If a person claiming to be Christ comes today, how do you know it is really *not* him?

[InvestigateTruth]

Its not necessary in my view as the Baha'i world centre has admitted to the editing of the text, and editing is subconciously a frank admission that he didn't get the words correct the first time.

Hmmm, Why not giving an example of what He edited?

You are claiming the purpose of editing was to "correct". But, revising a work, does not mean, it was wrong and then corrected. It can also mean, for a certain reason, first it was written in a certain way, and later due to a certain reason, it was revised.
Revising a document is not always for correcting mistakes, you know?

This is why, I prefer to look at one example.

 

[danieldemol]

Hmmm, Why not giving an example of what He edited?

You are claiming the purpose of editing was to "correct". But, revising a work, does not mean, it was wrong and then corrected. It can also mean, for a certain reason, first it was written in a certain way, and later due to a certain reason, it was revised.
Revising a document is not always for correcting mistakes, you know?

This is why, I prefer to look at one example.

Baha'u'llah himself says it was re-written to forestall the cavils of the people regarding its grammatical nonconformity.

So since he didn't have the foreknowledge to see the grammatical nonconformity (ie errors) from the beginning of writing the tablets and he had to keep on changing them as suggested by a mere mortal over a period of a year we can know that he wasn't All-knowing in my view, no examples required.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Baha'u'llah himself says it was re-written to forestall the cavils of the people regarding its grammatical nonconformity.

So since he didn't have the foreknowledge to see the grammatical nonconformity (ie errors) from the beginning of writing the tablets and he had to keep on changing them as suggested by a mere mortal over a period of a year we can know that he wasn't All-knowing in my view, no examples required.

What you seem to be missing is, Arabic language is spoken differently in different Arab countries. Baha'u'llah lived in Iraq for some time. Later He lived in Rome, and then exiled to Palestine.

Arabic grammar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Varieties of Arabic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

To know what it was, it is best to look at an example.

 

[InChrist]

I believe that Baha'is and other groups who claim to follow the return of Christ have their questions incomplete.

One not only needs a criteria of what a true claimant would look like, when multiple people make the case to fit those criteria, it is also helpful to have a set of criteria for what a false claimant would look like, so this thread is for how we can know that a claimant is *not* Christ.

In that regard I think it is helpful for as not only to know what a Christ is, but also what a Christ is not.

According to Baha'u'llah (one of the numerous "return of Christ" claimants), one of the features of Christ is that he is infallible. Though I dont know if this claim is justified in the Biblical texts, nonetheless it would be unwise to treat a demonstrably fallible person as if infallible.

So one of the things that might be a criterion of *not* being the Christ is making errors in one's own holy writings, having them pointed out by another fallible human, then having to re-edit the text multiple times.

But then Baha'u'llah appears to *not* be a return of Christ in my view because that is what he appears to have done;

'Bahā’u’llāh is probably the only Prophet ever who has revised and changed the errors in his own writings, and the only erring infallible. Unfortunately, some people fail to see why these errors must not be committed by a divine figure who carries God’s messages. Some people fail to realize that God’s words don’t need to be edited, proofread, and changed, especially if they have been penned by the “Unerring Pen.” To make matters worse, the UHJ explicitly mentions that many of the changes were suggested to Bahā’u’llāh by an ordinary person: 481 Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 71. 482 Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 78. 483 This can be deduced from his statement “then they would be like your words,” which was uttered by Bahā’u’llāh to state that there must be a difference between the words of God and the words of the people and this difference exists in the grammatical conventions. 217 It is important to note that the stylistic and grammatical changes mentioned above took place over time—often it was Zayn himself that suggested them—and therefore the various manuscripts differ somewhat, one from the other.484 These words show how helpless Bahā’u’llāh was in correcting his errors. Every time he fixed the errors some more were found and he was again forced to make changes in the book and give out a new revised version. He even needed a fallible person to point out these errors and give him suggestions. Thus, the book was not revised once but numerous times. If these changes were made to “to forestall the cavils of the opponents of the Cause” then why not change it accordingly once and shut the mouth of the opponents once and for all. Are the words of God some sort of joke that must be changed every time someone objects to them? The words of God are perfect they need not be changed for style and grammar. These acts by Bahā’u’llāh are in direct contradiction with the claimed infallibility and divine knowledge attributed to him. What is the difference between this Baha’i prophet and all other ordinary men who make mistakes and correct them later on? What kind of an Omniscient God do Baha’is believe in that cannot foresee the troubling consequences of his revelations and changes them multiple times and gives out newer versions and editions?!'

Source:
Twelve Principles:
A Comprehensive Investigation on
the Baha’i Teachings
Masoud Basiti, Zahra Moradi, Hossein Akhoondali
Translated by: Hossein Akhoondali, Ali Mansouri
page 216-217

Which can be downloaded here: https://dn790009.ca.archive.org/0/items/TwelvePrinciples/Twelve Principles - A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings.pdf

TL : DR? What criterion demonstrate a person is *not* the "return of Christ"?

I think the criteria which demonstrates a person is “not” Christ is if that person is not Jesus Christ with the nail marks still visible in His hands and feet. Also, Christ will be returning in His glorified body from the heavens, with power and judgment. There wil be no question or doubt concerning Who He is.
Won’t be just some human on earth claiming to be Christ.
That’s my view.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I think the criteria which demonstrates a person is “not” Christ is if that person is not Jesus Christ with the nail marks still visible in His hands and feet. Also, Christ will be returning in His glorified body from the heavens, with power and judgment. There wil be no question or doubt concerning Who He is.
Won’t be just some human on earth claiming to be Christ.
That’s my view.

Do you believe Jesus is in another planet in space, and He will come to earth? In another galaxy?
So, if we knew where that location is in the space, and if we had a very powerful spaceship, we could theoretically travel there and see Him right now?

 

[Trailblazer]

I think the criteria which demonstrates a person is “not” Christ is if that person is not Jesus Christ with the nail marks still visible in His hands and feet.

Baha'u'llah never claimed to be Jesus Christ.

Baha'u'llah did not come in the name of Jesus, He came with a new name.

The Bible says Christ (not Jesus) would return with a new name, so we know he would not be called Jesus.

Isaiah 62:2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12-13 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

The new name means that the return of Christ would be another man. It would not be Jesus.

Also, Christ will be returning in His glorified body from the heavens, with power and judgment. There wil be no question or doubt concerning Who He is.
Won’t be just some human on earth claiming to be Christ.
That’s my view.

You are free to believe that but bear in mind that Jesus has a spiritual body in heaven.

Spiritual bodies belong in heaven (verse 50), not on earth.
1 Corinthians 15
New Living Translation

The Resurrection Body

35 But someone may ask, “How will the dead be raised? What kind of bodies will they have?”

40 There are also bodies in the heavens and bodies on the earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies. 41 The sun has one kind of glory, while the moon and stars each have another kind. And even the stars differ from each other in their glory.

42 It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. 44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

50 What I am saying, dear brothers and sisters, is that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. These dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever.

51 But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!

 

[danieldemol]

What you seem to be missing is, Arabic language is spoken differently in different Arab countries. Baha'u'llah lived in Iraq for some time. Later He lived in Rome, and then exiled to Palestine.

Arabic grammar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Varieties of Arabic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

To know what it was, it is best to look at an example.

Your apologetics are doubly irrelevant in my view, both because Baha'u'llah didn't change countries during the edits (1887 to 1888) and because the edits were done to bring it into conformity with Quranic grammar which was fixed long before differing dialects emerged according to my understanding.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Your apologetics are doubly irrelevant in my view, both because Baha'u'llah didn't change countries during the edits (1887 to 1888) and because the edits were done to bring it into conformity with Quranic grammar which was fixed long before differing dialects emerged according to my understanding.

Aha, now you are more specific.

You mean Baha'u'llah had quoted verses of the Quran, but it was a bit different than exact wording as it was in the Quran.

This argument assumes, that Baha'u'llah had wanted to quote the exact wording.
I don't believe Baha'u'llah wanted to quote Quran verses. He did not need to. He was speaking with the essence of those verses.
It may also be that, you think, there were grammatical errors in the writings of Baha'u'llah. If that's what you understood, certainly that's not the case. There was no error. Just different wordings. I already know some of the Writings of Baha'u'llah in Iqan, that, He refers or uses certain expressions or parts of the verses of the Quran, with slight variations.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think the criteria which demonstrates a person is “not” Christ is if that person is not Jesus Christ with the nail marks still visible in His hands and feet. Also, Christ will be returning in His glorified body from the heavens, with power and judgment. There wil be no question or doubt concerning Who He is.
Won’t be just some human on earth claiming to be Christ.
That’s my view.

In the gospel stories a lot of what convinced even his disciples were the miracles... Walking on water, calming the storm, healing the crippled, the blind, the lepers, the demon possessed, and even raising two people from the dead.

Baha'is say that Baha'u'llah did do miracles but didn't want that to be the focus and the reason people believed in him. But then Baha'is also say that some of the miracles that Jesus performed didn't really happen. Their claim is that they were "symbolic". Baha'is here on the forum have said that Jesus healed the "spiritually" blind and he raised Lazarus from being "spiritually" dead. And Baha'is don't believe demons exist, so those miracles didn't really happen either.

But, as I bring up all the time, the greatest miracle, the resurrection of Jesus, they also deny and make out to be only a symbolic, spiritual resurrection.

So, what we have is that Baha'is claim that their guy is the return of Christ, but not the return of Jesus. Jesus, they believe, the physical body of Jesus died and stayed dead. And that many of the miracles didn't really happen.

They make a huge claim, however, that Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the Biblical prophesies. Since the title, Baha'u'llah, they say means "The Glory of God" they easily use any mention of the ''Glory of God" to be a reference to Baha'u'llah. And since his "Elijah" was the "Bab", which they say means "The Gate", any reference to the gate is referring to the Bab. One of the main ones they use is that the "Glory of God" was coming from the "Gate" that faces east.

Other prophesies, like those that alludes to or mention the Messiah coming to Zion or Jerusalem are made to fit in some symbolic way. Making it easy to fit any prophecy into whatever they need it to fit.

For them, it is clear. There is no doubt. No nail holes needed, because they don't believe it is the same man, Jesus, that is returning. Their guy is... the return of Christ.

 

[CG Didymus]

Aha, now you are more specific.

You mean Baha'u'llah had quoted verses of the Quran, but it was a bit different than exact wording as it was in the Quran.

This argument assumes, that Baha'u'llah had wanted to quote the exact wording.
I don't believe Baha'u'llah wanted to quote Quran verses. He did not need to. He was speaking with the essence of those verses.
It may also be that, you think, there were grammatical errors in the writings of Baha'u'llah. If that's what you understood, certainly that's not the case. There was no error. Just different wordings. I already know some of the Writings of Baha'u'llah in Iqan, that, He refers or uses certain expressions or parts of the verses of the Quran, with slight variations.

You know this is only part of what that book is claiming. I took a quick glance at it, and it had quotes from the Bab and his book that had some problems. The book had references to where the quotes came from in the Bayan. So, I assume they were quoting him accurately.

Have you taken a look at any of the allegations about the Bab? If so, what are your objections to how they are using those quotes? Since, for you, being a Baha'i, I assume they are wrong.

 

[RamaRaksha]

It does not matter. We are to show charity, tzedakah, to ALL, friend and foe, and we are to love God with all our heart and soul, so if we are doing these things, we see Christ in everyone.
Namaste

That's a Hindu view - unfortunately a lot of people will disagree with that, esp the conversion industry religions
Conversions are successful only by dividing people
A simple, Good people are with God, bad people are not won't get conversions

 

[RamaRaksha]

There are "signs", given regarding second coming of Christ in the Bible and in the Quran, and Hadithes. If someone claims to be a Christ today, if his coming does not match with the signs given in Previous Holy Books, then you know it is not really Him.

So the ancient book decides whether it is God coming or not?
Can you elaborate? What are the signs? Magic, miracle? Young blond white male and answer to the name Jesus?

 

[CG Didymus]

So the ancient book decides whether it is God coming or not?
Can you elaborate? What are the signs? Magic, miracle? Young blond white male and answer to the name Jesus?

In case you missed it. the Baha'is claim that their prophet, Baha'u'llah, is also the return of Kalki. In one of these threads a Baha'i claimed that in the Hindu Scriptures that the "promised one" they expect to return, which for them I assume would be Kalki, that he would come from west of India... meaning from Persia, to match where their prophet came from.

First of all, do you believe in the Kalki Avatar? If so, where is he supposed to return to and when... and what is he supposed to do when he gets here?

 

[Vinayaka]

That's a Hindu view - unfortunately a lot of people will disagree with that, esp the conversion industry religions
Conversions are successful only by dividing people
A simple, Good people are with God, bad people are not won't get conversions

Not this Hindu. Christ is irrelevant to me. I see divinity in everyone, but not Christ.

 

[Trailblazer]

Not this Hindu. Christ is irrelevant to me. I see divinity in everyone, but not Christ.

If you see divinity in everyone, why don't you see it in Christ?

 

[Vinayaka]

If you see divinity in everyone, why don't you see it in Christ?

I would, if he existed, but not any more divine than the average person. This addresses a major difference in paradigms though. Hindus see a spark of divinity at the core of everyone, whereas Abrahamics see us all as sinners, (except for manifestations, etc.) or some other non-divine way. Put another way, it's optimism versus pessimism.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You know this is only part of what that book is claiming. I took a quick glance at it, and it had quotes from the Bab and his book that had some problems. The book had references to where the quotes came from in the Bayan. So, I assume they were quoting him accurately.

Have you taken a look at any of the allegations about the Bab? If so, what are your objections to how they are using those quotes? Since, for you, being a Baha'i, I assume they are wrong.

The key thought here I have CG is there is a reason that the Bab was executed and Baha'u'llah was banished.

The most learned divines of the age they lived were unable to refute what they offered as the Bab and Baha'u'llah could quote from the Quran and the traditions in support of the New Word they offered. As such it was the essence of those passages, showing them in a different light, that was rejected by the Divines.

The Shah sent his most learned mullah to determine if the Bab was sane and the Mesage was valid, he sent Siyyid Yahya Darabi to interview the Bab. You should read his story, he was a man that all would turn to on matters relating to the Quran, he had memorised over 30,000 hadiths. He had 3 meetings with the Bab.

Siyyid Yahya-i-Darabi (Vahid) – Bahai Chronicles

bahaichronicles.org

That story is all that is needed in reply to such an OP.

Edit: I add a quote from the link.

"We verified all the traditions in the text and found them to be entirely accurate."

There are similar stories for Baha'u'llah.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

This addresses a major difference in paradigms though. Hindus see a spark of divinity at the core of everyone, whereas Abrahamics see us all as sinners, (except for manifestations, etc.) or some other non-divine way. Put another way, it's optimism versus pessimism.

That is not true of 'all' the Abrahamic religions. The Baha'i Faith acknowledges that we all have two natures, a material nature and a Divine nature, and since we have free will we can choose to act according to one or the other.

“In man there are two natures; his spiritual or higher nature and his material or lower nature. In one he approaches God, in the other he lives for the world alone. Signs of both these natures are to be found in men. In his material aspect he expresses untruth, cruelty and injustice; all these are the outcome of his lower nature. The attributes of his Divine nature are shown forth in love, mercy, kindness, truth and justice, one and all being expressions of his higher nature. Every good habit, every noble quality belongs to man’s spiritual nature, whereas all his imperfections and sinful actions are born of his material nature. If a man’s Divine nature dominates his human nature, we have a saint.” Paris Talks, p. 60

THE TWO NATURES IN MAN

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Hindus see a spark of divinity at the core of everyone, whereas Abrahamics see us all as sinners,

That statement is as broad as you accuse other people of when talking of Hinduism.

The Bible is clear, we are all born in the image and potential of divinity, it is our core potential.

Genesis 1:27
James 3:9

Regards Tony

 

[RamaRaksha]

Not this Hindu. Christ is irrelevant to me. I see divinity in everyone, but not Christ.

I see your anger
Hinduism asks us to see the good in everyone
Christ did not come to push religion - to push hate based on religion
That is what these religions have done and are doing
A Weaponized God, Segregated Heavens - that is why Gandhiji said I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians
Don't confuse a religion with their followers
To me, Hinduism is a Warrior faith - all our Gods fought evil, they did not back down
But centuries of foreign rule has mellowed Hindus - today, we refuse to speak up for our faith
We are abused as 2nd class people in this world and we don't speak up