What I think it shows is that in my current understanding of Baha’i and Hindu stories and scriptures, it looks to me like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’llah are avatars of Krishna, and Baha’u’llah is the Kalki Avatar. Now I’m reconsidering whether or not all Manifestations are avatars.
The Vaishnava Hindu version is that Krishna was the last avatar of Vishnu. A few people put Buddha after that. In Vaishnava Hinduism, the Kalki avatar is yet to come. People are free to believe whatever they wish, but anything beyond this in the line of avatars would be very rare indeed amongst Hindus. But then I'm just the anti-Baha'i village idiot, so what do I know. No Hindu thinks that Krishna has avatars. Krishna is an avatar. An avatar can't have avatars of himself.
I'm not Vaishnava so I don't believe in any avatars period. The entire concept has never made any sense to me.
As my good friend Aup said, we've been through this on this forum for about 1000 times now, and if we're still saying the same things, it is apparent there has been no progress. So I will be out. Sorry I responded at all now.
For me, a self-proclaimed Hindu to make a thread entitled 'My current version of Baha'i ' would just be so preposterous I would never ever think of doing it.