"The person called Prem Rawat is not the omnscient, omnipresent being that we refer to as God. He is however, a human being with a very special status..."

- That IS a fair statement of my position.

"...with a very special status that has previously been applied to Jesus Christ and Gautama the Buddha..."

- That is NOT a fair statement of my position. I would be very wary of saying anything to suggest that Maharaji is very similar to Jesus. Maybe he is, for all I know, but if he is, it's not something I really understand. For a start, I don't know enough about Jesus. (I don't even know what is meant by the term "the Son of God" - that's a concept which I find very difficult to understand.) So I would not say that. (Also, almost all Christians, and many other people - including, I'm sure, many Buddhist - would take issue with the suggestion that the same "special status" should be applied to Jesus and Buddha. So I don't want to get into arguments like that. I really do not know if the SAME "special status" should be applied to Jesus and Buddha, or not.)

"...a human being with a very special status that has previously been applied to...Gautama the Buddha."

- It IS fair enough to say that I see Maharaji as an enlightened soul with the ability to lead people (including me) from darkness to light - so it would be fair enough to say that I see Maharaji as someone SIMILAR to Buddha. That's how I PERSONALLY view Maharaji, at this point in time.

"Consequently, he is worthy of being called 'The Lord' by those who recognise that status."

- As I have previously said, I don't personally call him 'The Lord'. If others view him as 'The Lord', that's up to them, and I would have some sympathy with that viewpoint in some senses of the word 'Lord', but I tend to avoid using that term, because of the baggage it carries with it. (The term 'Lord' applied to Buddha is not the same as the term 'Lord' applied to Jesus or Khrisna, according to Buddhists. Is the term 'Lord' applied to Jesus the same as the term 'Lord' applied to Khrisna?)

"Prem Rawat, Elan Vital, and most followers of Rawat, do not publicly claim this status for Rawat, but allow his followers to discover this for themselves in their own time."

- That's more or less fair enough. They don't put any such labels on him, but allow his followers to discover whatever they discover, in their own time.

"By not publicly declaring their belief in Rawat's exalted status, Prem Rawat, Elan Vital and premies are not lying, but they are being evasive for a noble purpose."

- I wouldn't necessarily use the word 'evasive', but I know what you mean. As you mention, it's for a good reason.

"This purpose is to prevent newcomers to Rawat's message misunderstanding Rawat and his message because they have an incorrect pre-conceived idea of what the Christ and the Buddha are."

- I definitely would NOT put it like that! I'd say: "The purpose is to prevent newcomers to Rawat's message misunderstanding Rawat and his message.FULL STOP. It's NOT that newcomers necessarily "have an incorrect pre-conceived idea of what the Christ and the Buddha are." Maybe some have, maybe some haven't, many people don't have much understanding about either Christ or Buddha. The reason I have mentioned Christ and Buddha, several times on this board, is because I personally have some interest in Christ (having been brought up a Christian and living in a Christian society) and Buddha. But there is no need to generalise my personal interests in a way which sounds like they somehow apply to everyone. So maybe your last sentence is not terribly wrong, but it's just a bit clumsy the way you put it.

So to sum up, by modifying your words , I would say:

The person called Prem Rawat is not the omnscient, omnipresent being that we refer to as God. He is however, a human being with a very special status (something similar to Buddha, in my personal opinion). Prem Rawat, Elan Vital, and most followers of Rawat, do not publicly claim this status - or any status such as 'Lord' or 'Satguru', etc - for Prem Rawat, but allow his followers to discover for themselves their own understanding of Prem Rawat, in their own time. By not publicly declaring their belief in Rawat's exalted status, Prem Rawat, Elan Vital and premies are not lying, but they are being discreet, sensitive, tactful, prudent, for a good purpose. This purpose is to prevent newcomers to Rawat's message misunderstanding Rawat and his message, to help prevent people having (unhelpful, distorted or confusing) preconceptions, pre-expectations, presuppositions, prejudgements, etc.