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

[CG Didymus]

Yes Didymus, you are right there. The New Testament is full of ridiculous claims, such as walking on water, feeding 5,000 and turning water into wine. However, if you want to know why God allowed Paul, who never walked with Jesus or anyone who did, to adulterate the message of Jesus and by doing so, alienate the Jews, then I suggest you visit my web 'Gerald Calvert' or "The Papacy Can Now End" using inverted comas. Incidentally, the only miracles Jesus really performed, were healing miracles, which could then easily be claimed as just coincidence by the Pharisees. You will Find out why, God came to the Jew first and then to the Gentile; Jesus was only The Way, but His descendant is here now as The Truth. Know The Truth and the truth will set you free. May God give you wisdom to believe. JC2

Unfortunately, competing Christians have ruined it for me. Believers in the "Baptism of the Spirit" and speaking in "tongues"... Those that believe the Bible and the NT literally but don't believe the "gifts" are for today. I have a brother that's a 7th Day Adventist. Then I have Mormons and JW's knock on my door and tell me "The Truth". Everybody says that they have the truth.

I understand why you believe what you do, but I have too many doubts to be able to believe it you and other Christians do. But it's the same with a religion like the Baha'i Faith. I can't believe everything they teach.

The conclusion I've come to is that all these ways to believe will work and do word... but they all depend on people giving into to them and believing a particular set of religious beliefs is true. Then they apply it to their lives and things seem to work. Things seem to make sense. A person might feel the love of God inside. They might get healed or have some kind of vision.

But it happens to all of them. And they all believe something different. So, is it real? Or is it just because they believe it is real?

But then, if your beliefs are true, not only are the Baha'is wrong, but even several Christian groups are wrong.

And even though Baha'is say they believe that Christianity is a true religion, I doubt very much if that includes your Christian beliefs... Or the beliefs of any other Christian group.

So, essentially, if the Baha'i Faith is true, all the Christians, with all their different Christian beliefs and practices, are all wrong.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Revelation 3:12-13

That is if someone believes Revelation 3 is true, not otherwise. Otherwise it is trash, religious blah-blah. And people have different interpretations for it.

Do you actually believe that the physical body of Jesus is in heaven with holes in His hands and His feet?

What bars a God or Jesus of special pleadings to be in heaven with holes in his hands and his feet? Have you been there and met Jesus like Muhammad did (riding on Burraq).

 

[Truthseeker]

That is if someone believes Revelation 3 is true, not otherwise.

That's quite true.

 

[1213]

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.

What about the reference to "my new name"? This refers, I believe, to a Messenger having a different name than Jesus.

I understand that is referring to Jesus, who will have a new name.

 

[CG Didymus]

I understand that is referring to Jesus, who will have a new name.

Who knows what a "new" name means? But I think it's the strongest argument that the Baha'is have. The others are way too weak for me to take seriously.

Like the "Comforter" is their prophet and not the Holy Spirit. They have no way to tie in the "Lamb" of God to their prophet. The best they can do is say that his forerunner, the Bab, was the "Lamb that was slain."

A big deal is made that the year 1260 in the Islamic calendar, or 1844 in the Gregorian calendar, is when the "Christ" will return. But again, that's the Bab that declared himself in 1844, not their prophet, Baha'u'llah.

Then also from Revelation they make the Two Witnesses to be Muhammad and Ali. And they make Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah the "Three Woes."

For me, the worst interpretation they give is explaining how the Umayyad dynasty is the beast and the dragon in Revelation. They have the number of the beast, the 666, being the year that the Umayyad's took control of Islam. But that was 661AD. So, they add 5 years to it, because they say Jesus was not born in year "0".

But I guess one strong one and a bunch of weak ones is better than nothing.

 

[The Spirit of Truth]

Truthseeker, if I can prove to you that John Zebedee was a woman, Jesus' wife in fact, nicknamed and maligned as the prostitute Mary Magdalene by the Paulene Christians, probably Constantine, so as to deny Jesus' humanity in support of what Paul concluded, after he alone saw the apparition of Jesus alive again on the road to Damascus, i.e., that He was either God, the son of God or both, would you accept my conclusion that Revelations is a load of cods wallop, as it was considered to be, until several hundreds of years after Jesus was crucified.

 

[1213]

Who knows what a "new" name means? But I think it's the strongest argument that the Baha'is have. The others are way too weak for me to take seriously.
...

I don't know their teachings well. But, I think it would be best to remain in the teachings of Jesus.

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't know their teachings well. But, I think it would be best to remain in the teachings of Jesus.

This thread is actually what Baha'is need to be asking. Because their claim is that if you take a look at their prophet, Baha'u'llah, you will see that "The Christ" has returned.

For some people, most who are now Baha'is, it is obvious. For others, it's not so obvious. And for others, Baha'u'llah is obviously not the return of Christ.

 

[Trailblazer]

For some people, most who are now Baha'is, it is obvious. For others, it's not so obvious. And for others, Baha'u'llah is obviously not the return of Christ.

He either is or He isn't. It does not matter what people believe. Everyone has to decide that for themselves.

 

[Truthseeker]

I understand that is referring to Jesus, who will have a new name.

So much for that. That goes to show how valueless prophecies are. They don't really tell you anything, It is all in how a person interprets it.

 

[Trailblazer]

So much for that. That goes to show how valueless prophecies are. They don't really tell you anything, It is all in how a person interprets it.

Those new name prophecies do tell us something. They tell us that when Christ returns He will have a new name, and that means it won't be Jesus who comes. It is patently absurd to try to say those new name verses are about Jesus and Jesus will have a new name. And here I thought I had heard it all.


If Jesus came with a new name, how would anyone know it was Jesus?

 

[Truthseeker]

If Jesus came with a new name, how would anyone know it was Jesus?

Jesus would tell us? This would be after he floats down from the clouds.

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus would tell us? This would be after he floats down from the clouds.

I was going to say that he would tell us but I held back to see what you would say.
Of course, I think you know that both things you said were absurd.

 

[Truthseeker]

I was going to say that he would tell us but I held back to see what you would say.
Of course, I think you know that both things you said were absurd.

I'm just saying that would be the response of some Christians. You can't win with prophecies, at least with individual ones, and good luck getting them to read a book like Thief in the Night.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I understand that is referring to Jesus, who will have a new name.

There are some hints, what that name would be:


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 of Christ, will be the name of His God, and also, the name of the City of His God, which is the new Jerusalem.

So, it is an name that would be also the name of two others: Name of His God, and Name of City of God.

There is another hint in this verse:

Isaiah 43:7
“Everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”


That new name, is created for His glory.

Could that new name be Glory?

 

[Trailblazer]

Isaiah 43:7
“Everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”


That new name, is created for His glory.

Could that new name be Glory?

That won't matter to Christians unless it is the same Jesus in the same body who comes with that name.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That won't matter to Christians unless it is the same Jesus in the same body who comes with that name.

That's understandable, because Bible says that Jesus was resurrected after three days physically and then He was seen for 40 days after resurrection. So, if He physically was resurrected, it must be Himself who would come again. After all this is the hope of Christians that, as Jesus was physically resurrected, He will also come back and resurrects the believers and takes them all to heaven.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's understandable, because Bible says that Jesus was resurrected after three days physically and then He was seen for 40 days after resurrection. So, if He physically was resurrected, it must be Himself who would come again. After all this is the hope of Christians that, as Jesus was physically resurrected, He will also come back and resurrects the believers and takes them all to heaven.

There is no connection between the physical resurrection and the return of Jesus, since a physical body cannot go up to heaven and return from heaven, but of course Christians are not going to accept this. They are going to keep waiting for the same Jesus. It is an emotional attachment that keeps them waiting.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If Christ comes today, how do you know it is really Him, and not a fake one?

I would carefully consider how Jesus fulfilled prophecies within the Tanakh, the statements made throughout the Christian Bible in regards any future Messiah or Christ, the claims made by someone claiming to be the Return and whether or not their teachings and life were consistent with such a claim.

 

[CG Didymus]

I would carefully consider how Jesus fulfilled prophecies within the Tanakh, the statements made throughout the Christian Bible in regards any future Messiah or Christ, the claims made by someone claiming to be the Return and whether or not their teachings and life were consistent with such a claim.

I think the Jews have a great case for believing that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies about being the Messiah. Especially when we consider the things that are claimed to be prophecies in the Gospel of Matthew.

1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”​

​

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”).​

​

2:4 ...he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. 5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:​

​

6 “‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.​

​

2:13 ...an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.”​

​

14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”​

​

16 ...Herod... was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:​

​

18 “A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more.”​

​

19 After Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt 20 and said, “Get up, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who were trying to take the child’s life are dead.”​

​

21 So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23 and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.​

​

The "virgin" birth, getting Joseph and Mary going from Nazareth to Bethlehem, fleeing to Egypt, the boys killed, then going back to Nazareth and having Jesus being called a "Nazarene"? For me, I can believe that all of them were made up. That the writer of the gospel cherry-picked verses that he could make into prophecies.

But that's not all... were the events in Jesus' life made up? Did he cast out demons? Did he rise from the dead? Those things contradict Baha'i beliefs. So, what is it about Matthew or any of the other gospels that can really be relied upon?