There are probably thousands of claimants to the title "the Return of Christ".

Of these claims only a few are taken seriously and even fewer have
generated any significant following. Among this small subset is the
claim made by the followers of Baha'u'llah.

How strong is the case that Baha'u'llah is the return of Christ? How
does this claim compare with other serious contenders?

---

Clarification of Question by augusta-ga on 24 Nov 2004 20:50 PST

I wish to simplify my question:

Are there any existing religious movements with a significant
following whose adherents believe that the founder is the return of
Christ or that he/she has fulfilled the prophecies for the return of
Christ?

If so, what are these movements / religions / belief systems?

Why would Christ want to come back under another name?

Surely, with such brand awareness, he would have re-launched himself
under his existing label?

I have found the following statement on a Bahai web site, which
implies that the notion "return of Christ" is not to be taken
literally:

" "Return" signifies the reappearance of the light of God and the
spirit of the Prophet, not the reappearance of the same body or even
the same personality."
http://www.planetbahai.org/articles/2000/ar010100a.html

Probono:
"While they were talking and discussing, Jesus Himself approached and
began traveling with them. But their eyes were prevented from
recognizing Him."
--John 24:15-16 NAS

There are several times in the gospels where Jesus was among his
desciples and/or friends and they did not recognize him.  If Jesus
didn't want to be immediately recognized by his diciples then it
wouldn't be a stretch that he might hide his name from his followers
upon his return as well.

My husband is a Baha'i, so I hope I can clarify this for you :-)

Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ. He is one of many in a long
line of messengers from God. So, he is in the company of Christ,
Zoroaster, Mohammed, etc.

You might want to check out the messageboard at www.planetbahai.org.
They are very friendly and can answer your question more in-depth than
I can :-)

Such claims are false. The Holy Bible says repeatedly that Christ will
return without warning and that everyone will be surprised by it
("like a thief in the night"). 2 Peter 3:9, 1 Thessalonians 5:3, and
others...

Matthew 24:27 says Christ's return will happpen suddenly and instantaneously:

"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto
the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

When Christ returns He will not appear to a chosen few as the leader
of a small group of believers but "every eye shall see him".
(Revelation 1:7)

At the Second Coming Christ will take the rightous from the earth "in
the twinkling of an eye" in order to save them from the Tribulation.
So if this person you are referring to IS Christ, then we are in
serous trouble because WE are still here - which means WE have been
left behind. The Bible says ?And he will send his angels with a loud
trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from
one end of the heavens to the other? (Matthew 24:31).

That hasn't happened as far as I know [I mean, I don't know of
thousands if not millions of believers who are mysteriously missing,
do you?], so any one who claims to be Christ is a false prophet based
on his outrageous claim alone.

tutuzdad-ga

Interesting reading:

http://www.bahai-faith.com/

I think many Baha'is consider the Bab/baha'u'llah double-whammy to be
a kind of combo returtn of Christ deal. Perhaps more accurately, they
consider this dynamic duo to have fulfilled the prophecies for the
return of Christ.

My question is not: Is this the return of Christ?

It is rather: As claims to fulfill the return propehcy go, how strong
is the one put forward by Baha'is? How does it compare with the
others? Is it up there among the top 3? Is it #1 in terms of the
agregate of circumstantial evidence?

What about 1844, the Millerites, Mt. Carmel and all that? That's
pretty impressive stuff.

for Augusta; The simple fact that we are all still here in the middle
of wars, pestilence and strife worldwide, prove that prior dates that
have passed by  and organisations that no longer function were wrong.
The scripture quoted by Tutuzdad, Matthew 24.31, uses the word
'gather". This can mean "protect". God has set a day to "clean up the
place" [ Armageddon], and not even Jesus Christ himself knows the time
or date, only God. [Matthew 24;36].
But this fact of not knowing the time does not mean that Jesus is
still a helpless baby, as he is so often depicted. He is the cleanser
himself. Revelation 12;7 says He has already thrown Satan out of
heaven, to our detriment. But not for long. Jesus is in full power [
HERE] NOW. His requirements are clearly known and He has no need for a
second PHYSICAL PRESENCE. He has promised a heavenly existence for
144,000 [Revelation 14;1] and a continuing earthly life for his "other
sheep".

I guess it is really hard for a certain kind of passionate Christian
believer to see my question and understand that I am not asking if
Baha'u'llah is the return of Christ. I will borrow a one of J.C.'s
techniques and use a simple allegory to help  make my question more
clear:

One day an apple says: "I will return." and he goes away.
A few days later an orange, a banana, a cherry, a pineapple and a pear
each makes the claim: "I am the return of the apple."

Who has the best claim?
The orange, the banana and the pineapple are all at the bottom of my
list because they are tropical fruits of a completly different type.
We are left with the cherry and the pear. They both grow on trees and
in the same climate as the apple. But pears are much closer in size to
apples than cherries.
So I declare that the pear's claim to be the return of the apple is
the strongest. (This is not to say that the pear's claim is true.)

I hope that make it easier for those of you whose noses are stuck in
bibles and whose minds are clouded by book this, chapter that, verse
this.

I fully understand what you are saying, and I have all along. Your
parable's equation is flawed however because "x" number of similarites
is no more likley to make something "more probable" than "y" number of
similarites.

Which of the two of us (you and I) are more likley to be a pecan?

We may both be nuts, but that doesn't mean one of us more "likley" to
be a pecan because he has brown hair and the other is blonde. See what
I mean?

tutuzdad-ga

...Please understand that my parody of your example is not meant to be
offensive or sarcastic. What I intended to convey was that you cannot
compare two "unknowns" and come up with a potential candidate based on
the sole fact that one of them is slightly more understood than the
other. In this case one has to take the totality of the circumstances
and compare it against what is "widely believed" to be so and make
one's own judgement.

To those who do believe in Biblical teaching, the conclusion is
restricted to a "Yes" or "No" answer concerning each claimant (each
man having his own reason why he came to his conclusion), and not a
"more probable" or "less probable" as you seem to prefer to hear.
Having said that, I believe there is no answer to your question.

tutuzdad-ga

Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I regret being so snarky in my
closing to my previous one.

dear Augusta. The Bible is the ONLY book we have that let us know
about God and Jesus in the first place. The writings of Josephus
confirmed that Jesus did actually live. Chapter and verse, numbered,
is necessary to navigate the many "books" that make up the Bible. So I
ask the question. Why would you be so interested in a Biblical
subject, the return of Jesus, if you so dis-respect the Book itself
and any person that studies it. I quote your words "whose noses are
stuck in bibles and whose minds are clouded by book this, chapter
that, verse this". I would  like to refer to one direction from God.
Exodus 20; 2-6. I will not quote it, but it shows what God requires of
us and the benefits if we comply. If you don`t read it you will never
know. Respectfully, Pug.

Thanks for your comment Pug.

The idea that "the Bible is the ONLY book we have that let's us know
about God and Jesus" is a highly contentious statement. If your
comment was made into a tiny book then wouldn't you say that your book
tells us a little bit about God and Jesus because it would tell to
people which book is good for knowing more about God and Jesus?

I don't respec the view that the writings of Josephus are free from
error and entirely reliable. My suspicion is that people are tempted
to take this 'unquestionably true' Bible position because they prefer
not to deal with the complexities of acknowledging that it is a
comipilation that has been changed by thousands of humans over
centuries.

I don't disrespect the Book itself and any person that studies it. I
don't like discussing matters with people who hold that the things
they believe in are indisputable facts.

I wrote that snarky line in a moment of weakness because I was annoyed
by the fact that so many people were ignoring my question and just
answering a question that I didn't ask.

Those line from Exodus admonish the Jewish refugess from Egypt to stop
worshipping multiple gods and using carved idols in their religion. I
think those guidelines served them well. Hooray for monotheism.

From Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Christians it is quite clear that he
considers himself to have fulfilled the prophecies for the return of
Christ.

http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/lawhaqds.htm

 Say, O followers of the Son! Have ye shut out yourselves from Me by
reason of My Name? Wherefore ponder ye not in your hearts? Day and
night ye have been calling upon your Lord, the Omnipotent, but when He
came from the heaven of eternity in His great glory, ye turned aside
from Him and remained sunk in heedlessness.

Say, Lo! The Father is come, and that which ye were promised in the
Kingdom is fulfilled!

This is the Word which the Son concealed, when to those around Him He
said: `Ye cannot bear it now.' And when the appointed time was
fulfilled and the Hour had struck, the Word shone forth above the
horizon of the Will of God. Beware, O followers of the Son, that ye
cast it not behind your backs. Take ye fast hold of it. Better is this
for you than all that ye possess. Verily He is nigh unto them that do
good. The Hour which We had concealed from the knowledge of the
peoples of the earth and of the favoured angels hath come to pass.
Say, verily, He hath testified of Me, and I do testify of Him. Indeed,
He hath purposed no one other than Me. Unto this beareth witness every
fair-minded and understanding soul.

I would like to recommend a book called "I Shall Come Again"; I just
did a research paper on the Millerite Movement and that book had a
nice amount of information.
The only religious movement I know of that its founder has claimed to
be the Return of Christ is the Baha'i Faith.
William Miller was not a prophet, nor ever claimed to be; he simply
calculated the time Christ would return.  He is not the only Bible
scholar who came up with the years 1843 and 1844 to be the time if
Christ's Return.  The Bab declared His mission in 1844; His mission
being that He was to prepare the people for the coming of the Promised
One (Baha'u'llah).  The official website for the Baha'i Faith is
www.bahai.org.  If you wish, you can contact Baha'is through that site
if you are interested in more information.
If you are specifically interested in the Return of Christ, "I Shall
Come Again" and "Thief in the Night" are good.

2 quotes for probonopublico-ga re:question of new name:
1) "Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God.
Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God
and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming
down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new
name." (Rev 3:12)
2) "The nations will see your righteousness, and all kings your glory;
you will be called by a new name that the mouth of the Lord will
bestow." (Isa 62:2)
Also, throughout the Bible there is reference to Christ coming in the
Glory of the Father, Glory of God, or Glory of the Lord.  Baha'u'llah
means "Glory of God."
That's all for now, I have to go to class. :)
Much Love,
Cambria

 "Know that the return of Christ for a second time doth not mean what
the people believe, but, rather, signifieth the One promised to come
after Him. He shall come with the Kingdom of God and His power which
hath surrounded the world. This power (or reign) is in the world of
hearts and spirits and not in that of matter (or bodies). For the
material world is not comparable to a single wing of a fly, or rather
less in the sight of thy Lord, wert thou of those who know! Verily
Christ came with His Kingdom from the beginning which hath no
beginning and will come with His Kingdom to the eternity of
eternities, inasmuch as in this sense Christ is an expression of the
divine reality, the simple essence and heavenly entity which hath no
beginning or ending. It hath appearance, arising and manifestation and
setting in each of the cycles." from the Tablets of Abdul-Baha pg 138
Abbas