Manifestations of God

[metis]

A good friend of mine studied Hinduism in India quite a few years back, and on one day his study group visited a home of a Hindu family that his tour guide knew. As they sat down drinking tea, my friend walked around the house and saw something that really caught his eye: a picture of Jesus on the wall. Also on some other walls and tables were statues of Shiva, Vishnu, etc.

The owner of the house noticed my friend looking at the picture with what must have been a puzzled look, and he asked my friend if he had any questions. My friend asked why they had a picture of Jesus if their household was Hindu, and the man responded back that his family believes that Jesus was one of the manifestations of God.

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

 

[Sha'irullah]

A good friend of mine studied Hinduism in India quite a few years back, and on one day his study group visited a home of a Hindu family that his tour guide knew. As they sat down drinking tea, my friend walked around the house and saw something that really caught his eye: a picture of Jesus on the wall. Also on some other walls and tables were statues of Shiva, Vishnu, etc.

The owner of the house noticed my friend looking at the picture with what must have been a puzzled look, and he asked my friend if he had any questions. My friend asked why they had a picture of Jesus if their household was Hindu, and the man responded back that his family believes that Jesus was one of the manifestations of God.

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

(I am a former Hindu by the way) Hypothetically if a god was to exist it could have as many manifestations/avatars it wanted. Baha'is have a similar concept I think. But then there would be the personality difference and how each of these avatars had such different messages. Jesus, Muhammad and Sri Krsn are just opposing characters I do not understand how one can compartmentalize this and make it theologically work

 

[Sleeppy]

I'd say we are all God's manifestations.

 

[Sees]

Or possible different Gods had/have different manifestations, visitations, PR reps, cons/scammers, etc. Polytheism always makes most sense Manifestations, realizations always plural like we see all around us.

I would say "the Divine" has visited all the beautiful peoples and cultures of the world, gently guiding and nudging since our most infant stages. The wonderful diversity wasn't an accident or straying from the path. Imagine a huge gathering with a giant buffet and when you go up to start filling your plate...it is all actually the same food. How boring especially for immortal/eternal conscious being/s.

 

[Jainarayan]

To say that God can only appear, or has only appeared in certain ways, and cannot appear this way or that way, and to put limitations on God is the height of human hubris. Everyone sees God in their own way.

 

[outhouse]

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

People if they want to bad enough, can see just about anything they want.


Possible? No.

 

[sun rise]

There is a question about who really is an Avatar of God. But there are many in India who accept Jesus as such. One was Ramakrishna. One web site that discusses his vision of the Christ is Spiritual Guide For All: SRI RAMAKRISHNA’S VISION OF JESUS CHRIST

 

[Vinayaka]

But there are many in India who accept Jesus as such.

Where are you getting this information from? In my experience, it is only a few.

 

[Quintessence]

As a polytheist, I wouldn't really put it that way. I don't accept that there is one god, nor that the many gods I honor are "aspects" or "manifestations" of some one-god figure; they're independent entities that have relationships with each other.

What does sometimes come up amongst polytheists is the suggestion that gods that have similar themes or roles in various Pagan pantheons are the same god. That gets... complicated, and possibly beyond the intended scope of this thread, thus I won't start getting into that unless prompted.

 

[George-ananda]

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

Yes. To believe it would have been to only one people is hard to believe.

It seems to me though that India has drilled deeper into spiritual questions than any other area of the world and has seen disproportionately higher number of major and minor manifestations.

 

[Nakosis]

IMO it's all a manifestation of God. A manifestation may have a greater or lessor role to play however it is important that each role be played.

The majority of "manifestations" don't even realize they are manifestations of God.

 

[metis]

Yes. To believe it would have been to only one people is hard to believe.

This is the direction I also lean if there indeed is a God(s).

 

[sun rise]

Where are you getting this information from? In my experience, it is only a few.

My information is mostly from the followers of Meher Baba because he identified Jesus as an Avatar. And the cross is on Meher Baba's tomb-shrine:

 

[Vinayaka]

My information is mostly from the followers of Meher Baba because he identified Jesus as an Avatar. And the cross is on Meher Baba's tomb-shrine:

Oh I know there are a few people in India who believe that. It is little wonder considering it was a policy of the Catholic Church and others to convince Hindus that all religions are the same, as a stepping stone to eventual total conversion. Weaken them first.

But I know of no census whatever that discloses the actual numbers of Hindus who accept that. It might even be higher than I think. But again, in my own experience of traveling in India, and in being in Hindu houses, I've honestly have only seen it once, and that was here in the home of a Malayalam Hindu.

The vague word 'many' may be misleading. I mean, how many is many?

edited ... Meher Baba was born a Zoroastrian and gleaned his teachings from many sources, so it seems logical he's be a universalist.

 

[George-ananda]

My information is mostly from the followers of Meher Baba because he identified Jesus as an Avatar.

The master I personally respect most, Satya Sai Baba, says that Jesus and Buddha are referred to as Avatars as a matter of showing respect. Technically, Hinduism has attributes that makes one an Avatar and Jesus is not a true Avatar. An Avatar for example does not learn, discover and grow; they are born with full wisdom and play the role of human beings.

 

[George-ananda]

This is the direction I also lean if there indeed is a God(s).

I have come to believe there is 'only God'. He is not external to us but internal and the same in all.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think everything is a manifestation of God, but because of anava, we can't really see it. But in the meantime, we can see God as separate. I don't believe in avatars, just realised saints, those who can see God everywhere. As for particular ones, it varies on the individuals or myths or ideas that I'm looking at.

So if I don't believe a historical figure even existed, its pretty hard to say it was a manifestation of God,

 

[Poeticus]

Polytheism always makes most sense Manifestations, realizations always plural like we see all around us.

As a polytheist, I wouldn't really put it that way. I don't accept that there is one god, nor that the many gods I honor are "aspects" or "manifestations" of some one-god figure; they're independent entities that have relationships with each other.

Beautifully put, the both of you. A little something from a polytheistic Hindu comrade:

"O ye eleven gods whose home is heaven,
O ye eleven who make Earth your dwelling,
Ye who with might, Eleven, live in waters,
accept this rite, O gods, with pleasure."​

(R.V.1.139.11)​

 

[metis]

I have come to believe there is 'only God'. He is not external to us but internal and the same in all.

This is an opinion I'm also comfortable with, although I don't know if it's correct or not. The likes of Spinoza and Einstein are in your camp, and that's pretty good company, I would suggest.

 

[Jainarayan]

...Jesus is not a true Avatar. An Avatar for example does not learn, discover and grow; they are born with full wisdom and play the role of human beings.

Using the criterion above, then it's not true that Jesus is not an avatar. At the age of 12 years old he was already debating the Law with the temple scholars, who were astounded at the depth of his knowledge. He also said at times that his authority to teach was from God himself. Jesus appeared with his knowledge already present.