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

[YoursTrue]

Of you see the good in someone regardless of everything else that may be more prominent, then you're seeing their God spark. You're seeing their potential, the part of them God knows and loves and dies not give up on. When you see or feel this goodness, you should be drawn by your God spark to do them a kindness, and perhaps they do so for you.

The exciting thing is when you do a kindness without seeing/feeling their spark, and your kindness sets it off like a sparkler.

Have you ever looked at a stranger in the grocery store, or somewhere else equally "normal" and with a simple kind or affirming word turned a down-and-out look into a tired but pleasant smile? That's showing charity, "tzedahad", or "doing the right thing" in making someone's moment a bit better.

So what do you think the future will be?

 

[Niatero]

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.p

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

If your argument for saying that Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ is that Christ was infallible but Baha'u'llah is not, that's only an argument for people who believe that Christ was infallible, and I think there are much better arguments for convincing people who believe that. Also, If the problem is thinking that Baha'u'llah is infallible, why are you only trying to warn Christians? In fact, why aren't you trying to warn everyone against believing in the infallibility of the Bible and the Qu'ran? If believing in the infallibility of some scriptures is the problem that you think it is, those look like a much larger and more immediate problem than people believing in the infallibility of Baha'u'llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

As I understand it, your argument is that a person who is not infallible can not be the return of Christ, because Christ was infallible. That argument only works if you think that Christ was infallible. Do you?

Anyway, in my understanding, Baha'u'llah claims a kind of oneness with Christ, but it's questionable to me whether or not he's claiming to be the return of Christ in any of the ways that people might think. Of course I'm not sure how anyone actually is thinking about it. Certainly not the return, because if he is a return of Christ, so are Muhammad and the Bab.

(later) Also, I don't think "infallible" in the writings of Baha'u'llah, if he ever actually uses that word, means what people think it means.

(later) He does, at least 140 times according to Ocean 2.0 Reader.

That website with information that was posted about Baha'u'llah is anti-Baha'i propaganda. Bahā’u’llāh did not revise or change any errors in His own writings.

I think that the reason Baha'u'llah is considered infallible is because His will is identical with the will of God who is infallible.

“The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167

Yes, Baha'u'llah did claim to be the return of the Christ Spirit, but He did not claim to be Jesus Christ.

“O kings of Christendom! Heard ye not the saying of Jesus, the Spirit of God, “I go away, and come again unto you”? Wherefore, then, did ye fail, when He did come again unto you in the clouds of heaven, to draw nigh unto Him, that ye might behold His face, and be of them that attained His Presence? In another passage He saith: “When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 246

“We, in truth, have sent Him Whom We aided with the Holy Spirit (Jesus Christ) that He may announce unto you this Light that hath shone forth from the horizon of the will of your Lord, the Most Exalted, the All-Glorious, and Whose signs have been revealed in the West. Set your faces towards Him (Bahá’u’lláh) on this Day which God hath exalted above all other days, and whereon the All-Merciful hath shed the splendour of His effulgent glory upon all who are in heaven and all who are on earth.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 18

“This is, truly, that which the Spirit of God (Jesus Christ) hath announced, when He came with truth unto you, He with Whom the Jewish doctors disputed, till at last they perpetrated what hath made the Holy Spirit to lament, and the tears of them that have near access to God to flow….”
Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 19

 

[danieldemol]

If your argument for saying that Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ is that Christ was infallible but Baha'u'llah is not, that's only an argument for people who believe that Christ was infallible, and I think there are much better arguments for convincing people who believe that.

Well feel free to share those better arguments, you won't offside me by doing so.

Also, If the problem is thinking that Baha'u'llah is infallible, why are you only trying to warn Christians? In fact, why aren't you trying to warn everyone against believing in the infallibility of the Bible and the Qu'ran?

Well I have made serious attempts at doing both of those.

The attempts at exposing the Bible errancy are better done by scholars of those fields though in my view and as there are plenty of advocates for that here on RF I feel it more appropriate to cheer on their efforts with only the occasional thread started by me as I see the need.

As for the Qur'an people actually got tired of telling me off for criticising it, I realised that as Muslims are a minority in our society people confuse attempts to expose the fallibility of the Quran with attempts to stir up the mob against Muslim minorities in the west. Sometimes I believe they even will fully did so for self serving interests.

But the main reason I stopped criticism of the Qur'an is because even many atheists and liberals just didn't seem to want to hear it, so I felt like I was sharing information that was not solicited somewhat like a proselytiser and decided to save people the bother and let them find out the hard way just how destructive the Quran is to society.

Now your telling me I should be doing more of it so I'll try and re-fire up my zeal but again the Qur'an is something I'm less familiar with than the writings of Baha'u'llah even though I have read the yusuf ali translation from cover to cover.

If believing in the infallibility of some scriptures is the problem that you think it is, those look like a much larger and more immediate problem than people believing in the infallibility of Baha'u'llah.

There have been mass movements away from the Quran in traditionally Islamic societies such as Iran 1 and Across the Middle East 2 and the Bible in educated societies of the West
1 'A 2020 Online Survey by Gamaan found that 8.8% Iranians identifying as Atheist and a large fraction (22.2%) identifying as not following an organized religion and only 40% self identified as Muslims. This has been noted as a transition of Iranians towards secularism.[3][4][5][6]'
Source: Secularism in Iran - Wikipedia.

2. Middle East: Are people losing their religion? – DW – 02/04/2021

I guess from my perspective it is useful to deter those who have found the infallibility of Christianity and Islam wanting to give it a third run in the Baha'i faith

 

[Niatero]

I guess from my perspective it is useful to deter those who have found the infallibility of Christianity and Islam wanting to give it a third run in the Baha'i faith

Okay. Carry on.

 

[PearlSeeker]

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

The criteria are exactly the same:

- he won't make an entrance (all this won't happen: "revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels", "the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken", "every eye will see him"...)

- he won't judge the world and cleare all the wicked people

- he won't resurrect dead people

- he won't be the king of the world

...

 

[Niatero]

x

If your argument for saying that Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ is that Christ was infallible but Baha'u'llah is not, that's only an argument for people who believe that Christ was infallible, and I think there are much better arguments for convincing people who believe that.

Well feel free to share those better arguments, you won't offside me by doing so.

See the post above this one for some examples of reasons for Christians not to believe in the infallibility of Baha'u'llah.

I'm thinking that if you really want to warn people away from Baha'u'llah, you might do better if you think more carefully and deeply about it. Also, people promoting "Baha'i beliefs" online are doing such a good job of repelling people away from him and the Baha'i community that your efforts might not be needed.

 

[ChristineM]

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

Following on from my post in...

If Christ comes today, how do you know it is really Him?

Any false claimants would sink when trying to walk on water.

 

[Truthseeker]

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 notice that the source of this is from Tehran. Is the Iran government behind these people? We can strongly suspect this is just calumny and propaganda. Since it from people who are not Baha'i I guess we are to think it is objective in some way, which I see as nonsense. I think Baha'is can discount this. Others can evaluate it as they want to. Are people supposed to read over 600 pages of calumny? We have to counter this the 4 volumes of The Revelation of Baha'u'llah by Adib Taherzadeh for instance. I encourage others to read that as a counterpoint. You've already made up your mind on this, which is your right. I've made up my mind on this, which is my right.

Here are links to the 4 volumes:

The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 1, Cover

The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 2, Cover

The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 3, Cover

The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 4, Cover

 

[Jimmy]

To me it’s simple. Because “Jesus” supposedly lived a while back.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Also, people promoting "Baha'i beliefs" online are doing such a good job of repelling people away from him and the Baha'i community that your efforts might not be needed.

Can you say, what you see from Baha'is online that repells people away from Baha'u'llah?

 

[Niatero]

Can you say, what you see from Baha'is online that repells people away from Baha'u'llah?

It's from previous experiences with people promoting what they call Baha'i beliefs in online discussions. I'm not sure how much it happens here. I'll give you a few examples, and I'll try to remember some others. One is a kind of evangelism that violates the spirit of forum rules, and at least two people who said openly that they felt called to do it even if it did violate forum rules. Another is setting themselves up as infallible interpreters of the scriptures of all religions. Another is saying out of one side of their mouth that we're all equal, all the religions are equally valid, and out of the other side of their mouth that their religion is the only true one and all the others are wrong.

 

[CG Didymus]

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.

The first "prophesy" that Baha'is told me was John 16:12-13

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.​

​

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.​

​

So clear, so obvious, here's Jesus telling them about a future prophet of God that is going to come and teach them all things. Things they couldn't understand now, "bear", but in the future, they would.

Then Born-Again Christians told me the verse was speaking of the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.​

​

Yeah, so clear, so obvious. Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit.

John 14:15 “If you love me, keep my commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth.​

​

25 “All this I have spoken while still with you. 26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.​

​

Some people are going to believe the Baha'i interpretation. Some people believe what the Born-Again Christians say. But "signs" and prophesies can be made to mean pretty much whatever a person wants them to mean.

Like these verses in Isaiah... Two enemy Kings were going to invade Judah, but Isaiah tells the King Ahaz of Judah...

Isaiah 7:7 Yet this is what the Sovereign Lord says:​

​

“‘It will not take place,
it will not happen...​

​

Isaiah tells him to ask God for a sign. King Ahaz refuses. Isaiah then tells him a sign anyway...

7:13 Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin (or, young maiden) will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. 15 He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, 16 for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. 17 The Lord will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah—he will bring the king of Assyria.”​

​

So clear, so obvious, before the boy knows enough to reject wrong and choose right, whenever that is, the two enemy kings will be dead. But then another enemy, the king of Assyria, is going to come conquer them?

Well anyway, that's what I thought was so obvious about these verses. But then the writer of the gospel of Matthew takes one verse and makes it a prophecy about Jesus.

Matthew 1:22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).​

​

So clear, so obvious... that he cherry-picked one verse out of context and made it into one of the greatest "signs" or prophesies... The virgin birth of Jesus.

It is so clear and obvious to Christians. A prophesy about Jesus. That he had no human father. Mary was a virgin. Therefore, he is literally the Son of God.

Who's right? The Christians or the Jews that rejected Jesus as their Messiah? All depends on what a person chooses to believe.

Signs and prophesies aren't all that clear and obvious.

 

[CG Didymus]

Well the Baha'i faith is so relatively small at the moment that the emergence of conservatives who cling strictly to Baha'u'llah's orders are minuscule,

I think that the more conservative, authoritarian types of people are getting into positions of power in the Baha'i Faith. It is seen as a positive thing for a person to take the teachings of the Baha'i Faith seriously and to strictly obey them and promote others to live by them also. It makes strong, dedicated Baha'is. Baha'is that will make sure that God's laws are enforced.

People that believe many of the basic teachings of the Baha'i Faith, like believing all people are equal and that all religions have truth in them but are very liberal in their views about a religion's doctrines and dogmas, might not fit into the Baha'i community that easily.

 

[Kathryn]

You didn't trigger me, but it could have been devastating to someone browsing, so a heads up -- words DO matter.

But going through that "stage" and getting to the other side relatively unmarked is the goal of all parents. I'm fortunate mine found their independent ways with their roots properly planted.

That's what I hope for all "seekers" as well. That they don't get too scarred walking through the thorns to get to their favorite roses. Or maybe they prefer blackberries?

I think everyone goes through a time of denouncing what they don't understand or what they fear. A religion doesn't have to be the starter pistol. Reminding others to be kind should be in our daily repertoire with everyone.

I dipped my toe in the Southern Baptist pool nearly fifty years ago. I have very strong feelings still, however, the majority of my friends and neighbors are Southern Baptist so there's no getting away from it. I listen to a lot that makes me want to roll my eyes at the very least, but it would only alienate them. They worry so for my soul because I refuse to accept their invitations. Just yesterday I had the annual knock on my door with the little bag of homemade cookies and the personal invitation to revival that begins in Sunday night. They'll pray for me, bless their hearts.

Go back and reread - God hears all! Sincerity is directed at worship. Why go to sit in a church when you don't even listen to the sermon? Why put money in the offering plate when you won't even hold the door for "those people"? One is better at worshiping when they sit on the beach and contemplate all the wonders before their eyes.

I don't mean relax in your demeanor, but in your mission. Vinegar only attracts those nasty little fruit-flies. ;-)

Prayer differs a lot from worship, though prayer CAN also be worship. Prayer is communication, and worship is, well, worship - adoration. Two different things.

 

[Truthseeker]

Also, people promoting "Baha'i beliefs" online are doing such a good job of repelling people away from him and the Baha'i community that your efforts might not be needed.

How some adherents of a religion act have little bearing on the truth of the claims of the Messenger. I recognize terrible things some who claim to be Christians have done and it makes no difference to me when I evaluate the claims of Christ.

 

[Spice]

So what do you think the future will be?

No need to be concerned with the future. Just take care of today. Mt 6:34
“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

 

[Niatero]

How some adherents of a religion act have little bearing on the truth of the claims of the Messenger.

That depends on the claims of the messenger. If he claims that following his teachings will improve society, then the behavior of his followers has everything to with the truth of his message. Even so, I don’t think that we can learn anything at all about it from the behavior of people evangelizing, using its name as a label for their beliefs.

 

[YoursTrue]

No need to be concerned with the future. Just take care of today. Mt 6:34
“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

That's not exactly what I was saying. I mean various people have various opinions about what the future will bring. And of course, the scientists at the Doomsday Clock do say the human race is pretty close to destruction at its own hands -- so since you talk about moment to moment helping people feel good, that's why I asked what you think about the future.

 

[YoursTrue]

No need to be concerned with the future. Just take care of today. Mt 6:34
“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

By the way, if you're going to quote that, how about this: 1 Thessalonians 5:3 - While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape."