Intro
On Aug-12-1984, Mirza Tahir Ahmad held a Question/Answer session at the Fazl Mosque in London. The Ahmadi questioner said that Allah revealed that prophets would come. Mirza Tahir Ahmad immediately said NO! At 1:28, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that MGA claimed to be that prophet who was predicted by Muhammad (Saw) and addressed as Nabi by Muhammad (saw) (only). On the same day, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argued that NO ONE says that NO prophet can come, and a prophet in the fashion of Muhammad (Saw) can also come.
At 1:53, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that if anyone repeats the claim of MGA, it would be their duty to prove where Muhammad (Saw) has referred to another one and gave this other prediction of a “prophet”.
Mirza Tahir Ahmad eventually discussed 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) and alleged that the verse says “nabiyeen”, which doesn’t mean plural would come, it’s a way of expression, instead, they would become the “the like of prophets”.
At 12:06, Mirza Tahir Ahmad defended Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the last prophet, and alleged it was accidental and etc. And someone has to be last, it doesn’t mean superiority. More often then not, the last are the not the best (See the clip on TikTok and Twitter).
At 12:44, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that being Last is not a matter of pride at all, Mirza Tahir Ahmad suggests that Non-Ahmadi’s believe in this as a matter of pride. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that they don’t say that Maseeh e Maud (MGA) is the Last prophet and thus the greatest. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that each chain of prophets, always had someone who was last, and that person was never the Best. This is wrong! The best came before him (referring to Muhammad, saw, coming before MGA). Mirza Tahir Ahmad then clarifies that not never “the best”, but, more often than not, they were never “the best”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argued that maybe accidentally a few of them were the better than previous people (prophets). Mirza Tahir Ahmad says it’s not a rule, it’s pure chance.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________At 2:16, the questioner specifically quotes 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) and asks about its implications in this entire discussion. The questioner specifically asked about the phrase “nabiyeen” and inferred that this means additional prophets in the future. Mirza Tahir Ahmad immediately shook his head and answered “No it doesn’t, it doesn’t at all”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that the verse says “nabiyeen” doesn’t mean plural would come, it’s a way of expression, it’s a language, first you need to understand the language of Arabic to understand this word (“nabiyeen”). Mirza Tahir Ahmad says, “Minan Nabiyeena” means from among the prophets, and it refers to the previous prophets, because it is they that are mentioned, you must first understand the text of this verse, only then, the confusion in your mind will be removed.
At 3:45, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that the possibility is open that if “whoever” obey’s Allah and follows his prophet (Muhammad, saw), would be counted among those, who appeared before them, who would be treated like those, we can also translate it like this, who appeared before them and who were well rewarded by Allah, such as “Minan Nabiyeena”. The plural here refers to the prophets of the past and the promise says that you could also reach the status, which was given to the prophets of the earlier ages. The number who would attain that status is not mentioned.
At 5:08, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argued that in response to Muslims that argue that there should be many new prophets in Ahmadiyya, since “Minan Nabiyeena” means in the plural sense. Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that he counters this by arguing that there is only one Siddiq in the entire ummah, that is Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddiq. Mirza Tahir Ahmad gives additional arguments.
At 6:07, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that they would be counted amongst them (nabiyeena, siddiqeena, and etc).
At 6:43, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) doesn’t mean that “nabiyeen would come”, and he tells the questioner: “this is where you are wrong”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad alleges that this verse means that “Nabi’s are those who were rewarded before them. Siddiqun are those who were rewarded before them, Saliheen and Shahideen. Mirza Tahir Ahmad then concludes and says that the entire verse is an explanation of “Who were those, who were rewarded before them” (7:04).
At 7:08, the questioner tells Mirza Tahir Ahmad that thank you and since 1953, and he mentioned his father and their struggle vs. Muslims in that era and how his father pointed out this verse to him as a good argument. He says that he has been arguing to Muslims that in 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) since siddiq is plural, nabiyeen is also plural and thanks for clarification. This guy admitted to be making mistakes while doing debate vs. Muslims and not understanding the Ahmadiyya position himself.
Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that this is what the verse 4:69: (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) means or infers (7:56 time stamp).
At 8:00, Mirza Tahir Ahmad again argues that 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) refers to the people of the past. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that anyone who follows, could be one of those. Mirza Tahir Ahmad then argues that this verse is connects to the famous hadith about being “the like of prophets”.
At 8:47, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that MGA is a “subordinate prophet”, and the number of “subordinate prophets” is much larger than you can conceive. Because, there are 2 types of “subordinate prophets”, one is that wherein Muhammad (Saw) gave him the title of “Nabi”, by saying, he would be Nabi. And in-between me and himself, there would be no one with the title of “Nubuwwat”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad alleged that Muhammad (Saw) said this. Mirza Tahir Ahmad also alleges that since Muhammad (Saw) said that his ulema would be “the like of prophets” of old and 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) is also referring to the prophets of the old days. They would be counted amongst the people of the past.
At 10:20, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that via 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) people can become no less than prophets, by the standards of the era before Muhammad (Saw). They are definitely not less than prophets. By the standard of the era, that Mirza Tahir Ahmad has observed after the era of Muhammad (Saw), they can’t be called prophets, because that standard has risen now. And since this verse only promises prophethood according to the past standards, it is true, there are so many.
At 11:06, the same questioner stands up and repeats the fact that he has been arguing incorrectly for the past 10+ years and has been telling Muslims that prophethood can never end and he gave may arguments. The questioner then mentions how he believes that MGA pointed out to the world, that here is an opening (for prophethood). Mirza Tahir Ahmad agrees with him!
At 12:06, Mirza Tahir Ahmad defended Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the last prophet, and alleged it was accidental and etc. And someone has to be last, it doesn’t mean superiority. More often then not, the last are the not the best (See the clip on TikTok and Twitter).
At 12:44, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that being Last is not a matter of pride at all, Mirza Tahir Ahmad suggests that Non-Ahmadi’s believe in this as a matter of pride. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that they don’t say that Maseeh e Maud (MGA) is the Last prophet and thus the greatest. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that each chain of prophets, always had someone who was last, and that person was never the Best. This is wrong! The best came before him (referring to Muhammad, saw, coming before MGA). Mirza Tahir Ahmad then clarifies that not never “the best”, but, more often than not, they were never “the best”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argued that maybe accidentally a few of them were the better than previous people (prophets). Mirza Tahir Ahmad says it’s not a rule, it’s pure chance.
At 14:08, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says that hypothetically, if we consider that other people could also be called as “Prophet”. Then wouldn’t people argue that he is the LAST?
At 14:53, the questioner interjects and turns the conversation towards, “the last prophet in time”. They then spoke about Nuh (as) and his era.
At 16:12, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says to be the last (prophet) in time, is no matter of honor, superiority over those who before such a person.
At 16:50, Mirza Tahir Ahmad is now talking about the last days and how it will happen to the worst people in existence.
At 17:11, Mirza Tahir Ahmad says to be the last in time is no matter of pride at all.
At 17:33, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that Ahmadi’s don’t insist that there shouldn’t be a prophet (to come in the future), or it is forbidden by the Holy Quran (that a prophet might come in the future). Ahmadi’s don’t believe this. Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that the Holy Quran opens a possibility and that possibility is not closed by anyone, it remains open, that possibility also covers those who are given the “status” of prophethood, like the prophets of the past and people as such would continue to come. Mirza Tahir Ahmad then alleges that even in the Ahmadiyya movement in 1984, there are some with this status. Their status in the eyes of Allah, is like that of a prophet of the past, thus, the promise in the verse 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) is covered.
At 18:40, Mirza Tahir Ahmad explains that the argument of 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran) is twofold, firstly, it encompasses MGA as the only prophet who was promised to come as well as the promise that people can become “like-prophets”. Mirza Tahir Ahmad then argues that when he searches the Quran and hadith he doesn’t find anyone else who is mentioned as a prophet other than MGA.
At 20:48, Mirza Tahir Ahmad argues that if Allah decides to send a prophet in 1000 years, it’s up to him to make his arguments, why should he care? Why should we fight his battle and not our own? If a prophet comes, he will look out for himself!
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
Ahmadiyya and 4:69, everything you need to know – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
The Fazl Mosque, London – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
https://x.com/ahmadiyyafacts/status/1935095517266252125?s=46&t=HTqZKquoOvKbgoBAF2aQcg
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8rrTBFy/
Shaikh ‘Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani (also spelled as Abdul Qadir Jilaani) in Ahmadiyya literature–a study
https://x.com/ahmadiyyafacts/status/1935179292373397826?s=46&t=HTqZKquoOvKbgoBAF2aQcg
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8rk1Tr4/
Shah Wali Ullah, Ahmadiyya literature, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and how they misquote Shah Wali Ullah
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #mirzaghulamahmad
5 Pingback