Prophecy and the Mullah: Hotel Mohenjodaro

sattar #267 Let us agree to disagree. We have been around this issue enough times, and on matters of religion as I have said that is between God and the individual according to the Quran. So, to you be your way, and to me be mine.

You have not issued any threats to me, nor mischievously attributed to me the opposite of my views (like usrtruly), and for that I respect you as an individual.

As for getting along - I am sorry but too many innocent people have been killed by these followers of iblis (whether they are hindutva extremists or mullah rascals) for this evil ideology that they promote to go unchallenged. Thousands of shias have been murdered - some while saying prayers in mosques, others while leaving their families to go to work - by the followers of mullahism. Innocent christians have been attacked while praying in churches in Pakistan by men who are deaf to the specific Quranic injunctions calling for respect for all places of worship. Would a man who fears Allah ever attack innocent people? Would a man who truly fears Allah attack someone in a house of worship? Or even excuse such evil behavior? Hundreds of innocent hindu and sikh villagers have been killed by these rascals. Thousands of muslim families were murdered in Gujerat by the hindutva branch of this evil family. Who cries for the 60 young pakistanis who were killed at the WTC by another branch of these followers of iblis?

urstruly #268 spare me your royal ``we``, and mend your evil ways while you still have time. And I see you have shamelessly posted yet another lie in your pseudo-arabic mullah-speak (``gustakh-e-rasul``): You have lied again. And once again I challenge you to cut and paste anything I have written to back your filthy lie. You have already failed once this challenge when you implied that i was a qadiyani.

sattar #267 one more thing - I did read AND respond to your post #248 (see my post #253), including the point you said I ducked (I didnt, and gave you a proper response, I think).

As for the continuing evil in this world (which I see is a new argument you now present as a reason for the continuance of prophets in this world) - your argument is negated by the fact that the Quran places responsibility on the individual for his actions in this world (a basic tenet of Islam).

You can learn to tell right from wrong - truth from deceipt, kindness from cruelty, humility from chauvinism, respect from ridicule - from the Quran, and/or you can learn about it if you are raised in a good household, and/or you can learn this from other religious or non-religious aspects of any civilized culture. Surely you dont need an endless line of prophets to get this message across.

tahmad

We keep an eye on all gustakh-e-rasul mirzais whether they use hate speech like sattar, mantolives, and hamidm do to harass and insult Muslims, or it is someone like you who is trying to weasel their way in. We are watching you. You will be checked at every forum whether it is chowk or mirzai mouthpiece TFT.

Tahmed (#253):

I explained how your faith has subdued your rationality. Don’t stop after reading only the first line … but read the rest of my post #248 as well …

The basic point seems to have escaped you. Ahmadis believe that Allah raised Mirza Sahib as a prophet … just like Allah raised Noah, Jesus, Muhammad as prophets. No big deal … if you understand the message of Quran. Every evil mentioned in Quran is abundant in this world today. And you still cannot explain why prophets will appear no more. You may as well argue that Allah has fallen asleep at the wheel …

Simply insisting that Muhammad was a prophet since the book he wrote portrays him as a genuine follow … is faith-based, circular reasoning. Sorry … your view fails to measure up … which I predicted even before you said it. And btw, the book Muhammad wrote, never says that he is the last prophet (wink).

Re #258, I don’t think Urstruly suffers from temporary blindness. His real problem is perpetual stupidity … but I get the point anyway …

++++++++++++

Atif,

I appreciate your display of faith and your kind words. Now, if I throw a stick, will you go away?

+++++++++++

Tahmed, Atif, Urstruly … kindly keep up the fatwas of kuffr … against Ahmadis ... as well as against each other. It paints an accurate picture of how low the ummah has sunk (... where is MaududiLives when he is needed ...??).

As for me, I consider all of you Muslims (sigh). If you claim to be a Muslim, it is good enough for me. This is a matter between you and God Almighty … and I see no reason to dissect and label your faith.

Now, can’t we all just get along …???

urstruly #265 So now you change your tune - now you call me a munafiq!! And are you threatening me by saying this will not end with this board? You think I am afraid of you, and that you can intimidate me like you shaitani rascals try to intimidate people in Pakistan, you proven liar? Go to hell (where you and the rest of you mullah rascals will end up anyway, given your wilful violation of the Quran and the hypocritical manner in which you seek to replace its peaceful message with your own hypocrisies and lies to cause a fitna in this world)!!

tahmad

I hope you fully understand that this will not end with this thread - choice is yours to make it easier on yourself by chosing between either path. This dilemma comes in every munafiq`s life sooner or later. A few words will set you free.

Atif2

I thought it was understood - the method that you mentioned.

Urstruly - In all fairness to tahmed32, he may have hestitations about putting his age, father`s name etc. So I suggest that he say ``I agree`` or ``I disagree`` to the following statement. That would set the record straight. In fact, let me set an example:

I atif2 of www.chowk.com , adult Muslim, hereby solemnly declare that :-

(i) I am Muslim and believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of the prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) the last of the prophets.

(ii) I do not recognise any person who claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Muhammad (peace be upon him) or recognise such a claimant as prophet or a religious reformer as a Muslim.

(iii) I consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Quadiani to be an imposter nabi and also consider his followers whether belonging to the Lahori or Qadiani group to be Non-Muslim.


[signed Atif2 of Chowk]

urstruly #262 I dont need your prompting to say that I the prophet muhammed to be the final prophet and mirza ahmed to be a fake rasul - I have not just taken this view on chowk, i have also explained why I consider this to be based on what is written in the Quran. You know that very well, having been on chowk for years - and all you were doing was following the standard mullah technique of trying to intimidate anyone who speaks out against them by labelling him a kafir or an qadiyani. The fact is that maududi is a prophet in all but name to his followers - and while this many maududi followers wont like my saying this, just as many mirza followers wont like my saying this - that does not change this fact.

I am also on record for opposing all religious parties on principle - and this would include any ahmedi religious parties as well as religious parties of any other kind. So, you should not have needed confirmation of this issue from me as well, since you have been long enough on chowk to know better. I not only oppose the concept of a religious party, I also provide the reason for it: The reason being that by definition a religious party seeks to gain political power on the basis of religion - and this is a clear violation of the Quranic injunction against compulsion in religion. As for which party has created fitna, to the best of my knowledge you are wrong in pointing to qadiyani parties for this - the reason being that thousands of pakistanis that have been killed by sectarian violence have been the victims of shia vs sunni violence, and to the best of my knowledge no qadiyanis were involved. If you have better knowledge, i suggest you share it - otherwise try to be honest.

Finally, I never asked anyone to follow me. Indeed, if I were to do so, I would be violating the basic point I have been making all along - namely, if someone considers himself to be a muslim, then he has a responsibility to read and understand the message of the Quran FOR HIMSELF in an honest and common sensical manner. And it is a fact that the Quran is explicity and crystal clear on the couple of issues I have raised - respect for all religions and faiths and even their rituals; equality of all individuals (regardless of religion) before God.

tahmad

If that is so then you would not have any problem saying that it is your belief and Iman that Mohammad - peace be upon him - was the last of Allahs apostels and Mirza Quadiani was an imposter nabi and a fake rasul. And that you condemn both Quadiani and Lahori groups for creating this fitna in Islam.

The reason for that oath is that since you occassionally give us sermons on how we and every other Ulema-e-din is incorrect in interpretting Qura`n and only one who knows the correct inyterpretation is you and how we shouldn`t follow ulema blindly , therefore, I have to make sure that you are not an imposter pretending to be Muslim, misguiding us. So that when we will be blindly following you there won`t be any burden on our conscience.

urstruly#259 I assume you wrote this without waiting for my response in #258. If this assumption is incorrect and you are sufficiently hypocritical to write this even after reading what I said in #258, then you are merely an even more blatant liar and there is no point in arguing with you.

urstruly: And let me add one more thing - your attempt to portray me as a qadiyani when you know perfectly well that I am as strongly opposed to the qadiyanis for creating a prophet after muhammed as I am to the mullahs for creating ``religious leaders`` like maududi and expecting ordinary muslims to follow their evil ways rather than to have faith in the Quran as being the message of God to the individual.

You of course have no way to back up this vicious personal attack and when challenged to back you lies by cutting and pasting anything I have written. This is a perfect example of the shaitani ways of you mullah rascals: When confronted with the Quran whose injunctions you violate with impunity in order to create mischief in this world, you try to intimidate anyone who dares stand up to you by labelling him a qadiyani or a dehriya. You have given a perfect illustration of this. This is a glimpse of the evil mindset that underlies the mischief created by mullahs in this world - the mindset that has resulted in thousands of innocent pakistanis losing their lives at the hands of sectarian violence, and the mindset that has made islamist terrorism the number one threat to civilized societies across the world.

atif

what did I say

urstruly: you obviously suffer from temporary blindness when confronted with inconvenient facts. You suffered from this blindness when presented with the Quranic verses you requested. And you suffered from this blindness when I called you a liar and challenged you to back your calling me a qadiyani by cutting and pasting anything I have written. You quietly pulled yourself away from chowk when presented with the Quranic verses you yourself requested. Since it is God`s business to deal with hypocrites like you who claim to be muslim but willfully violate the Quranic injunctions.

I can only hold you responsible for your second episode of blindness: So let me repeat myself: You are a cheap liar when you imply that I am a qadiyani. If you dispute this, I challenge you to cut and paste anything I have said to back your lies.

As for that statement, I will be glad to sign it if you will send me your correct name and mailing address (or are you too much of a coward and a hypocrite to do that?).

atif

Mantolives dodged it. Lets see what reason tahmad comes up with while dodging it.

This verse was mentioned in the discussion but not discussed enough.

002.213
YUSUFALI: Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.

When the ayat refers to mankind, isn`t it all the humans (not just jews, christians and muslims)?
Doesn`t it clearly say that mankind was sent the Book? and doesn`t it attribute the title of ``the people of the Book`` to all the mankind.
Why then is the popular interpretation of this term as `christians and jews` only?