[qadianism] Re: Fwd: negative evidence showing there can b
By umaraadil @excite.com

I applied no tests whatsoever to determine "whether" mirza was a prophet.

Islam is clear on the point that there can be no prophet after Muhammad
(S.A.W.) and as was pointed out in one of the first posts, according to Abu
Hanifa it is haraam and makes one a kafir even to ask for proofs of
prophethood from someone.

As the proposer of a new religion, it is your responsibility to adduce
evidence sufficient to overcome 1,400 years of Islam. As for me, it is
sufficient that Rasulullah (S.A.W.) told us urgently to pay attention to the
words in his final sermon because "no prophet will come after me".

I am simply confronting you with the illogic of your position in the hope
that you will come around to the truth. My post about "negative evidence"
asks you to consider why certain events did not take place, that logically
should have taken place if we were required to expect a new prophet.

For example, the Jews did not hesitate to ask for new prophets in times of
trouble, because they had been told to expect them. It is your
responsibility to show why the Muslims never did likewise. The obvious
answer is that the Muslims never expected a new prophet, and therefore they
did not seek that which was not authorized.

It is necessary for you to establish that belief in any prophet after
Rasulullah (S.A.W.) is authorized in Islam. You haven't done that, and it is
my sincere belief that with the mountain of evidence contrary to your
position, that you never will.

On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:15:33 -0800 (PST), Abdul Aziz wrote:

> Mr. McKlosky: Could you tell me the tests you applied to determine
> Mirza Sahib was or not a true prophet of God. For your information Quran
> mentions some tests. (1) A prophet appears when there is sin all over.
> The person appointed a prophet has never told a lie before he declared
> himself to be God's appointee. (3) His mission always succeeds even when
> whole world opposes him. These tests are derived from Quran where God,
> almighty tells Muhammad (SAS) to put up these as the proof of his
> prophethood. Could you please tell me the tests you applied.
> .>> Reply-to:       qadianis-@egroups.com 
> >> To:             qadianis-@egroups.com 
> >> Date:          Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:58:52 -0000
> >> From:          "Umar Aadil Abdul Rahman McKloskey"
< umarantiqa-@mailcity.com >
> >> Organization:  MailCity  (http://www.mailcity.lycos.com:80)
> >> Subject:       [qadianism] Re: Fwd:  negative evidence showing there
> be no prophet after Rasulullah (s.a.w.)
> >
> >> I trust that my recent posts on Isa (A.S.) clarifies that Mirza could
> possibly be identified as the second coming of Isa, because Mirza does
> meet the qualifications.
> >
> >If we had internet at the time of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace 
> >and blessings of Allah be on him) the Meccans might have posted
> >the same message ...
> >

eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/qadianism