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 confused are we now talking about disunity against the Qadianis?
What is there to be confused about? Moreover, do you think the Qadianis are united?
We are Muslims. We will stand united with other Muslims, yet even amongst friends there are differences of opinion, and finally, ahmedi.org is not administered by a Muslim. (It used to have some Muslim moderators, but they are long gone)
To confuse you further, AK Sheikh is not the administrator of ahmedi.org, merely the board owner and we respect him and his work.
This symptom of the rejectors of prophets has been described in the Quran as “Quloobuhum Shatta”..
You’re referring to 59:14, right? Spit it out man, try saying something straight, without making sly insinuations.
Just quoting a well known Quranic phrase..
Now you are lying. Is this what your religion teaches you?
Well the verse fits the description of the situation without a doubt. Also the other symptoms “la yafqahoon” “la ya’lamoon” are present.
At least you acknowledge that when you said “Just quoting a well known Quranic phrase”, you were in fact lying.
Instead of behaving like a weasel, not coming right out and saying what you mean in public, which is typical of Qadianis (but I had not expected it of you), why not just come out and say what you want to say?
Or would you rather I drew inferences? Please. State your case like a man (if you can manage that in public) and I will respond.
Maybe I overestimated your qualifications.. What happened to your SOAS education? Arabic shouldn’t be any trouble for you..
Ah, how quickly you sink to snide remarks.
You started with a thinly veiled insinuation. Then you pretended you were just quoting a phrase. (What, without context?). Then when challenged you felt emboldened to add to your insinuation, whilst still not being bold enough to spit it out.
I have a good idea what your insinuation is, but it is not for me to draw inferences when you are just being sly and snide.
As for Arabic, don’t worry my friend, you are the one who thinks “zurrayatul baghaaya” is OK. (In which case you will have no problem me applying this to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and I would do, if it were not for the fact that his mother was probably a decent Muslimah).
So instead of making insinuations and being sly and dropping snide remarks that have no relevance, be a man and say what you want to say instead of hiding behind thinly veiled and obtuse comments.
You know very well that Mirza was no prophet. You also know full well that the context of the expression you refer to has no relevance to anything that has happened here. And you know that the admin of ahmedi.org and their user base is not just anti-Qadiani, but secular and anti-Muslim. You noted it yourself when you re-entered the forum a while back.
All the Muslims left and many of them are here.
Now stop being snide, try being a man and discuss things openly instead of insinuating out of context.
OK.. another test of your SOAS arabic then.
Was it dancing girls and prostitutes which chased the Israelites and Moses (as)?
hint hint. 10: 91
Snide again? Try again. Be a man. Spit it out. Stop diverting.
I can see you’re still sore about the email conversation we last had where you finished up a very bad loser. I never divulged the contents of that conversation in public. Yet here you are mentioning SOAS, something I only ever mentioned in an email to you.
Now be a man, and say what you wanted to say, or I will publish that entire email exchange.
Please feel free to publish the emails.
As for my beief that all anti-ahmadi groups fulfill the conditions of “quloobuhum shatta”.. I do not need to elaborate further. The enemies of truth are known by the symptoms described in Quran..
Well thanks for finally coming out and saying it.
There is no “anti-ahmadi group” here.
We are Muslims, of all kinds, of all persuasions. Needless to say, all Muslims are wary of impostors like Mirza and so by that token, yes, all Muslims stand opposed to the doctrine of Qadianism and to the claims and person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
As Muslims, we love the truth and never fear it. If you have any truth to share with us, we would welcome it.
Dear Islam976
We welcome you to this forum and since you are here we take this opportunity to better understand your beliefs and evaluate. In that respect, I have always been confused about the beliefs of Ahmadis about Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam as to why Ahmadis insult one of the mightiest messengers of Allah.
What is your opinion?
(In the words of the founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at,
Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, peace be upon him.)
“We inform our readers that our belief concerning
Jesus is extremely noble. We most sincerely believe
that he was a true prophet of Allah, and He loved him.
As the Holy Qur’an tells us, we hold firm faith that he
most sincerely believed in our lord and master prophet
Muhammad Mustafa (may peace and blessings of
Allah be on him) for his salvation, and that he was one
of the hundreds of obedient servants of the Law of
Moses. Therefore, we hold a great esteem for him in
accordance with his exalted status.”
(Nur-ul-Qur’an, Part 2, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 9, p. 374.)
That is strange because found of the Ahmadiyaa Jama’at also says that Holy Quran tells that Hazrat Issa aliahis-salam was inferior most of all the prophets. Are both his statements correct or only one is correct?
“But it is proven from Quran and Bible that Jews rejected Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam andHazrat Issa aliah-i-salam had the poorest performance (lowest number) of all the prophets in reform of humanity .”(Braheen Ahmadiyya Vol.5 38, RK 48)
http://www.ahmadibeliefs.com/hazratissa
newobserver,
The reference is taken from a discourse on the topic of miracles. Promised Messiah (as) has put forth the argument that if Jesus (as) indeed had the power to resurrect the dead from their graves etc. then how come he only converted 12 people from the Jews. It is a recorded fact that Jews as a nation rejected Jesus Christ and the total number of his adherents was no more than 12. Which other prophet do you find mentioned in the Quran who had less than this number of followers?
The argument is not to belittle Jesus (as), Naoozubillah. But it is to break the myths which have been woven around the exalted person of Jesus (as). Prophets of Allah do not require stories and myths to make them great. Their greatness is in their conduct, their message and their steadfastedness. Jesus (as) was a great prophet if the criteria of Quran is used. But if the criteria of clergy (both christian and muslim) is used, than he was indeed an unucessful prophet. Despite showing amazing miracles of bringing back the dead, making brids out of clay, walking on water etc etc. he could only get a dozen disciples!!
This is a beautiful argument to break the christian onslaught on India. Promised Messiah (as) writes further on page 50 that he doesn’t understand why Jesus (as) has been given superiority over all other prophets based on such stories. These stories have caused millions of people to start worshiping Jesus (as). Another very potent argument is where Promised Messiah (as) mentions the Christian belief that Jesus (as) was born fatherless. Here Promised Messiah (as) quotes the Quran stating that the birth of Jesus is the same as the birth of Adam, i.e., Jesus (as) was born through a natural phenomenon which is very common in invertebrates. He says that why is it then christian do not start worshiping those insects who are born fatherless?
Now, if you follow the same line of thought as the mullah who provided you with the quote you are referring to, you must blame Ahmadis to believe that we consider Jesus (as) to be no better than insects. And at this point, I will rest my case.
Islam976,
QUOTE-Jesus (as) was a great prophet if the criteria of Quran is used. But if the criteria of clergy (both christian and muslim) is used, than he was indeed an unucessful prophet.-UNQUOTE
Here you are saying that if we read Quran it is proved that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam was a great prophet. On the contrary, Mirza Sb say that is proved from Quran Hazrat Issa was the inferior-most. He did not say it is proved from Clergy thinking or it is proved from Mullahism. His words are crystal clear that he gets the proof from Quran.
So please clarify once again what is provedn from Quran: Hazrat Issa was a great prophet or the inferior most when Mirza Sb categorically used the words “Quran Sharif aur Injeel sey sabit hey”
You are just ignoring the context here. A blatant attempt to cover the truth.
You can explain the context. When Mirza Sb said it is proved from Quran then what difference the context will put into it.
Do you want to say that Mirza Sb actually said it is not proved from Quran but use the wording “Quran Sharif aur Injeel sey sabit hey”.
Let us make the question simple, you please read all the context and then simply answer what is the meaning of the quote. Hazrat Issa was inferior most prophet, is it proven from Quran or not?
He also said that it is proven from the laws of nature and common observations that insects are born without the angency of a father. Why don’t you blame him for equating Jesus with insects then?
This is something which you choose to ignore, because there is no argument if you see it the way it was intended.
Dear Brother,
I am just trying to understand a belief of yours. If Mirza Sb said that insects are born without a father we can certainly discuss that once we are done with this one. Let us first finish this one. So I put my question again:
Hazrat Issa (as) is the inferior most prophet – is it proven by Quran?
Please give to the point answer instead of giving example of insects.
If you wish to discuss other writings of Mriza Sb, we will have that insha’Allah, but please give answer one to one.
newobserver,
Please observe the construction of this argument. It is called ilmul Kalam in religious terms.
The objective of this argument is to prove that those who ascribe myths to Jesus (as) are actually making a mockery of his status. How? By saying that he could do such and such. Now, I ask that if he really could perform a supernatural feat like raising the dead, then he should have converted all the jews. Imagine Jesus (as) walking from town to town, gowing to their burial chambers, calling one deceased after the other out of their graves. All those who observed this should have fallen prostrate and accepted the Christ, their saviour. But what do we find instead. 12 disciples. Two of which rejected him and one betrayed him. Those who say that a miracle, like making living birds out of clay did actually happen, also believe that such supernatural miracles are the reason they believe in Jesus (as). Christians refer to him as their god, because they believe that he actually held the attributes of God. And that is the reason they worship him. Muslims also fall in the same trap of biblical myths by ascribing the same powers to him.
Now the question is, if Jesus indeed held such powers, why was he rejected by his people? was he a failure? Despite all these miracles that no other prophet received, Jesus could manage nothing as compared to the rest. And to add insult to injury, he was taken up alive to avoid further damage to the true faith. This is what, (according to this argument) you believe.
The Ahmadiyya view point is that all the miracles attributed to Jesus (as) were of a spiritual nature. His success was judged by his qualities of prophethood and sacrifice. He was rejected, reviled and persecuted by his nation, but he remained steadfast and became the “HUJJAT” on his people. God fulfilled all His promises to him. He saved him from the Cross, frustrated the designs of his enemies, He made his followers victorious and He punished his rejectors for the times to come.
Bible paints Jesus (as) in a very different light. Jesus of Bible is not the Jesus of Quran. According to Bible, Jesus had to die and accept humiliation for the sake of Humanity. According to Quran, Jesus (as) was victorious even when only a hand full of people accepted him. But according to the mullah, Jesus (as) was a failure (Nauozubillah) because he did not finish his mission and he awaits his return to complete his purpose of life.
Our way of judging success is very different than yours. According to your understanding of the scriptures (which includes the supernatural miracles, heavenly ascent etc), Jesus failed. According to ours, Jesus (as) was a victorious prophet with no blemish on his person whatsoever.
Dear Brother,
Thank you for your long answer however your answer contradicts with text of Mirza Sb. You are saying:”According to ours, Jesus (as) was a victorious prophet with no blemish on his person whatsoever.” On the contrary Mirza Sb says that it is proven from Quran that Jesus was of lowest number. He did not say it is proven from Mullah’s understanding of Quran. The word Mullah is nowhere available in the quote. Actually he has said two things.
1. It is proven from Quran that Jews rejected Jesus. In your long story you also give the same meaning that Jews rejected Jesus.
2. In the same sentence he says that it is proven from Quran that Jesus was the inferior most of all the prophets. However, here you have explained it as a victorious prophet. If he was a victorious prophet how could he be inferior most?
Now we come to the second reference that you want us to discuss:
“He also said that it is proven from the laws of nature and common observations that insects are born without the angency of a father. Why don’t you blame him for equating Jesus with insects then?”
I tried to find this quote but failed to find it. Could you please give the exact reference?
I, however, found the following:
Although we believe based on teachings of Quran that this pregnancy was just by will of God so that God Almighty can give a sign for the day of Judgment and just like thousands of insects are born without parents in rainy season and just like Hazrat Adam was also born without mother and father. Then such birth of Hazrat Issa (pbuh) does not prove any respectability. (Chashma Masihi 27-28, RK 356)
Here he is saying that insects are born automatically, i.e, without father and mother. This in itself is so strange that any learned person would refer to it.
Here you have picked on the part of the statement which can be interpreted using the whole argument to reflect the wisdom behind it. It is a known scientific fact that insects (arthropods) use sexual reproduction. So presence of both mother and father is required. Based on this, the argument certainly fails. But, we also now know that there are many arthropods and lower invertebrates use parthenogeneis for reproduction. Worms are hermephrodites and do not need separate genders for reproduction. And worms are also refered to as insects in common urdu. This is another sign of the truthfulness of Promised Messiah (as) that despite the aparent “flaw” in his argument, he is proven right in the light of new discoveries.
From the scientific facts known in this age, we can easily deduce that Jesus (as) was born due to this natural phenomenon which occurs so commonly on daily basis.
The ahmadiyya belief about the ministry of Jesus (as) is that he travelled to Kashmir and had many followers. He was revered and respected by the people he went to find. Thus the number of followers in Palestine do not reflect on his performance as a prophet and a guide. But if you read Quran and Bible from the mullah and christian perspective, we can only see him as a failure.
Problem is where is the word Mullah’s perspective written in the quote. It categorically says Quran Sharif sey sabit hey.
The argument is spread over at least a dozen pages. You can not form an opinion based on just 4 lines.
Does not make a difference, the 4 lines are in crystal clear Urdu and say that Quran is a verdict that Hazrat Issa was inferior most. If he wanted to say that Mullahs think Hazrat Issa is inferior most why did he give a verdict from Quran?
Regarding your comment: “Worms are hermephrodites and do not need separate genders for reproduction.”
I still could not find the quote you are referring to? Please give the reference.
The one I read says that insects (or let us say worms) are produced “khud ba-khud” i.e., without father or mother. Just like Adam was born without father and mother.
By the way which worm in the world is produced by a single worm? Could you please name a few?
The urdu word used is “keeray”, which means insects and worms. Earthworms which come out in rainy seasons are hermaphrodites.
Earthworms which come out in rainy season they are produced “khud ba-khud” without any parents?
I’d love to see our friend islam976 “wriggle” his way out of this one, so to speak…
Sirs, you should consider this before enjoying your victory dance.
If Promised Messiah (as) was arguing that Jesus (as) was born Khud ba khud, then this example of worms being born without any parents will be null and void. But we see that the worms use the same phenomenon to reproduce as it happened in Mary, this argument shines with truth and triumph.
I refer you again to the quote. Please see the highlighted section.
“Although we believe based on teachings of Quran that this pregnancy was just by will of God so that God Almighty can give a sign for the day of Judgment and just like thousands of insects are born without parents in rainy season and just like Hazrat Adam was also born without mother and father. Then such birth of Hazrat Issa (pbuh) does not prove any respectability.”
(Chashma Masihi 27-28, RK 356)
Dear Brother, it is unfortunate that a clear Urdu word “khud ba-khud” is being translated as without father. I regret to say but it is a pity that you speak to Urdu speaking people and then say “khud ba-khud” means from mother without intervention of father. And it is further a pity that you don’t know your beliefs properly and you don’t know that Mirza Sb himself has explained that here the word “khud ba-khud” means without father as well as without mother. I wish you would have read books of Mirza Sb and would have been able to understand what he used to say.
I understand you have a blind faith in Mirza Sb without any logic and when he says without mother and without father, you will accept it and deny the basic scientific understanding and I accept your right to follow your leader blindly but please don’t tell a lie and don’t mis-translate. “khud ba-khud” means by itself.
Hazrat Issa was not born “khud ba-khud” he was born from a mother. However, Hazrat Adam was born without mother and father. Same has been explained by Mirza Sb.
Well if a insect is a hermaphrodite, then who will be its father and what will be its mother? The term khudba khud, simply points to the fact that sexes are not involved in such reproduction. Besides, Adam’s birth is also mentioned here. A majority of christians and muslims believe that Adam was born without a father or a mother. This is not the ahmadiyya stance. But is mentioned here to elaborate on the error made by christians to make Jesus (as) superior to all.
I refer you again to the quote. Please see the highlighted section.
“Although we believe based on teachings of Quran that this pregnancy was just by will of God so that God Almighty can give a sign for the day of Judgment and just like thousands of insects are born without parents in rainy season and just like Hazrat Adam was also born without mother and father. Then such birth of Hazrat Issa (pbuh) does not prove any respectability.”
(Chashma Masihi 27-28, RK 356)
Is that quote from Chashma Masihi real? That’s really disrespectful…
Dear Brother,
Please refer to Braheen Ahmadiyya Vol 5 Page 40 (RK page 50).
“Mausam barsaat mein hazaar ha keeray makoray baghair maan aur baap key khud ba-khud zameen sey paida ho jatein hein.”
I hope your scientific knowledge is corrected. It is clear simple Urdu. Insects or worms are born without mother and without father but they are born from earth.
As I mentioned before, the validity of the argument still holds. It is enough to prove the truthfulness of the writer.
Could you please name a few worms that are born from earth by themselves without mother and father? Don’t forget the clear Urdu language:
[khud ba-khud zameen sey paida]
Even a simpleton like me understands that!
Dear Islam976
We have discussed two quotes for the moment:
1. Mirza Sb says that is proven from Quran that Hazrat Issa was the inferior most prophet.
We believe it means that Mirza Sb had a belief that Hazrat Issa is the inferior most prophet. However, you believe it means that Mullahs believed that Hazrat Issa was the inferior most prophet.
2. Mirza Sb said that insects are born without father and mother but automatically from earth. You believe there is some argument (which no one can understand) that proves Mirza Sb has written the truth.
Now I request you for the 3rd questions. Do Ahmadis believe that Hazrat Issa did not have any moral values and he did not follow his own teachings? For reference I am giving two quotes below:
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. (Chashma Masihi 11, RK 346)
Show us any faction of morals of Hazrat Maseeh – he is totally deprived of morals. Even a yogi can claim to tame the desires but without proofs. Maseeh (pbuh) did not show even the courage equivalent to Imam Hussain alaihissalam. (Mulfoozat Vol4 107)
Thank you for your patience and help.
You are free to draw any twisted conclusions out of context. This is no news for me or any ahmadi. Mullah literature is full of such lies.
Now you have brought two more quotes. I will start with the quote from Malfoozat, Vol 4, page 107. This saying is hardly one paragraph, but even then you find it difficult to quote the whole passage. You did not have the courage to quote the beginning statement which clearly sets a context. 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?
As for Chashma e Masihi, as the title shows, it was a response to a Christian book “Yanabee’ Islam”. This was addressed to the christians and you should expect a debate in the light of Biblical references. Also Promised Messiah (as) clarifies at the very beginning of the book (page 4) “and 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……
Another very important phrase used here is something that you should add to your allegations. Really, I am recommending this one. This is “on the house” so to speak…
Page 15.. ” and then what we do not understand is that the removal of other people’s internal ills due to the SUICIDE of Jesus is based on what law….”
Another one on page 21.. “When the king of Persia sent soldiers to arrest the Holy Prophet (saw), then the Almighty God told his messenger that tell the soldiers that tonight my God has killed your god. Not it should be noted that on one side a person CLAIMS TO BE GOD and the result is that a soldier of the Roman governmnet arrests him and puts him in jail for two hours. AND ALL HIS NIGHT’S PRAYERS ARE NOT ACCEPTED. And on the other hand is the man who only claims to be a Prophet and God kills his enemy kings….. ”
I find it astonishing, that such strong and powerful defense of Islam can be ignored by anyone. But than I read the Quran and understand the state of such people.. May Allah give you guidance…
Dear Brother,
Thank you for your long answer though you did not explain the meaning of the quote. What I understand from your explanation is that Mirza Sb was under some discussion with Christians where Christians put some allegations on Holy Prophet and Mirza Sb responded that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam did not have any morals so they should not put any allegations on Holy Prophet. OK, I understand your explanation however, this is not the answer to the question I put forth. Your explanation basically hints that the question is in affirmative.
My question was, do Ahmadis believe that Hazrat Issa alaihis-salam had not moral values and his morals were even lower than Hazrat Hussain alaihis-salam as written by Mirza Sb. So your answer should have been “yes” or “no”. Could you please simplify your responses for the benefit of every one.
I put forward the questions again.
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?
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?
The answer has already been given.