The metaphor of “incarnation” is about location – it locates God on earth in a man. The Doctrine of the Trinity asserts that this is the person of God the Son. By way of contrast, the notion of “manifestation” is that of an “image” and it does not involve the idea of re-location of that which is imaged. This notion is not a metaphor because aspects of God can be said to be imaged in a human insofar as both are persons. From the very first humankind was intended as the manifestation of God on earth; man was made in the image of God–he was the divine agent, the pinnacle of God’s creation, and the highest expression of his effulgence. As the divine representative and vice regent he was made “a little lower” than the angels and creation was put under his authority (Psalm 8). Jesus is the “second man” of this creation (1 Cor 15:47), and therefore a manifestation of God.
Manifestation and Names
The act of naming is very important in Israel’s traditions; it often has prophetic or theological significance. The Tetragrammaton, YHWH, translated “Lord”, is introduced in Exodus 3 in the paronomastic account of the Burning Bush. Paronomasia, or the phenomenon of introducing names through word-play, is evident in Exodus 3 in the relationship between YHWH and the Hebrew verb “to be”. The name given at Moses’ request (Exod 3:13) is supplied in the statement, “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, YHWH…hath sent me unto you”. This statement repeats the immediately preceding statement, “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM…hath sent me unto you” (Exod 3:14, KJV) with the substitution of YHWH for “I AM”.
The common verb “to be” hyh (hyh) has as its third person imperfect form hyhy (yhyh); this is obviously very similar to YHWH. The difference is a change from a yod y (Y) to a waw w (W). A similar shift (from yod to waw) occurred when the adjective for “living” (chy) became the name “Eve” (chwh), which is another example of a paronomastic account. Hence we see that “Yahweh” has the sense of “he will be”, together with a causal sense that Yahweh will bring to pass the fulfillment of what “he will be.” In the immediate context, God makes the assertion that “I will be who I will be” (’ehyeh ’ašer ’ehyeh) and the candidate for who God will be is Moses. The divine name is therefore an expression of purpose, and that purpose is God manifestation in sons and daughters.[1]
A Son, an Apostle and a Blind Man
The phrase “I am that I am” in the KJV is rendered, sometimes as a marginal note, as “I will be who I will be” in the NEB, RSV, RV, NIV, GNB, and Moffat. The phrase begs the question: Who will God be? The covenant promise to David gives the ultimate answers the question: “I will be his father, and he shall be (yhyh) my son” (2 Sam 7:14). This is an obvious word play on God’s name – the “son” would manifest the qualities and character of the Father. This passage is quoted in the future tense by the author to the Hebrews—“I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son” —within the context of inheriting a more excellent name (Heb 1:5).
However, the theology of God manifestation is also expressed in the unusual formulations used by the apostle Paul in 1 Cor.15:8-10 and the blind man in John 9:9:
“And last of all he was seen (w;fqh cf. Acts 7:30 w;fqh, burning bush episode) of me……For I am the least of the apostles (i.e. sent ones)….but by the grace of God I am what I am (eivmi o[ eivmi )….yet not I but the grace of God which was with me (su.n evmoi,)”
The links to Exodus 3 are as follows: i) Paul saw Jesus, just as Moses saw the Angel of the Lord at the burning bush; ii) the context of the passage is redemption and salvation (cf. Exod 3:7-10, 17); iii) Paul is an apostle (=sent one cf. “send” in Exod 3:10, 12, 13, 14, and 15); and iv) the grace of God was with Paul just as God also promised to be with Moses (Exod 3:12). Paul states “I am what I am” because he is a present tense fulfillment of one (like Moses) in whom God would be manifest. Hence, Jesus says, “Saul is a chosen vessel to bear my name” (Acts 9:15).
In a similar fashion the blind man, whose sight was restored (like Saul’s) could say: “I am” (John 9:9). The blind man uses exactly the same syntactic expression for which Christ was almost stoned in John 8:58 –yet he was not claiming to be “God”. Jesus explains that the man was blind so “that the works of God may be made manifest in him”.
[1] A. Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1980), 151-164
1st Peter: Some New Testament Allusions