Revealingly, in the underhand and deceitful way typical of the recent administration of ahmedi.org, their admin is now implying that we at TheCult.info are spreading hatred. This deceitful man (whose anonymity I still protect, despite his treatment of me and other Muslims) has always been quick to be snide and then hide behind disingenuous denials. The irony of a man using multiple, anonymous personalities to attack Islam and Muslims, but being anything but, is huge.
We quoted an article from a Pakistani newspaper to invite discussion. At no point in that blog entry (to which the original writer at ahmedi.org linked to, but which the admin deleted for fear that any silent Muslim readers of that Islam-bashing forum still remaining might come here) did this site make a stand on the issues. There is a debate in the comments section about the article and that’s how it should be.
After all, ahmedi.org has a long history of publishing all kinds of material by all kinds of writers, but now the Qadiani admin calls us a hate site whilst he continues to bleed Muslims from his site and promote, encourage and shelter Islam-bashers like the quite disgusting phippi46 (now sumuque) and the hateful “Mullah do Plaza”
What a sad day it is that a site that once welcomed Muslims, now only has very rare contributions from Muslims on an ad hoc basis. The site is a shadow of what it used to be because the admin of the site got it into his head that Muslims are terrorist scum. Sound like Qadiani logic to you? That’s because it is.
Those who left ahmedi.org after being scorned, ridiculed, censured and censored are branded hate-merchants, despite their enormous contributions to that site’s success in its halcyon heyday. Coming from a Qadiani who despises Muslims whilst claiming to speak for them, that is rich.
We at TheCult.info do not promote hatred of anything but evil. We are proud to stand up to tyranny, hypocrisy and oppression. We are proud to be Muslims and we welcome Muslims to our site. We also welcome Qadianis to Islam. May they keep coming, as they have been, insha’Allah.
Peace unto those who follow the guidance.
I am a bit confused what exactly did you answer, but let me try to put it in simple words and you please confirm if that was the answer.
Question b. Mirza Sb has compared Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam with Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam and said that Hazrat Massih (pbuh) did not have even as low morals as Hazrat Hussain ra. He was totally deprived of moral values. Does Mirza Sb clear Urdu means the same?
Answer: Promised Messiah (as) says that the Holy Prophet (saw) had the opportunity to show his morals in both situations. i.e., The life in Makkah and the life in Madina. Whereas Jesus (as) did not get these opporunities. Thus the claim of Christians that Jesus (as) was better than Holy Prophet (saw) is false. What is wrong in saying that?
So it says yes he meant that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not have any morals and what is wrong in saying that because it proves that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam was not better than Holy Prophet (pbuh. While you reconfirm your stance please also explain your belief about Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam – did Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam had such low morals that it became a standard to quote. Plus morals of Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam were even lower than Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam. Just reconfirm to make our understanding clear.
For the first question I failed to find the answer:
Question a: As you describe that when Mirza Sb was responding to some Christians he explained to them that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not follow even his own moral teachings. Do you believe so?
Answer:it should be remembered that we respect Jesus (as) and consider him to be a Prophet of God. And We are against the allegations published by Jews these days, but we wish to show that like the Jews who, just because of their intolerance attack Jesus (as) and his gospels, Christians also attack the Holy Prophet (saw) and Quran. It was not appropriate for the Christians to follow the Jews in such manner. But this is a practice that when someone can not attack a faith based on truth and justice, there are many who start attacking with false accusations and allegations….. ”
Now coming to the quote your presented from page 11. You should have quoted the next few lines to complete the argument. It states “And the complete teaching is of the Holy Quran, which nourishes each branch of the human tree. And Quran does not stress upon one aspect, but gives the teaching of forgiveness and patience with the condition that forgiveness will bring reform (Qareene maslihat), and sometimes, according to the situation and time it instructs to punish the criminal. So, in truth the Holy Quran is the reflection of the laws of nature which is always infront of us……
It does not explain if a belief of Ahmadis that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not follow his own teachings. You agree this belief is correct or incorrect. When replying to Christians or to anyone in the world, one would expect Mirza Sb explained facts about Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam.
The question has been answered. You are trying to create an allegation “Plus morals of Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam were even lower than Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam”.
In a way you are proving yourself to be a malicious fabricator. So I suggest you revise your posts and make sure you are quoting the words of Promised Messiah (as) with correct translation and context.
Secondly, when you imply that “It does not explain if a belief of Ahmadis that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not follow his own teachings.” You fail to mention that the basis of the argument is the exhibition of the universal morals applicable in all situations. The proof of superiority of Islam is in the fact that these morals were shown in practice by its founder, whereas the founder of Christianity never had the opportunity to do so. This does not mean that he had inferior morals (nauoozubillah), but the purpose and scope of his prophethood was limited to his time and people and did not require universal appication.
Now.. what have I not answered? Something that only exists in your imagination? I am sorry, but I can’t help you with that…
Dear Brother,
Please read again the wording of Mirza Sb:
“Hazrat Maseeh ka koi shoba-e-khulq dikhlao woh tau us sey bilkul farigh hein … Maseeh (pbuh) ney tau Imaam Hussain alaihis-salam jitna hausla bhi na dikhlaya”
So what is the fabrication and what are the universal morals? Mirza Sb says in clear Urdu that Hazrat Issa was deprived of all types of morals: “koi shoba-e-khulq dikhlao” – show “any” faction of morals of Hazrat Maseeh. Now how do you put universal morals into it? Please explain your ambiguous post.
Please also read the second reference carefully:
It is strange that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not follow his moral teachings. He told others to pray but condemned injeer tree when he saw it without fruit. He forbade from calling others stupid but his own language was so malign that he even used the word bastard for respectables of Jews.
It categorically explains that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not follow his own teachings and Mirza Sb has given certain examples to prove it. What has got universal morals to do with calling someone bastard – where did Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not have a chance not to call respectables of Jews as bastard.
Please try to explain in simple words and to the point. Thank you for your help.