Ahmadiyya

In every case in the past when prophets came as warners - the cataclysmic events that ghulam-ahmadis cite as favours to Mirza, happened in the lifetimes of those prophets.

• Moses? Locusts, rivers of blood and Pharoah’s army drowned, thus saving Moses? Check.
• Noah? Flood killing everyone bar those on the ark with him? Check.
• Lot? Stones from sky killing all bar him and his family - except his wife who stayed behind? Check.
• Salih? Thamud - destroyed in his lifetime? Check!

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is dead - even if he was a prophet, his forecasts were vague and bogus and he missed key events too whilst busily burying his nose deep in Queen Victoria’s ample butt. Such a man, who was more subservient to a tyrannicaly empire than to God, could never have the character to be a prophet of God.

The Lat Prophet (saw) passed way long before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - and in the interim, many Muslims suffered and died in cataclysmic events.

A key point of the Qur’an is that prophets come as warners to their people - and the cataclysms happened while they were still alive.

Al-A’raf:94
Whenever We sent a prophet to a town, We took up its people in suffering and adversity, in order that they might learn humility.

So - where was the suffering in Qadian above and beyond what happened in the rest of India at the time?

According to Mirza, Qadian would be safe - everywhere else would suffer. but like all his lies, this too was a lie.

1) From Qur’an - it is proven that people were punished at the time of a warner for their disbelief. The world was not arbitrarily punished decades later.

2) From Qur’an - it is proven thaat since the town of Qadian did not suffer any adversity significantly greater than the rest of the land - that Mirza was not a prophet.