3 ms·
Seems you have no understanding what Ahmadiyya standing for, let's clarify something first, one morning an Orange start calling herself Apple, should we start c
by kamel3d 6y ago
Seems you have no understanding what Ahmadiyya standing for, let's clarify something first, one morning an Orange start calling herself Apple, should we start calling this Orange apple? should to Orange get offended if we still call it Apple? well we have to call the Orange Orange based on our well established understanding of the characteristics of a na orange and what makes it different, Ahmadiyya is widely considered non longer muslims amount the islamic world and islamic scholars, same fore Durouz in Lebanon for example, Ahmadiyya is against one of the main pillars of islam that prophet Mohamed is the last one but this movement founder declared himself a prophet and that god talks to him in english, this was established in 1889 during the British colonialism to India, islam consider people from other religions as infidel and it dose not seem to be an issue to christians or Jews how they are being seen by islam, and same thing goes to Christianity it dose not consider muslims as christians and I am sure muslims are happy not getting offended by not being Christians so I don't get it why this definitions are an issue while it comes to Ahmadyya, also I don't get your point of free speech while Ahmadyya are free to call themselves what they want and Muslims are also free to describe Ahmadyya the way they considered it right
- nethunters 6y agoFunnily enough the Ahamdis don't consider normal Muslims to be Muslims too! Statements of Mirza Basheer-ud-Din, Ghulam Ahmad’s son and successor, including what he wrote in his book Ayena-e-Sadaaqat (p.35): “Verily, every Muslim who does not pledge allegiance to the Promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad), whether he heard of his name or not, is a disbeliever and outside the fold of Islam!” He is also quoted in the Qadiani periodical, Al-Fazl (30th July 1931) as reporting from his father, Ghulam Ahmad himself that he said: “We disagree with the Muslims in everything: concerning God, the Messenger, the Qur’aan, prayer, fasting, hajj and zakaah. There is a fundamental difference of opinion between us in all of these things!” https://www.masjidattaqwa.co.nz/ahmadiyya/ https://www.masjidattaqwa.co.nz/ahmadiyya/
- selimthegrim 6y agoLike Jinnah, Mirza Basheer said a lot of things at one time and a lot of diametrically opposite things at another. Punishing people who aren't dead for something someone who is dead said is a bad idea, so is predicating citizenship rights. Do you think I asked for who my parents were? Do you think it's fair they couldn't even register their marriage in Pak and could only give Nikahnama to American embassy on the way out?
- nethunters 6y agoThe point was aimed at the classification of Ahamdis as not being Muslim and how the founder and main leaders of the Ahmadiyya even seen their movement as radically different to mainstream Islam. I haven't seen any statements of them opposing these views. Regardless, I wasn't advocating or defending their persecution.
- selimthegrim 6y agoYou might want to check out the 1974 assembly hearings where the successor of the guy you cited has a bit about “political Muslims”
- nethunters 6y agoAre you talking about the below National Assembly where it couldn't be decided by him whether mainstream Muslims are Kaafir according to the widely published statements of the founder? https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/22/mirza-nasir-ahmad-discussed-his-fathers-and-uncles-statements-on-takfir-in-1974-at-the-national-assembly-hearings/ https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/22/mirza-nasir-ah...
- selimthegrim 6y agoYeah, I'm not defending his performance. I think he said something about 'political Kaafir'