185-254 C.E.), citing the Book of Wisdom, called Christ 'the spotless mirror' of God's workings (Origen, On First Principles 26).

Origen's ideas are a little up to debate, he may have been an early Trinitarian, he may not have been, it depends on how one gramatically reads his passages (Most translations are done by Trinitarians, like with Iraneus, where the anarthrous Theos is an issue), but this overall does not make Jesus a "Manifestation" of God anymore so than the very concept of the Logos Theology outlined in detail by Philo.

Moreover, the following verses from the Bible confirm this:

"and we all, with unvailed face, the glory of the Lord beholding in a mirror, to the same image are being transformed, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." 2 cori 3-18

So all Christians are thus Manifestations of God in your view. Does that make them all "The god of this age"? I still don't see why a Manifestation counts as "The god" himself.

and

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature" - Colossians 1:14-15

The firstborn of every creature, another great example of Arian Theology, but that doesn't make him the "Manifestation of God". It seems the word "Manifest" and "Manifestation" is yet another slippery semantic. Otherwise, in scriptural terms, it's just Arianism.

“The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” Hebrew 1-3

A better translation:

"Young's Literal Translation
who being the brightness of the glory, and the impress of His subsistence,"

So yeah, not a manifestation. A representation is only a manifestation by some shifty wordplay.

Let's see what manifestation actually means:

Manifestation | Define Manifestation at Dictionary.com

Nothing about representation at all. It's only about the being itself manifesting. So looks like you need another word to use, cause you don't get to redefine the term however you like especially when it doesn't hold up to scriptural scrutiny.


According to Clarke commentary of Bible, the interpretation of Image of God:

The brightness of his glory - Απαυγασμα της δοξης The resplendent outbeaming of the essential glory of God. Hesychius interprets απαυγασμα by ᾑλιου φεγγος, the splendor of the sun. The same form of expression is used by an apocr yphal writer, Wis. 7:26, where, speaking of the uncreated wisdom of God, he says: "For she is the splendor of eternal light, απαυγασμα γαρ εστι φωτος αΐδιου, and the unsullied mirror of the energy of God, and the image of his goodness." The word αυγασμα is that which has splendor in itself απαυγασμα is the splendor emitted from it; but the inherent splendor and the exhibited splendor are radically and essentially the same.

Exactly what I'm saying about Arianism, in that the Logos/Wisdom represents God but isn't God. Therefore, not a manifestation.

And according to Gill’s exposition:

so the phrase , "the brightness of his glory", is used of the divine Being, in the Chaldee paraphrases (r); see the Apocrypha.
"For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.'' (Wisdom 7:26)
And the express image of his person; this intends much the same as the other phrase; namely, equality and sameness of nature, and distinction of persons; for if the Father is God, Christ must be so too; and if he is a person, his Son must be so likewise, or he cannot be the express image and character of him;

Same thing. Not a manifestation. A representation.

In fact, Baha'i Scriptures calls them Mirrors. The Term Manifestation is just another term for the Mirrors.

I've shown how plainly incorrect this is.

If today we have a Mirror that Reflects the Image of the Sun, and yesterday we had another Mirror that refelcted the image of the Sun, then the same God that appeared through Jesus, is the same God that appeared in Baha'u'llah. But each one in a different Age. Hence, return of Divine Prophets, is return of the same "attributes of God" in two alike Mirrors, who came to express the Will of God for their own Age.

So even in your terms, you believe Moses was such a "Mirror"? Funny how the same verse you use earlier indicates that humans themselves will be such mirrors. And now apparently a Prophet as well as the Divine Logos incarnated are both "mirrors" of the same quality?

"These Prophets and chosen Ones of God are the recipients and revealers of all the unchangeable attributes and names of God. They are the mirrors that truly and faithfully reflect the light of God. Whatsoever is applicable to them is in reality applicable to God, Himself, Who is both the Visible and the Invisible. The knowledge of Him, Who is the Origin of all things, and attainment unto Him, are impossible save through knowledge of, and attainment unto, these luminous Beings who proceed from the Sun of Truth." Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

Again, a mirror is not a manifestation but a representation.

Hence the Will of God is expressed periodically in different Ages.


"the Mirrors reflecting the light of divine Unity, in whatever age and cycle they are sent down from their invisible habitations of ancient glory unto this world, to educate the souls of men and endue with grace all created things, are invariably endowed with an all-compelling power, and invested with invincible sovereignty." Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

So you would also believe that God changes his will in each age by your own logic?

How did you conclude that? (is this sarcastic?)

Because you said he's the Prince of this world, when I said he's the Power of the Air.

He had Prophecies about His own Age as well as future.
For example, He said "Think not I came to bring peace, but I came to bring a sword"
He predicted that in His age, after He leaves the World, there will be many wars, and peace will not come at that time.

What an amazing prediction, no one would have guessed that one. But what's the relevance? Besides, that's not even the right quote for this prediction. You're thinking of the "There will be rumors of war" part. He was clearly talking about the dividing principles he would bring.

But going back to the topic of "Blinding", Baha'u'llah said the same thing to some of the People of this Age:

"Thus hath God blinded your eyes in requital for your deeds, would ye but understand. Day and night ye transcribe the verses of God, and yet ye remain shut out, as by a veil, from Him Who hath revealed them." Baha'u'llah, Súriy-i-Haykal

[/QUOTE]

Why did you not address what I said about how this blinding in your use of the verse would only apply to the Pharisees?

 

[Shermana]

That is a big problem. God's adversary is real to many if not most Christians. Jesus is the one that is going to destroy him in the end. Like you say, Revelation and other "end times" quotes are written in symbolic language. When I was a Christian I assumed the devil was in Judaism also. I expected God's true message to be consistent. But, to my shock, the devil is not part of Judaism. He is "found" by Christians here and there, like a morning star or Prince of Tyre in Isaiah, but it is by taking verses and making them symbolic and figurative.

However, when a person "turns to the dark side" what is that evil feeling that surrounds them and takes them over? It feels real. Like there is a spiritual evil reality. Is it all in their minds? If so, then what about the good? When we feel the Holy Spirit or God--Is that only in our mind also? I know the Baha'i explanation is something like the "absence" of good is all bad is. Like darkness is the absence of light, but is there a real spirit-being that is the embodiment of evil? Christians really do belief there is, and believe he is the "god of this age." So what are some more of the Baha'i "proofs" that he doesn't exist?

For the record, the Devil may not be a part of MODERN Judaism but it most certainly seemed to be real for the Qumran sects (Essenes), especially judging by the War Scroll and others, and it wouldn't make sense for Jesus to be talking about the Devil to the Pharisees in the Gospels if the concept wouldnt' register on them back then.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Ah, so Satan in the Book of Job wasn't real either, nor when he tempted David to do a census without offering the appropriate offering of a shekel per head, what was the metaphor in those instances? Was it a metaphor for Job secretly being a sado-masochist and inflicting massive pain and suffering on himself by killing his family and his servants and destroying his wealth and blaming it on God?

The satan is symbolic representation of selfish desires.
I think John said such things "selfish forces". I don't remember the exact verse.

How long is an age exactly?

An Age in the holy Books is the time between Two Divine Prophet.
For example, between Moses and Jesus was one Age (about 1500 years).
(on average about 1000 years)

So, from Adam till Noah was one age. From Noah to Abraham another Age. From Abraham to Moses another Age.
Each Age starts with appearance of a Manifestation of God, such as Abraham, or Noah, or Adam.

Why does a manifestation count as THE god himself?

Let's go back to the Analogy of the Mirror and the Sun.
If a Perfect Mirror is placed in front of the Sun, what do we see in the Mirror?
We see the Sun. So, if the Mirror says, I am the Sun it is True. and if the Mirror says, I am the Mirror, and the Sun is in sky, that is also True.
That is why, Jesus said "who ever has seen Me, has seen the Father", but also He alluded to Himself as a Prophet, and said the Father is greater than I.

"Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God!” He verily speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name and His attributes, are made manifest in the world." - Baha'u'llah, Book of Iqan

So all Christians are thus Manifestations of God in your view. Does that make them all "The god of this age"? I still don't see why a Manifestation counts as "The god" himself.

Here is the difference:
each one of us is like a mirror. but a Divine Prophet is a "perfectly polished Mirror", an spotless Mirror, that can perfectly and fully Manifest the Will and attributes of God to the World.
So, in this analogy, we are not perfectly clean mirrors, that fully reflects the Attributes of God.
Hence the scripture calls Jesus "image of God", but it also says God created all of us in His Own image.
The difference is the Divine Prophets are embodiment of Holy Spirit. We are not. But if we clean Our Heart, and become more detached from Worldly things, then the Mirror of our Heart can reflect the attributes of God better and better.

The firstborn of every creature, another great example of Arian Theology, but that doesn't make him the "Manifestation of God". It seems the word "Manifest" and "Manifestation" is yet another slippery semantic. Otherwise, in scriptural terms, it's just Arianism.

It seems to me, you might have thought, "incarnation" is the same as "manifestation". If that's the case, then I have to say, these are two different things. Jesus was not incarnation of God. But He was a Perfect Mirror, that Manifested the Image of God.

So even in your terms, you believe Moses was such a "Mirror"? Funny how the same verse you use earlier indicates that humans themselves will be such mirrors. And now apparently a Prophet as well as the Divine Logos incarnated are both "mirrors" of the same quality?

Yes, Moses was also a Manifestation of God.

I am not sure what you mean by "Divine Logos incarnated".

Again, a mirror is not a manifestation but a representation.

I guess you are arguing about the word.
No a mirror is not manifestation by itself. But when it is placed in front of the Sun, then the Sun is "Manifested" in the Mirror. Hence it becomes a Manifestation of the Sun.

This why Jesus said "I am not Good, only God is Good"
Can be understood as, Jesus by Himself is not Good, but since He manifests the image of God, then He is God (Good).

“When I contemplate, O my God, the relationship that bindeth me to Thee, I am moved to proclaim to all created things ‘verily I am God!’; and when I consider my own self, lo, I find it coarser than clay!” - Baha'u'llah

So you would also believe that God changes his will in each age by your own logic?

Yes, he does. That is why Jesus annulled some of the Laws of Moses. such as "whoever breaks the Sabbath shall be put to death"

He also changed many other teachings.

Because you said he's the Prince of this world, when I said he's the Power of the Air.

Does the Scriptures says, that "prince of this world" is Satan? or that is the mainstream interpretation again?

What an amazing prediction, no one would have guessed that one. But what's the relevance? Besides, that's not even the right quote for this prediction. You're thinking of the "There will be rumors of war" part. He was clearly talking about the dividing principles he would bring.

"There will be rumors of war" is part of the signs that must happen right before the second coming of Christ. and in Baha'i View that was fulfilled before and early 19th century. (There was many many wars, king against king, nation against nation)

Why did you not address what I said about how this blinding in your use of the verse would only apply to the Pharisees?

Because I am not arguing who this verse is addressing. What I am discussing is who is "God of the Age"
But generally, I think the verse is not limited to only Pharisees, but also all their likes, who even exist today. In general anyone who does not clean the Mirror of His Heart, becomes blind in a spiritual sense.