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

[Aupmanyav]

I believe so. We execute murderers and do our best to protect out freedoms.

As our Father in Heaven is also. We are also forgiving.

Now I am confused. 'Accept the dictator and his representative and you are saved.'

 

[Balthazzar]

I don't

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 don't care if it is or isn't. Safety precautions would dictate a disbelief of anyone claiming to be. He wasn't the most well liked guy in the first place. He was a wanted man, even before his birth. Couple this with the world domination and power establishment effort to be and you have a very delicate and dangerous situation for anyone seriously claiming to be. People generally don't like to be dominated or to lose power to figures they don't much care for. So, a great rule of thumb would be to never believe anyone who claims to be Christ. It's a dangerous world we live in and I'm fairly sure as a thief in the night holds most truthful and safest for any present or future "comeback" to establish a new government under his rule.

 

[Balthazzar]

If Christ is in everyone then there is no need for one Christ to treat another Christ as an infallible person to be deferred to, making the whole concept of an individual "return of Christ" bogus in my view.

And I believe that one form of charity is when one can see a person headed for a ditch to warn them of the danger that lies ahead. Unfortunately in my view the danger that potentially lies ahead for treating Baha'u'llah as infallible is people being literally burned, unwarranted censorship to protect hagiographic notions of Messengers etc.

Messengers are everywhere. Christ is literally in everyone. I mean, we all understand the difference between truth and error. The problem is we're not infallible in our discernments. I think that's the gist anyway. The spirit of truth, rightness, correctness, honest, sincere, and valid ... these things most can get on board with. What I've found so paradoxical is how sometimes atheist are more attuned to "christ" than some of the overly superstitious crowd.

Hehe

 

[danieldemol]

Bouncing this thread in response to How can you tell if a Prophet is true?

Because people deserve to be able to make an opinion that is fully informed including with the views of the non religious in my view.

 

[Muffled]

Now I am confused. 'Accept the dictator and his representative and you are saved.'

I believe I am confused. Are yousaying Jesus is a dictator? I don't perceive Him that way. To me a dictator wants to manage everything but Jesus as my Master does not micro-manage. An acceptance of representatives is not necessary for salvation but He does remind us what is done to them is done to Him.

 

[Muffled]

Messengers are everywhere. Christ is literally in everyone. I mean, we all understand the difference between truth and error. The problem is we're not infallible in our discernments. I think that's the gist anyway. The spirit of truth, rightness, correctness, honest, sincere, and valid ... these things most can get on board with. What I've found so paradoxical is how sometimes atheist are more attuned to "christ" than some of the overly superstitious crowd.

Hehe

I believe not everyone has the gift of prophesy ie hearing God speak but I have found that God is capable of delivering a message from anyone even without thier knowledge.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I believe I am confused. Are yousaying Jesus is a dictator? I don't perceive Him that way. To me a dictator wants to manage everything but Jesus as my Master does not micro-manage. An acceptance of representatives is not necessary for salvation but He does remind us what is done to them is done to Him.

It is necessary. "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.."

 

[Trailblazer]

It is necessary. "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.."

An acceptance of Jesus is necessary but the consensus of scholarly opinion is that Jesus never said what you said that he said.

“Most scholars, if they had worked through the sayings as we had, would tend to agree there is virtually nothing in the fourth Gospel (John) that goes back to Jesus,” said Robert Fortna of Vassar College. Jesus says in John “I am the good shepherd . . . I am the light of the world . . . I am the bread of life,” but that “is mostly the work of the author,” Fortna said. Jesus rarely refers to himself in the other Gospels.

THE REJECTED SAYINGS

The Jesus Seminar, a six-year project based in Sonoma to assess the historical authenticity of sayings attributed to Jesus, concluded that about half were words put into his mouth by Gospel authors and early believers in reflection of their own hopes and fears. Among the sayings rejected were the following:

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”

John 14:6: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Mark 13:25, 30: (A series of apocalyptic sayings) “Then they will see ‘the Son of Man coming in the clouds’ with great power and glory. . . . Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.”

Matthew 5:11: “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.”

Mark 10:32-34: “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death; then they will hand him over to the Gentiles; they will mock him, and spit upon him, and flog him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise again.”

Seminar Rules Out 80% of Words Attributed to Jesus : Religion: Provocative meeting of biblical scholars ends six years of voting on authenticity in the Gospels.

The provocative Jesus Seminar on Sunday concluded six years of voting on what the Jesus of history most likely said, ruling out about 80% of words attributed to him in the Gospels and emerging with the picture of a prophet-sage who told parables and made pithy comments.

www.latimes.com

 

[Aupmanyav]

An acceptance of Jesus is necessary but the consensus of scholarly opinion is that Jesus never said what you said that he said.

Why is the acceptance of Jesus necessary?
I do not know, I was not there. Were you?
Ah! Because if I do not accept your One God, Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad as messengers of Allah; I am not likely to accept Bab and Bahaollah as well, and will not convert to Bahaism, and not pay tithe to your House of Justice?
No. I do not accept any God or Goddess, or any messenger from God or Goddess, whether Hindu or non-Hindu, unless some one provides me the evidence.
No, I do not want to get my nose cut to see the Emperor's New Clothes. I have seen it all.

 

[stvdv]

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

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

Answer is simple: To know it really is Him, you need to be on His level of consciousness

IF you are *not* THEN it's just hearsay

First Lesson in Spirituality:
"Be humble and use Common Sense"

My guess: This reply won't get many likes

 

[Jedster]

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

Answer is simple: To know it really is Him, you need to be on His level of consciousness

(just a thought)
Surely if a Christ-claimant comes, it would be in order to raise the (lower) consciousnesses of the masses.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why is the acceptance of Jesus necessary?

It is not necessary unless you are a Christian or a Baha'i, so you are off the hook.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It is not necessary unless you are a Christian or a Baha'i, so you are off the hook.

I would offer none of us are off the hook. It is quite clear we will all face a judgement, the vast majority of NDE's have experienced that judgement.

Which is interesting, that would mean they have 2 judgements.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

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

Answer is simple: To know it really is Him, you need to be on His level of consciousness

IF you are *not* THEN it's just hearsay

First Lesson in Spirituality:
"Be humble and use Common Sense"

My guess: This reply won't get many likes

(just a thought)
Surely if a Christ-claimant comes, it would be in order to raise the (lower) consciousnesses of the masses.

Like to teach us about the Oneness of Humanity, how to bring about the peace and security of all humanity on a global scale and how to genuinely Love all!

Mmmm, may have happened.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I would offer none of us are off the hook. It is quite clear we will all face a judgement, the vast majority of NDE's have experienced that judgement.

Which is interesting, that would mean they have 2 judgements.

Regards Tony

I only meant that he is off the hook for believing in Jesus, I did not mean he is off the hook for everything.

What do you think those two judgments will be?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I only meant that he is off the hook for believing in Jesus, I did not mean he is off the hook for everything.

What do you think those two judgments will be?

When recounting their NDE, they usually explain the judgement they faced.

I had a Baha'i friend that had an NDE and they said that part of their judgement was being made aware of all the souls they had hurt, not knowing the hurt they had imparted to them, it gave them a deep sense of regret of those actions.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I had a Baha'i friend that had an NDE and they said that part of their judgement was being made aware of all the souls they had hurt, not knowing the hurt they had imparted to them, it gave them a deep sense of regret of those actions.

That is all the more reason to follow the first Hidden Word, which I strive to do in my everyday life.

1. O SON OF SPIRIT!
My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, kindly and radiant heart, that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and everlasting.

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh

 

[danieldemol]

and how to genuinely Love all!

Which Baha'u'llah did not do in my view, eg did not teach us how to genuinely love gays by not fining them into poverty, did not adequately teach Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi how to love alleged covenant breakers and smeared those who rejected him saying, "Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth."

Source: Bahá'í Reference Library - The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, Pages 185-241

That smearing also not being genuinely loving in my view.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is not necessary unless you are a Christian or a Baha'i, so you are off the hook.

Thanks for the clarification. I have never needed Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad or that 19th Century Iranian.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Which Baha'u'llah did not do in my view, eg did not teach us how to genuinely love gays by not fining them into poverty, did not adequately teach Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi how to love alleged covenant breakers and smeared those who rejected him saying, "Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth."

Source: Bahá'í Reference Library - The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, Pages 185-241

That smearing also not being genuinely loving in my view.

It may be your concepts of Love are not as well informed as Baha'u'llah's knowledge was, considering it was God's Message to humanity he spoke to us. There is no greater Love than the source of it.

Love requires morals, virtues, justice, trustworthiness and truthfulness and God knows what is best for us.

I do not need to expound on that, nor explain it any further, as it is self evident to me, I have no need to argue the point

Regards Tony