Intro
MGA contradicted himself many times.  Most likely because he had multiple ghost-writers.  In a recent catch, we see MGA and his team of writers trying to assert that Adam (as) was born as a twin…and Eve or Hawa was the female twin of Adam (as) (nauzobillah).

The reference work
(1907)— “””Adam twa’am(twin) k toor par paida hoa tah, pahlay Adam or baad ma Hawa (rk vol 22 haqiqatul wahi page 209)”””—urdu transliteration

English—“Adam was born as a twin, first Adam and then Hawa (aka Eve)”

14725527_892560084212416_4659436476707395719_n

20 years earlier, and before 1891 he wrote
1886 in Arya Dharam:

Urdu Transliteration—-“”””jasay Hazrat Hawa Hazrat Adam ki pasli sa nikali gae aisay he har yak larkay ki joroo us ki pasli sa nikali gae ho””””

“””Just like Hazrat Hawa was created by rib of Hazrat Adam same as each boy’s wife was created from his rib.( rk vol 10 Aariya Darham page 39)”””

1

In 1908, MGA said….
An English scholar of Astronomy, Professor Rege met the Promised Messiah on 12th May and 18th May 1908 in Lahore and asked him a few questions as reported in Malfooza’at Vol. 10, Pages 353 and 426. Among other questions he asked: “It is written in the Bible that Adam or say the first man was born in Jeehoon, Seehon and belonged to that country. Are, then, all the mankind, that is found in different parts of the world like America and Australia, the descendants of the same Adam?” To this question the Promised Messiah replied, “We do not follow the Bible in holding that the world began with the birth of Adam six or seven thousand years ago, and that before this there was nothing, and God was, as it were idle and without work. Neither do we claim that all mankind who are now found in different parts of the earth, are the progeny of the self-same Adam. On the Contrary we hold that this Adam was not the first man. Mankind existed even before him, as is hinted by the Quran itself, when it says to Adam, “I am about to place a Khalifa in the earth.” As Khalifa means successor, it is clear that man existed even before Adam. Hence we cannot say whether the original inhabitants of America, Australia etc. are the progeny of this last Adam or some other Adam gone before him. (Malfooza’at Vol. 10, Page 426).

Why did he lie?
MGA and his team seemed to try to make a parallel fit, they wanted to argue that MGA was born just like Adam (as)…i.e. of a twin.  Moreover, they are also hinting towards other parallels here…since they knew that the quran linked the miraculous birth of Esa (as) to that of Adam (as)….they wanted to use this idea for an argument.

Additional lies and cover up…
In this video…(Retrieved on 10-18-16)these Ahmadis argued that women were created before men and thus supported MGA’s writings on the topic.  They also explained away the Arya Dharam quote as a metaphor.  So, they called MGA’s writings on this topic as a metaphor, without addressing the later writings….this is a classic Ahmadi tactic of deflection.

Further, the official Ahmadi-comprehensive english commentary on the Quran tells us that this verse means that mankind was born from 2 souls, man and woman, and thus its supports MGA’s view on this topic.  He then goes on to argue that women werent really created from the rib of a man, and its only a metaphor.

Other lies about Adam by Ahmadiyya
As we all know…Ahmadis dont believe that Adam (as) was the first human.  They believe in many Adams (as)….they also dont believe that Adam (as) physically descended (nuzul) to Earth from Heaven, which is an established islamic belief.

 

The Lahori-Ahmadi position
Muhammad Ali (see 4:1) cleverly made the argument that this verse infers that mankind started from “pairs” and not from a single person.  He didn’t care to comment on “rib” topic.  I’ve found many instances wherein Muhammad Ali has steered clear of certain controversial topics.  

The Islamic position on the Adam?
Tafsir Ibn Kathir is an amazing classical book on Tafsir.  Ibn Kathir tells us that Allah created a single soul, i.e. Adam (as) and then created Hawa aka Eva from the rib of Adam (as).  

Conclusions
MGA and his team of ghost-writers seem to have denied the islamic concept of creation as early as 1886.  The ulema must have been concerned.  It was Sir Syed who first challenged this topic and obviously, MGA’s team stole Sir Syed’s argument.