Christ Has returned, what should have we looked for?

[Trailblazer]

So, according to you guys Christ came already in the name of Bahaullah or “Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ Spirit”But bahaullah as the spirit of christ, right?

Yes, that is what we believe.

You see how confusing your religion is? Let’s go back to Matthew 24:5 “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

Didn’t you say “Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ Spirit”? Yes, you did!!

What the Lord Jesus was saying here is the false-christ who would come, like bahaullah, as the "Christ" of God. Read it again, “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

If you read your own post: “Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ Spirit”Then, one of the many who would come as the false-christ is bahaulllah that “shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many”

IOW, Bahaullah, as we speak, is one of the false-christ who would come in "Christ's name" and will deceive the many including you and Tony. Do you understand this?

There have been many false christs, but logically speaking, that does not mean that there was no true Christ.

The fact that there have been many false christs says nothing about Baha’u’llah... That does not mean that Baha’u’llah was a false Christ. Logically speaking that is completely irrelevant... Did any of those false christs do what Baha’u’llah did, write what He wrote, fulfill all the prophecies that He did? No, they did not. That is because they were false.

You just committed the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization by assuming that Baha’u’llah was a false christ.

It does not matter how many false christs there have been. The point you so easily blow off is that that in no way precludes Baha’u’llah being the return of the Christ Spirit. Unless you can prove that He was not you are up the creek without a paddle.

Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.

Hasty generalization - Wikipedia

You assume, without any evidence (since you never researched the claim of Baha’u’llah) that Baha’u’llah was a false christ. Thus, you have based your conclusion on “insufficient evidence,” essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. There is no way you can wriggle out of this unless you can prove that Baha’u’llah was a false christ.

Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern:

1. prophet a represented a false christ
2. prophet b represented a false christ
3. prophet c represented a false christ
4. prophet d represented an a false christ

Therefore, prophet e (in this case Baha’u’llah) represented a false christ.

 

[Trailblazer]

"come in the flesh" means "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:14
Where the "Word" came from? Actually, the "Word" DID NOT come or started from anywhere because, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." -John 1:1 IOW, the "Word" is God and God has no beginning and since you do not believe this, i.e., Christ is God, "who became flesh", then you don't understand the meaning of what "come in the flesh" means in 1 John 4:2, right? So, who is the antichrist now?

Come in the flesh does not mean Jesus was became God in the flesh. It means that Jesus manifested God in the flesh.

John 1:1-2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

That means that the Word was God and all things were made by God.

John 1:14-15 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

That means that God (the Word) was made flesh when God “manifested” Himself in the flesh in Jesus and Jesus dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. Then John bare witness of Jesus.

 

[Neb]

Come in the flesh does not mean Jesus was became God in the flesh. It means that Jesus manifested God in the flesh.

John 1:1-2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

That means that the Word was God and all things were made by God.

John 1:14-15 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

That means that God (the Word) was made flesh when God “manifested” Himself in the flesh in Jesus and Jesus dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. Then John bare witness of Jesus.

We went through with this already or this was Asked and Answered already.

Manifested from what or where? Where was “the Word” before the manifestation? Before the “BEGINNING” as the imperfect tense “WAS/EN” is suggesting, right? “The imperfect tense describes a continuous action usually occurring in the past –William Mounce”. If the imperfect tense “WAS/EN” is suggesting that before the beginning of time, meaning from eternity, “the Word” was with “the God” then there is only one conclusion and that is, “the WORD was God”.

Why can’t you understand this?

Was it because Abdu’l-Baha wrote a commentary: “For the Word does not signify the body of Christ, no, but the divine perfections manifested in Him.” So, with this commentary by Abdul-Baha, the eldest son of Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núr, aka, Bahaullah, both Persian Shiites, you could then justify that Bahaullah was also a manifestation of God

I never said that Baha'u'llah was God. Jesus was not God either. Both were Manifestations of God.

Baha’i Faith claimed Baha’u’llah is the true manifestation of God. Baha’u’llah, a Persian/Iranian Shi’ite, means the glory of ullah/allah/allat, is the Messiah in Judaism, the Christ in Christianity, the twelfth Imam in Islam, all in one, and who knows what else, perhaps Buddha and Krishna too.

 

[Neb]

Yes, that is what we believe.

No one is stopping you if that's what your belief is telling you, but forcing it with other beliefs, like Christianity, by means of mixing bahaullah's writings/commentaries with the Bible is one thing I cannot understand, or should I say, I understand it because things like these must take placed before the end time.

 

[Neb]

There have been many false christs, but logically speaking, that does not mean that there was no true Christ. The fact that there have been many false christs says nothing about Baha’u’llah... That does not mean that Baha’u’llah was a false Christ. Logically speaking that is completely irrelevant... Did any of those false christs do what Baha’u’llah did, write what He wrote, fulfill all the prophecies that He did? No, they did not. That is because they were false.

If we apply logic here, can we agree that by means of true or false, that if we can conclude that there is only ONE TRUE CHRIST in Bible, and it’s NOT bahaullah, but the Lord Jesus Christ, the ONLY TRUE Son of God, "the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father" then it means it's TRUE, i.e., there is ONLY ONE Christ, and therefore, bahaullah, claiming to be the Christ is FALSE? I say it’s TRUE, based on the Bible, i.e., The Lord Jesus is the ONLY Christ of God, because Bahaullah was NEVER “in the bosom of the God/Father" nor was he in Bible at all.

Read this verse: “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” John 1:18

How do you comprehend this verse? You would need to wake up Bahaullah to write a NEW commentary about this verse or update your “PROGRESSIVE REVELATION/COMMENTARY”

 

[Neb]

You just committed the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization by assuming that Baha’u’llah was a false christ.


It does not matter how many false christs there have been. The point you so easily blow off is that that in no way precludes Baha’u’llah being the return of the Christ Spirit. Unless you can prove that He was not you are up the creek without a paddle.


Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.


Hasty generalization - Wikipedia

You can accuse one guilty of the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization based on insufficient evidence but based on the bible the evidence is overwhelming or sufficient that Baha’u’llah is or was a false-christ based on the Bible or Matthew 24:5.

Let’s go back to Matthew 24:5 “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

Didn’t you say “Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ Spirit”? Yes, you did!!

What the Lord Jesus was saying here is the false-christ who would come, like bahaullah, as the "Christ" of God. Read it again, “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

There’s sufficient evidence that Bahaullah was never mentioned in the Bible as the Christ. Therefore, we can ONLY conclude that Bahaullah was really a false-christ. Is this really hard to understand?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

To be fair we must apply the biblical requirements of a True Prophet to find out who is true and who is not.

To be fair, if God is real, we don't need to clear His itinerary with a book first. If God must do as a text says, God is not the real god here.

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

So, just about everyone, then.

By their fruit you will recognize them.

Jesus and others created some less than stellar fruit if viewed honestly.

Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Grafting is a thing.

Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

I doubt Matthew (or Mark, for that matter) ever even remotely dug up a single weed in a small garden, much less farm large-scale. They know NOTHING about how gardening works. I don't have a green thumb and I know more than they do about how plants work.

Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

A LOT of religious leaders, including in the bible, will need some SPF 100 then.

"And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, [and] will speak unto him in a dream."

God talks to me all the time. Ten bucks says you won't care.

(And I don't think it's ethical for anyone who hears from the divine to tell others to follow them. Let the gods do their own marketing. Humans suck at it.)

Jer. 28:9. "The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, [then] shall the prophet be known, that the LORD hath truly sent him."

LOTS of prophecies in the bible are wish-fulfillment silliness or ex post facto rationalizations. LOTS of prophecies are unfulfilled and I'm tired of waiting for a literary character to save us in the real world.

1 Jn. 4:2. "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:"

Not everyone who calls out "Lord, Lord" is his servant. Anyone can slap a fish sticker on their car. Doesn't make them God's messenger. John is a blasphemer, as are others in the bible, eschewing spirituality for bumper sticker shallowness and idolatry. Supporting John is one way to ensure I won't believe in the divine nature of the supporter.

Paul and Peter are others.

Dan. 10:17. "For how can the servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me, straightway there remained no strength in me, neither is there breath left in me."

Daniel is tired. So? So am I and lots of other people. We're ALL tired of having our chains yanked by yet another "prophet" more interested in followers than just silently getting the job done.

Matthew 17:11 - And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

If things are already restored we don't need Jesus or anyone else. The person who ACTUALLY did the job deserves our respect, not the ones who crowed about their accomplishments on their resume and then didn't do half of it.

Yes, Bahais reject all of those on that list, except Baha'u'llah, because He was not self-appointed, He was appointed by God.

They ALL say it.


If y'all want to believe in him, go for it. I'm not in the market for new salesmen and I got tired of the old ones. Have you ever seen this commercial?

I plan on getting my Truth from The Truth. I'm sorry you guys don't sense the divine, but I don't require your services at this time.

 

[Neb]

You assume, without any evidence (since you never researched the claim of Baha’u’llah) that Baha’u’llah was a false christ.

Thus, you have based your conclusion on “insufficient evidence,” essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. There is no way you can wriggle out of this unless you can prove that Baha’u’llah was a false christ.

I must argue from the Bible, and there is NO argument, based on the Bible that Bahaullah was a false-christ. What you guys got is nothing but an anecdotal evidence based on mythical stories and not facts.
Interacting your rabbit hole fantasy with the Bible, to make it more plausible, is not really a bad idea if you feed it to your own congregation but taking it to a forum like this one and challenged the apostles’ writing with your fantasy to make it more like a legit movement, yeah, what do you think Alice in Wonderland is thinking right now? Ahh, welcome to my humble abode! “Would you like an adventure now, or shall we have our tea first? -Alice

 

[Neb]

Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern:

1. prophet a represented a false christ
2. prophet b represented a false christ
3. prophet c represented a false christ
4. prophet d represented an a false christ

Therefore, prophet e (in this case Baha’u’llah) represented a false christ.

You need to understand this verse before we move on to the next segment. Matthew 24:5 “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

If all these prophets, including Bahaullah, claimed they are the Christ then there is only one conclusion to this and that is, all are false-christ, right?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Baha’i Faith claimed Baha’u’llah is the true manifestation of God. Baha’u’llah, a Persian/Iranian Shi’ite, means the glory of ullah/allah/allat, is the Messiah in Judaism, the Christ in Christianity, the twelfth Imam in Islam, all in one, and who knows what else, perhaps Buddha and Krishna too.

"...To Israel He was neither more nor less than the incarnation of the “Everlasting Father,” the “Lord of Hosts” come down “with ten thousands of saints”; to Christendom Christ returned “in the glory of the Father,” to Shí’ah Islám the return of the Imám Husayn; to Sunní Islám the descent of the “Spirit of God” (Jesus Christ); to the Zoroastrians the promised Sháh-Bahrám; to the Hindus the reincarnation of Krishna; to the Buddhists the fifth Buddha...."

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

No one is stopping you if that's what your belief is telling you, but forcing it with other beliefs, like Christianity, by means of mixing bahaullah's writings/commentaries with the Bible is one thing I cannot understand, or should I say, I understand it because things like these must take placed before the end time.

It is the way it has always been. God sends his Messenger who Spiritually fulfills the Prophecy in the Holy Books, all the while not to the material expectations of the masses that await. Time sees them arise to their Seat of Glory amongst those that have rejected them.

Baha'u'llah, the Father is the one who is promissed in all Scriptures. Day by day tgis knowledge permeates the heart and mind of man.

I can see that nothing short of a world wide event on a massive scale will now correct the direction we are now heading. The future will not have centralized massive cities as we now build, centers of materialisim.

You will have your yet to be fullfilled material events, but it will not have a visual Christ riding upon visual clouds, as that spiritual event has come to pass in the mid 1800's.

Baha'u'llah has said;

"The world is in travail, and its agitation waxeth day by day. Its face is turned towards waywardness and unbelief. Such shall be its plight, that to disclose it now would not be meet and seemly. Its perversity will long continue. And when the appointed hour is come, there shall suddenly appear that which shall cause the limbs of mankind to quake. Then, and only then, will the Divine Standard be unfurled, and the Nightingale of Paradise warble its melody."

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Read this verse: “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” John 1:18

How do you comprehend this verse? You would need to wake up Bahaullah to write a NEW commentary about this verse or update your “PROGRESSIVE REVELATION/COMMENTARY”

I see translators having translated without the knowledge of what they were translating.

Acts 7:55-56 Shows a True vision;

"But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,"

The Father and Son at the right of God.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I plan on getting my Truth from The Truth. I'm sorry you guys don't sense the divine, but I don't require your services at this time.

Stay safe and well Kelly.

I hope you plans unfold.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

To be fair, if God is real, we don't need to clear His itinerary with a book first. If God must do as a text says, God is not the real god here.

Correct, the Messenger stands by their own person, life and Word.

To those that do not see the Messenger or hear His Words, a book and prophecy is given for our bounty.

God does not need you to pursue this matter. It will always be your choice.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Jesus and others created some less than stellar fruit if viewed honestly.

The Tree of Christ is naught but good fruit.

Many have pruned themselves from this tree. A pruned branch can live on for a while, seemingly healthy.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Daniel is tired. So? So am I and lots of other people. We're ALL tired of having our chains yanked by yet another "prophet" more interested in followers than just silently getting the job done.

Most people do want the job done for them, few are willing to help. The Messenger gives us the way, we usually persecute them while they only ever offer us Love and Hope.

They one and all live what they offer, so they are the first to get the job under way. If we did not kill them or persecute them, then the world would be a different place.

Effort is required and it is a bounty to join that effort.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

"...To Israel He was neither more nor less than the incarnation of the “Everlasting Father,” the “Lord of Hosts” come down “with ten thousands of saints”; to Christendom Christ returned “in the glory of the Father,” to Shí’ah Islám the return of the Imám Husayn; to Sunní Islám the descent of the “Spirit of God” (Jesus Christ); to the Zoroastrians the promised Sháh-Bahrám; to the Hindus the reincarnation of Krishna; to the Buddhists the fifth Buddha...."

Regards Tony

Zoroastrian beliefs?

6. Belief in the tradition of prophets. Zoroastrianism is based on the teachings of Zoroaster or Zarathushtra, the first prophet. According to legend God manifested Himself to him in a vision and revealed him the secrets of creation and the religious instructions to be followed by people on earth to pursue the path of righteousness. The teachings of Zoroaster are available to us in the Zend Avesta, the main scripture of Zoroastrians. Followers of Ahura Mazda believe the birth of Zoroaster heralded the beginning the current cycle of creation, which would last for 3000 years. During this period a prophet would appear on earth at the end of each millennium to preserve the teachings and guide the humanity. The third prophet, will be a future son of Zoroaster, whose name would be Shoshyant, who would herald the Judgment Day and the eventual destruction of evil powers in the material world.
​

What to expect in each religion doesn't line up all that well. Here Zoroaster started the current cycle. Baha'is say Adam? Here it says in 3000 years, at the end of the cycle, evil will be destroyed and there will be a judgement. I have no doubt that you can arrange the beginning of the cycle so that 3000 years ends at 1844. But, it says that a prophet will appear at the end of each 1000 years? So we have Zoroaster, then a 1000 years later who do we have? then 2000 years later who? and at the end, for you to be correct, it has to be Baha'u'llah? So where do Buddha, Krishna, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and the Bab all fit in? Not to mention that some Baha'is say Adam, Noah and Abraham are also Baha'i manifestations.

So what do we look for when there is no consistency?

 

[CG Didymus]

It is the way it has always been. God sends his Messenger who Spiritually fulfills the Prophecy in the Holy Books, all the while not to the material expectations of the masses that await. Time sees them arise to their Seat of Glory amongst those that have rejected them.

Baha'u'llah, the Father is the one who is promissed in all Scriptures. Day by day tgis knowledge permeates the heart and mind of man.

I can see that nothing short of a world wide event on a massive scale will now correct the direction we are now heading. The future will not have centralized massive cities as we now build, centers of materialisim.

You will have your yet to be fullfilled material events, but it will not have a visual Christ riding upon visual clouds, as that spiritual event has come to pass in the mid 1800's.

Baha'u'llah has said;

"The world is in travail, and its agitation waxeth day by day. Its face is turned towards waywardness and unbelief. Such shall be its plight, that to disclose it now would not be meet and seemly. Its perversity will long continue. And when the appointed hour is come, there shall suddenly appear that which shall cause the limbs of mankind to quake. Then, and only then, will the Divine Standard be unfurled, and the Nightingale of Paradise warble its melody."

Regards Tony

" ...world wide event on a massive scale"? You mean like those predicted in the Book of Revelation? The bulk of which Baha'is say were fulfilled by the evil leaders of Islam centuries ago. Especially the one about no one would be able to buy or sell without the mark of the beast. And Baha'i make this beast some Islamic leader in Andalusia? And his "mark", "666", Baha'is make a date, 666AD? Long before this leader ever existed? What are we supposed to look for if everything means something different than what's expected

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So what do we look for when there is no consistency?

The Bible is full of what to look for in a True Prophet. They will stand out, they will not go with the current thoughts of men, as they came to guide them back to the path and not confirm what they have made of God.

Thus the first to reject them are those with pride in knowledge of God. They think they have it all right and when told they did not, pride takes over. Except for a few. In this day many knowledgeable theologians did accept Baha'u'llah, but read their stories it was not easy for them.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

" ...world wide event on a massive scale"? You mean like those predicted in the Book of Revelation? The bulk of which Baha'is say were fulfilled by the evil leaders of Islam centuries ago. Especially the one about no one would be able to buy or sell without the mark of the beast. And Baha'i make this beast some Islamic leader in Andalusia? And his "mark", "666", Baha'is make a date, 666AD? Long before this leader ever existed? What are we supposed to look for if everything means something different than what's expected

I found this which may expalin a bit more for you;

"A letter dated 29 November 1937 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer identifies the fulfillment of Christ's prophecy of His return of the coming of the Kingdom of the Father with the worldwide realization of the sovereignty of Bahá'u’lláh:

Now as regards the signs that would herald the advent of the new Manifestation; The Guardian wishes you to read over very carefully Bahá'u’lláh's explanation as recorded in the Íqán". There it is made clear that what is meant by the appearance of the Son of God after the calamitous events preceding His coming is the revelation of His full glory and its recognition and acceptance by the peoples of the world, and not His physical appearance. For Bahá'u’lláh, Whose advent marks the return of the Son in the glory of the Father, has already appeared, and the signs predicted in the Gospel have not yet fully been realized. Their complete fulfillment, however, would mark the beginning of the recognition of His full station by the peoples of the world. Then and only then will His appearance be made completely manifest."

Regards Tony