answer to first question and the way u r leading it is beyond my moral values... so i ignore that.. for your own well sake CD =]

and i am not ashamed to be called an Ahmadi Muslim Allhumdolilah.. =]

some people here are scared to call themselves Muslim, some girls and boys i have seen them... do u want me to put them as an example for rest of Muslims? will it be fair by any way?



http://alislam.org/

^^^^^^ your answer to the above question...
kyun other sects are very poor than ahmadis?

we are very less as compared to others arent we? toh hum paise de ke khareedte hein toh app try karein? dekhe shaid app bhi khareed sakein? try it?

u can still win u know... there are very rich people out there. much more than our jammat... so u can win over =]

sorry but its really annoying me now.... as again... these are the excuses and misconceptions people put on us... which has nothing to do with reality.... i am willing to sell my faith... if anyone can win it...frankly i am saying it.. to be honest no one has won it till now... no one! and i am not talking abt money here only....

at least we sacrfice our time , wealth both physically and spiritually willingly... i have seen non ahmadi muslims asking for chanda going from door to door like beggars.. including imams of mosques... what do u say for them?

I really dont want to say the above part... but please if u are hitting on us.. then remember your BG too...

for graveyards and rabwah read Al Wasiyat on the site above...

I think you need reference about that, I was and am really serious so don't think I am making fun of you or your Dr.

What do you mean by your own well sake?



Exceptions are always there...



Please do that but mind it they will remain Muslim.




Why dont you give us answer...



We don't need that



Why don't you make us clear all the misconceptions... Well I was not talking abt money only, they do their level best. They do offer alot of things.



What and why do I have to say for them...



I am asking you simple questions, NOT HITTING ON YOU...

BG too... whats that :S



Well why dont you tell us here...

as always the story you know is very different than what I know.. i dont need a reference... so I dont want to repeat it.

yes so please remember, they will still be ahmadi muslims even if they claim or not...

i have given u the answer.. u r not willing to know then dont... but dont spread lies...

lol @ a lot of things... oh please... come up with better excuses.. if you dont have the courage to go to poor areas of the world and offer help... those who are doing it... if u cant appreciate it at least give it some respect... rather than Hitting with false claims....

I said it the storm of hate is coming... I really dont feel like loging on mp.. but I just do to reply here.. it feels useless now really...

i will appreciate if u read Al Wasiyat... i cant copy the whole pdf file here... thats what i know and believe in... i am sure app sirff mera iman toh nahi janchne aye yahan.. jo u r asking only my opinion...

my opinion is same wt i said in my very first post in this thread.... =]

Nah trust me, we know what it means. That's why we had to come clarify it for you since you made it sound like as if he ran away like Umar did in Hunain, in the heat of the battle.

I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to follower who thinks he can go visit Imam Mahdi.

Bro I think you should re-read his post again and see what he is actually trying to say. He and Shias don't think that you can go visit him. He is saying if he is still in a cave then that would mean he is not really in ghaibat and therefore you should be able to visit him (once you tell us which cave he is in) - but that is not the case.

Interesting read.....very informative. I got couple of questions
Q: Why was Imam Mehdi given the protection and not the others who were killed before him?

@ insha _ji
Q: How did jesus escape the roman soilders? what did jesus preach in kashmir/india? Correct me if I'm wrong your belief is that jesus already came to us in 17th century as Mr Ghulam ?

Post 88, last paragraph.

I was not harping on the issue I was merely stating a fact. Had you been very wise you would have picked up as they say a sign is enough for a wise man. Maybe you should read a bit more and this time fully before taking any more pangas



Ok hold on a second Mr Panga is Changa. You stated he is in a cave so please find me which cave is he in so I can go meet him. That was my question to you. Had you read fully rather than picking pieces from anti Shia site you would have known his occultation started Samarra in the underground basement which was in Al Askariyyah which is now razed to the ground thanks to takfeeris.

I already know what occultation means and it certainly is not what you stated. But this is the second time your half baked assumptions went down the drain.

Care to tell me what you have to say for the rest of the my post?



Thinks? Please stop living in assumptions.

This topic is not concern of mine since this topic asks for differences between shia/sunni/wahabi/ahmadi discussion. I felt like passing on the positive comment which is i am highly influenced by Shia school of thought literature as i have been looking into it. Now i am NOT muslim, agnostic, or christian. I am intrested into look into shia school of thought books if someone could refer to me. Thanks in advance.

My definition of Islam is simple: recite the shahadah yaani professing faith in God. Then you go from there to your articles and pillars





He said that the swoon theory was a valid theory based on the text. He professed that he stuck with the alternate.
Ahmadi scholars think that they are non-ahmadis. Same with Khulafa o.O. If you want a parallel justl ook at Jews who rejected the Messiah and Jews who accepted. Both were Jews but one group had acepted the Messiah and the other had not.

Saheefa Sajjadiya: http://www.duas.org/sajjadiya/sajjadiya.htm
A Restatement of the History of Islam and Muslims: http://www.al-islam.org/restatement/index.htm
Elixir of Love: http://www.al-islam.org/elixiroflove/
Light Within Me: http://www.al-islam.org/LWM/
A Summary of Logic: http://www.al-islam.org/hawza/mantiq/A_Summary_Of_Logic.pdf

Thank you ali for your kind effort to put up these links. I hope this will be a positive learning experience for myself.

You're kidding right? If you actually knew what occultation meant you wouldn't be asking such a question about visiting him. Shia belief that Imam Mahdi hid in a cave to avert danger is a fact. He then went on this "occultation" and cannot be heard or seen.

Its pretty simple. It happened hundreds of years ago. He hid in a cave. It's been hundreds of years now. He's been in his occultation ever since.

And yes, you were harping on that issue like any other Shia would do when evidence of Imam Mahdi's fear of getting killed and occultation is brought to light in front of him. Past battles have nothing to do with this thread. The issue of Imam Mahdi does.

You did say you went to www.tombofjesus.com that website have complete information on that. It also have a documentry movie made by BBC london about Jesus in india.

But in Brief to answer your question.

The Greatest Miracle of Jesus
Jesus prophecied that his fate would be like that of prophet Jonah.

Jesus said:

"A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:39,40)

The sign of Jonah is related in the Bible:

The Lord provided a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was inside the fish three days and three nights. From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the Lord his God. He said: In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depths of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry. (Jonah 1:17, 2:1,2)
The sign given to the Ninevites by Jonah was he was saved from certain death. He stayed for a period of time in danger, but ultimately recovered. He went alive into the belly of the fish, stayed alive for days, and came out alive.

The same fate was prophecied for Jesus. He would enter the tomb alive, stay alive for days, and come out alive. If Jesus had died, there would be little resemblance to Jonah.

The story of Jonah is one of survival

After Jesus being un consious on the cross a Roman soldier made a decision not to break the legs of Jesus while on the cross. The episode fulfilled a prophecy and was not without meaning.

The Gospel of John (19:36) tells us that the Scripture was fulfilled (based on Psalms 34:20) - a bone of his shall not be broken. The Roman soldier did not bother to break the legs of Jesus to hasten death since he thought he was already dead. Breaking the legs would have been devastating due to the severe trauma of blood loss and consequential hypovolemic shock by breaking one of the larger bones in the body, the tibia, in each leg.

The Scriptural attention to not breaking the legs can only be meaningful if the body was alive - it is a meaningless issue for a corpse. A fuller reading of Psalm 34, verses 19 and 20 underscores it:

"The righteous face many troubles but the Lord rescues them from each and every one. For the Lord protects them from harm - not one of their bones will be broken."

An important piece of information is mentioned in the Gospel of John which supports the view that Jesus did not die on the cross:

"One of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water" (John 19:34).

Blood pouring out is a sign of intact circulation, with the spear injuring an arteriole. Note the words 'sudden flow' which implies blood pressure. The 'water' was perhaps pleural fluid, present between the rib cage and lungs.

As blood does not rush out of corpses, the quoted verse did present a problem to at least one Church Father, Origen. In his exegesis of John 19:34, he admitted that blood coagulates after death, but the flow of blood in this case constituted a miracle and thus needed no explanation. (Contra Celsus, by Origen, translated by H. Chadwick, Cambridge U).

The spear thrust into the side of Jesus was not meant as a kind of definitive blow, but as a rough (and actually inaccurate) indicator if death had occurred. If the intent were to kill, the soldier would have stabbed into the front of the chest to injure the heart. However, in the event the person was not on the cross for sufficient length of time, death was usually caused by breaking the legs, as was done with the individuals hanging along side Jesus.

The Gospel testimony leads precisely to that conclusion.

Jesus shows his wounds to Thomas (John 20:25-7), showing he did not have a supernatural, resurrected body, but a patient's body.

He hurriedly travelled away from the locality of the crucifixion and chose to meet only his closest followers:

"Go tell my brothers to leave for Galilee, and they will see me there" (Matthew 28:10).

The followers of Jesus were frightened to the extent that they decided not to tell anyone about his emergence from the tomb (Mark 16:8).

Not once did Jesus appear before his persecutors or wandered through the center of Jerusalem asking people now to accept him as the resurrected Messiah who had atoned for their sins.

All we have is a man in his earthly body of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39) who suffered pangs of hunger (Luke 24:41) and staying out of the lime-light. In convincing his disciples that he had the same wounded body, he in effect was showing he never died as God saved him from the ordeal just as Jonah emerged alive from the fish (see "Sign of Jonah").

Traditional Jewish history and Biblical texts divided this Semitic people into twelve tribes. In the time of Jesus, only two of the tribes were in the region Jesus preached, whereas the whereabouts of the remaining ten has always been a bit of a mystery.

The second century historian Josephus wrote in his book Antiquities of the Jews that the ten tribes were 'beyond Euphrates' in his time, east of present day Iraq and in the Persian empire of the time which extended into India.

It is also notable that early Church history documents the existence of a Gospel in the Hebrew language found in India, which also confirms Israelites in India. St Jerome (c 400 A.D) wrote that the scholar Pantaenus in the second century came across the document in his travels. St Jerome further wrote that the Israelites in his time continue to live in the Persian empire.

The mission of Jesus was to reach out to the Lost Tribes (or 'Sheep') of Israel, as stated in Matthew 15:24. It was thus imperative for him to migrate to the east.

The mass of evidence showing that the peoples of Afghanistan, north-west India (particularly Kashmir) and neighboring areas are of Israelite ancestry continues to grow. Their physical features, language, folklore, customs and festivals attest to their Israelite heritage. Evidence also come from the names they give to their villages, their monuments and ancient historical works.

Some pilot genetic studies on peoples in India who to this day call themselves 'Bene Israel' or 'Children of Israel' confirm their middle eastern origin



hope this was helpfull..

Ahmadis might as well preach the bible instead.

No, I know what it meant. What I asked you was what you stated which was that he is hiding in a cave hence where is he if he is in a cave? Dont wriggle now answer the question.



So occultation = hiding in a cave for hundreds of years?



Ah assumptions and more assumptions. Please next time try to read what is there than what is not there.

I refuted your so called evidence already. Next please? [that is if you have anything left other than conjecture and rhetoric]

OCEAN..I will comment on some points you have raised in your reply but i still have not got answer of common questions i asked about qadyaniz. You shoud give simple and straight forward answer of simple and straightforward questions istead of saying go and visit al-islam in response of each question

U_Ahmad..I will comment on your point later because i am bit busy right now but before that if you dont mind, can i ask a personal question, which group you belong?. Ok Politics played its part in calling qadyaniz as non muslim in pakistan but what about other muslim countries?. What opinion they have about Qadyaniz?. I am not talking about pakistan but opinions of famous scholars of different sects within islam, no matter where they live?. Jews who accepted Messiah call themselves Christians?. I dont see any christian consider himself as jews . He will consider it insult if you call him jews because he is different to jews in his belief because he believed in propherhood of jesus while jews did not .... just like Qadyaniz who believe in Prophethood of Mirza while we dont

this isnt gonna help any of you in any way whatsoever. entering into polemics is just stupid when our scholars have exhausted the subject beyond any more debatable manner, lets turn our minds to Allah now and do something for his sake

Can a prophet come after Mirza Ghulam Ahmad with same religon Islam and with same Holy book Quran?. How exactly does one decide who is and isn`t a prophet? Suppose, someone, today, genuinely feels that they are a prophet. They are not faking it. They, themself, are 100% convinced that they are a prophet of Islam. They declare it, and then suffer for it. And they have a following and are simultaneously prosecuted by the majority.

Now, would you consider that person a prophet? If the answer is yes, then anyone who fits the above criteria, can declare themselves to be a prophet of Islam. If the answer is no, then isn`t that the criteria used by Ahmedis in giving Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a high status in their understanding of Islam?

I consider Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) to be a prophet because the Quran says he is.Quran is not the work of man, and has not been changed, then we know for certain that a Prophet named Muhammad(PBUH) was a prophet as Quran also give information of many others Prophets as well


MN:


You see there are many doctors who claim to be a doctor but are not genuine doctot and use false degrees i.e MBBS after their names and some peoples get believe in them and go for treatement. Important question which you should ask from yourself is that how can you surely know that someone is prophet who come after Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Quran? What criteria do we apply to them? Obviously, their exact name cannot have been mentioned in the Quran. The Quran does not name a specific person to be Mahdi. How do we know, the one we consider to be the genuine one, is actually genuine? How does that person know himself that he is actually the Mahdi? What if two people declare themselves to be the Mahdi, and are genuinely convinced that they are the real one?
These are questions that, at least in my opinion, need to be debated - starting from the Quran itself to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and anyone who comes after him.


I cannot get the answer of these questions in website you mentioned thats why I am discussing with you.You can paste any information relevant to my question from that website. You said mirza Ahmad united those who believed in him but dont he consider non Ahmadi muslm as well if yes then It was also his job to unite them under one banner as well. Imam Mahdi and Prophet Isa(PBUH) are not same individuals but two different individuals. You better read about them from non qaadyani sources.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also claimed to be the Messiah, whose advent was awaited by Jews, Christians and Muslims, and to be an avatar, or reincarnation, of the Hindu god Krishna. Furthermore, it teaches, among other things, that Jesus feigned death on the cross, escaped to India where he resumed his ministry, died aged 120 and was buried at Srinagar in Kashmir.
Question is Can you call/consider yourself as Qadiani-Hindu or Ahmadi-Christian or Qadiani-Jew? OR this honour reserved only for Muslims?

Then, there are at the most 20 million adherents, mainly on the Indian subcontinent, in West Africa and Indonesia. More or less as many as there are Sikhs. Using the definition, criteria and benchmarks given by you to judge the authenticity of prophets. What about Guru Nanak? Do you consider him too a prophet of God. Where do you place him? Before Mirza sahib or after?


Yes you can paste some of his Qualities which according to you hazrat Isa(PBUH) also had those. It would be great if you share those pillars which are necessary for one to be muslims. You cannot expect peoples to agree with you without questioning your beliefs. I do not consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be the Mahdi, because, so far, no one has been able to provide enough reason to me, to justify it.

.

If you think that i am hitting or insulting your beliefs by asking important questions about Qadyani movement which we should have information then i would quit asking but i think we should have courage to defend what we believe


My Friend U_Ahmad It is not as simple as you mentioned. What pillars of beliefs necessary for a person to call himself muslim.Ok i try to make more simple. Do you think that being a muslim mandate belief in one God? The answer being yes would imply that all monotheists are muslims. Now if the next step would be belief in the prophethood of Mohammad(PBUH), then the population would be reduced somewhat. and Number three would probably be the finality of this prophethood and then come Imamat in case of Shia etc. What is being discussed is not who can declare him/herself to be a prophet, in general. What is being discussed is how and why and when and where prophethood is/can be declared withing the context of one particular religion, i.e Islam.
Anyone, anywhere can declare himself to be a prophet. And can even start a new religion. I have nothing against or for that. It is his/her choice. There could be a million different religions. Its a free world.
We are only discussing it from an Islamic perspective. Is, and how is, someone a prophet within the boundaries of Islam. And do people have a right to declare themselves to be the Mahdi (again within the boundaries of Islam). And what criteria should be used.

Obviously, this would be immaterial to someone who does not follow Islam. And they should be least bothered about it. But to those, who do follow Islam, this is of a lot of importance. This doesn`t mean we should kill each other, but we should present our view in a civilized manner.

You see if the people of pindora, declared the nanga faqir to be a prophet, who started his own religion. That is his choice. If they declared him to be a prophet within Islam, then it becomes a part of the discussion. Whether it is easy or difficult is immaterial. If we Muslim start subscribing Quadianiat there will be at least three dozen prophets every year claiming as such. And in next 50 years Islam in this part of world, as Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) conveyed to us, will remain no more.


Do they consider non ahmadi muslim or non muslim. I think you know the answer. If they consider us muslim than what is the point of having believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? You know what i mean.


It would help. How many muslims know what Qadniyyat movement actually is. How many muslim have got ideas about their core beliefs which create differences among us. I dont think any harm in discussing as long as the other party is ready for debate

Thank you for the explaination i was trying to navigate on the site using firefox browser but it was acting all funky....
I see you have lot of quotes from the bible but as i understand dont u follow the quran or do u have a mix of both..?

The answer wouldn't be yes because the verification of God isn't just done through accepting Him, it includes accepting the messages He has sent, through the mesesngers he has said.

Finality of Prophet hood is a completely different subject. Ahmadiyyat was within the fold of Islam for roughly 70-80 years and were there 3 new Prophets each year? I wouldn't deny that there were claims made by people, but did those claims suddenly stop? You can find cases of people who've made the claim to be a prophet or the mahdi even with Ahmadi's as non-muslim.


Non-Ahmadi. However by calling Ahmadi's kafir the place that charge soley on themselves as that is what comes from ahadith.





Your looking at it from the wrong perspective. The people can be as convinced as they want but unless God has stated it then it means little.

The history of Prophets past is a good start in order to udnerstand who the Mahdi will be. Each Messenger was originally rejected, many persecuted but they spoke the message and people came.


There is a hadith in which Hadhrat Mohammad (saw) has stated that there is no Messiah but Isa (ibn majah)

Insha Ji: The website you posted is having a statement regarding Isa Ibn e Muriam as Son of God...is that what you also believe in?

Desiplease we follow Holy Quran 100% but inorder to be a muslim you have to believe in what is revealed before Quran as well. The truth that is in every book of God beside Holy Quran we believe in as long as the previous books do not contridict with Quranic teachings.

Sausy i dont think you have read or browsed throught he site. We do not believe in Isa-ibn-e-Mariam as son of God.

He's not in the cave anymore. He's in occultation.


lol, no.

I guess i'm trying to understand your belief about Jesus traveling to India and settling in Kashmir area....where are those passages in Koran ? I would like to read what was his life like there.

Did somebody say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the 2nd coming of Christ?

Your point?

According to Shias, he was hiding in a cave to avoid danger and then went into occultation.

I would suggest you read this book Jesus in India the Holy Quran evidance is this part http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch2.html

I 'm not sunni or shia
I 'm muslim.

But I know that certainly.
Wahabis are animals.

ouch.. n with that i shall close this topic...