From Brian…
Are all theophanies, Christophanies?
The basic definition of ‘Theophany’ is, ‘God Appearing’. If this is an accurate definition of a Theophany, then the definition of ‘Christophany’ is, ‘Christ Appearing’.
Well, there are different kinds of Theophanies recorded in the Old Testament. Of course, those that we are most familiar with are those where God takes either the form of man or an angel. But there are other kinds of Theophanies as well.
God appears to Moses both in the burning bush (Exodus 3, 4) and in the declaration of his attributes (Exodus 34:5-7). Both are Theophanies, or, appearances of God, but neither of those are God assuming human or angelic form. So in this broad sense, I would say, no, all Theophanies are not Christophanies.
But what about that narrower sense of the word? Are the times that God appears in human or angelic form actually pre-incarnate appearances of Christ? I would say that some of these are Christophanies (with the caveat listed below), such as in Daniel 3, where it seems rather explicit that the fourth person walking in the furnace with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego is indeed a Christophany (Daniel 3:25).
And yet, I see no reason to assume then, that every time God appears as a man or an angel, that we must interpret this as a Christophany.
Now that we have come this far, I think it is only fair to address another issue inherent in this discussion. when we talk of Christophanies and pre-incarnate Christs, we would do well to remember that Christ had not yet been given. And this may sound shocking to some, but Jesus did not at that time exist.
Before I am thoroughly routed as a unitarian or a modalist or some other heretic, let me assure you that I did not say that the Son of God did not exist. I am merely pointing out that the Son of God had not yet become man. Jesus the Christ was not alive. The plan was there, the prophecies were there, the anticipation of the Christ was there, and his birth was certain to occur, but Jesus had not yet been born.
The Son remained eternally with his Father, eternally the Son of God, but not yet human. This is an important fact to remember because when God appears in the OT in a Theophany, this is the Triune God who is appearing. When God speaks his attributes to Moses, this is not only representative of the Father, but of the Spirit and Son also.
While the Theophanies certainly point to the the day when the Son would be made flesh, we must remember that this had not yet happened.
When the Son did come in human form, all Theophanies ceased forever. God must no longer reveal himself through that means. Christ is the final, complete, perfect revelation of the glory of God.
Now, I said all of that to say this…
We can become so wrapped up in whether this or that appearance of God in the OT was a Theophany or a Christophany, and miss the perfect revelation to which they point. The glory of God in the face of Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:6)
Filed under: christophany, theophany
