New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Moderator: admin

New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby rationalist » 30 Jun 2012, 16:32

I have just realized new data on the birth of Mirza sahib. I didnt realize this until a few days ago.

1. His father only moved back to Qadian in 1839, after the historic death of Ranjit Singh.

2. Mirza could not have been born before this date. It is simply impossible.

Here is the reference: http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/sklife.pdf

See Page 9, Kitab al Barriyya, (1898).


"Return to Qadian in father’s time. Then, during the last days of the rule of Ranjit Singh, my late
father, Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, returned to Qadian. The said Mirza sahib received back five villages out of the villages of his father."
"Ahmadiyyat robbed me, didnt educate me properly"
rationalist
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 11 Dec 2009, 21:32

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby shahid » 30 Jun 2012, 21:50

Great work.

Now read further, page 10:

"Now an account of my own life is as follows. I was born towards the last days of Sikh rule in 1839 or 1840 C.E. In 1857 I was sixteen or seventeen years old; my beard and moustaches had not yet started growing."
shahid
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 01 Mar 2008, 00:00

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby rationalist » 01 Jul 2012, 18:29

shahid wrote:Great work.

Now read further, page 10:

"Now an account of my own life is as follows. I was born towards the last days of Sikh rule in 1839 or 1840 C.E. In 1857 I was sixteen or seventeen years old; my beard and moustaches had not yet started growing."


1. I had quoted this book in english to the band of brainwashed souls over at that blog...it seems that this was the first that they ever heard of this reference...

2. All Ahmadis thought this was fake.

3. Ruhani Khuzain page numbers are all off by design as compared to the original books....All Ahmadis have Rk instead of original books...thats why they can never find references.

4. MGA's elder brother was NOT BORN IN QADIAN.

4.a. MGA's birth coincided with a change in lifestyle of the Mirza family...the British came into power.

4.b. MGA's dad only moved back to Qadian after Ranjit Singh died and the Sikhs were totally out of power which points to 1839 or 1840 as MGA wrote. The ROR of June 1906 wrote the same thing.

4.c. When Mirza died in 1908...almost every newspaper that mentioned this death gave a DOB of 1839 or 1840....this was when Ahmadis began to backpeddle on these dates...
"Ahmadiyyat robbed me, didnt educate me properly"
rationalist
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 11 Dec 2009, 21:32

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby ramesh » 04 Jul 2012, 20:14

whole issue ahmedis raise is taht on the day of birth three things shold come true
1; month of pagan of hindi calendar
2;14 of islamic calendar
3; friday

and they calculate 13/02/1835 to say it is first of pagan but the fact is month of pagan starts 20 of february and by 13 it will be month magh

see the calendar for reference

http://www.prokerala.com/general/calend ... la=en&sb=1

they are trying to assume taht hindi calander is lunar and starts by 14 of moon whihc is untrue instead it starts by the middle of georgian calander (not 15 always)
RK V 9 p 468 Esa AS died at the age of 33,RK V 15 p 499 died at the age of 125,RK V 14 P 154 died at the age of 120,Page 30 of tohfa nadva deid at 83
died in Galile RH v3 p 353-354, died in al qudas RK v8 p 296-297, died in Kashmir RK V18 p 320 & 358 what is true about EsaAS?
ramesh
 
Posts: 144
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 12:41

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby khalid nawaz » 05 Jul 2012, 21:38

ramesh wrote:whole issue ahmedis raise is taht on the day of birth three things shold come true
1; month of pagan of hindi calendar
2;14 of islamic calendar
3; friday

and they calculate 13/02/1835 to say it is first of pagan but the fact is month of pagan starts 20 of february and by 13 it will be month magh

see the calendar for reference

http://www.prokerala.com/general/calend ... la=en&sb=1

they are trying to assume taht hindi calander is lunar and starts by 14 of moon whihc is untrue instead it starts by the middle of georgian calander (not 15 always)


In urdu there is saying.
Neem Hakeem Khatra e Jann, neem Mullah Khatra e Emaan.

your situation resemble to above saying. You were referred to a link where your question was already answered but without reading it , you raised an objection.

before presenting your brilliant point , you must read this article carefully.
http://www.thecult.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=670
khalid nawaz
 
Posts: 738
Joined: 18 Nov 2009, 14:39

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby shahid » 05 Jul 2012, 21:44

Your own Mirza confirms his birth year and you deny it.

Wake up.
shahid
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 01 Mar 2008, 00:00

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby rationalist » 06 Jul 2012, 17:40

shahid wrote:Your own Mirza confirms his birth year and you deny it.

Wake up.


1. I think the incident of the DATE-CHANGE by Ahmadis in terms of the DOB of MGAQ is proof enough of the modus operandi of the Qadiani debate-brain. These people went out of there way to change a date....and for what??? They were better off simply saying that he lived for 72 islamic years...instead...they lied about a measly incident...

2. Here are some other facts:

a---the akhri-zamana of Sikh rule started in 1839 with the death of Ranjit Singh.
b---MGA writes that he was born in this era, he writes 1839 or 1840.

Here is the timeline

1892, ----he writes a book entitled Nishan Asmani, in this book he declares that he was 40 in 1880 when he first started getting revelation...he was trying to confirm the hadith report that Esa (as) would live 40 years upon his return.

1898---he writes his biography. In it, he states that he was born in the "akhri-zamana" of Sikh rule. This era is factually know as 1839--1849. It started with the death of Ranjit Singh. Ranjit Singh had problems with the Mirza family...he would not allow them to move back to Qadian...however, after his death in May 1839..the Mirza family moved back to Qadian...MGAQ was born 9 months later.

1906--The ROR runs an article on the life of MGAQ....they state 1839 as the DOB

June 1908---The Aligarh GAzette and Civil and Military gazette write about the death of MGAQ, they write that he was born in 1839 or 1840. The ROR begins to backpeddle..they give the year as 1836 or 1837.

Dec 1908---Braheen e Ahmadiyya vol. 5 was published postmouthously..Im sure it was was tampered with....MGAQ writes therein that he is unsure about his age....
"Ahmadiyyat robbed me, didnt educate me properly"
rationalist
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 11 Dec 2009, 21:32

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby ramesh » 07 Jul 2012, 19:18

khalid

first i would like to say few things about your assumptions

1; if a lunar month is split into two halfs it will be from 15 and 16 of lunar month should be first then only a 30 days month will be split into two starting form full moon but if we take your assumption to be true and start month form 14 to be first them by 30 of lunar month it will already be 17 of hindi month (as per your assumption ) no where in wikipedia artical of yours says you can split lunar month in that way and if we start hindi month of phalugana from 16 of lunar month by 13 of feb that will not even start

2; your own wikipedia artical says hindi calander is lunisolar and you are trying to use it as a perfact lunar calander which is untrue on example of such calander is christean calander event of easter which is calculated by lunar month but falls in a solar month so you are ignoring this simple fact

3; hindi calander which is standardised is a solar calander which shows that only hindu festivals are calculated using lunar movements and calander itself is not lunar calander (just like easter of christens ) which refutes your assumption taht 14 of lunar month will always be 1 of hindu month

4; hindi calander itself is not a lunar calander see your favourite wikipedis shows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikram_Samwat#Months
all of indian calanders have some months with 31 days that shows clearly that they are not lunar calender as lunar month can not be more than 30 days

5; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_national_calendar
shows the calender which is used mostly in north has phaluguna starting on 20 of feb and your assumption of phulugna starting from 13 of feb has no grounds it is just another lie to convince the cult and its followers

6; http://www.theholidayspot.com/baisakhi/history.htm
baisakhi which is well know seikh festival is celebrated since 1699 (well before the birth of MGA) and is celebrated on same day of 13 april which shows taht hindi calander was linked to georgian calender well before MGA birth and and was not linked to lunar calander as you assume

so in light of all the eveidance i provideed where does your assumptions of stands in relation to 13-02-1835 and also 1 of phulugna ??????????????????????????????
RK V 9 p 468 Esa AS died at the age of 33,RK V 15 p 499 died at the age of 125,RK V 14 P 154 died at the age of 120,Page 30 of tohfa nadva deid at 83
died in Galile RH v3 p 353-354, died in al qudas RK v8 p 296-297, died in Kashmir RK V18 p 320 & 358 what is true about EsaAS?
ramesh
 
Posts: 144
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 12:41

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby Predator » 08 Jul 2012, 09:26

bro ramesh...are you a revert from ahmadiyya?
Predator
 
Posts: 109
Joined: 10 Nov 2009, 17:02

Re: New data on the birth of Mirza --thank you Batman

Postby rationalist » 08 Jul 2012, 15:28

Khalid...like most Ahmadis....has suffered from 50 years of brainwashing...he cant get past that...i feel sorry for him.
"Ahmadiyyat robbed me, didnt educate me properly"
rationalist
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 11 Dec 2009, 21:32

Next

Return to Main Discussion Area

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron