Which is the fastest growing sect of Islam?

Ahmadiyya counter Argument:

“We are the fasting growing sect of islam – with 500,000 baits this year alone”

Whereas, in the Muslim World there are millions of converts to Islam every year. Despite the endless propaganda against Muslims.  

Sunni Muslims are estimated to be 85 to 90% of the Mainstream Muslim population.

(Also check out the post that nails the population discrepancy of Ahmadiyya)

The Famous Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsari and the Challenge

The famous Sanaullah Amritsari and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

The focus of this debate is to prove whether the document titled as the “The final decision” is a mubahala challenge (prayer duel) or merely a supplication. The document in itself does not, however, include any condition of a mubahala challenge. But Ahmadi missionaries insist this letter is part of the chain of “challenges” that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had made to Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsari, which the Maulvi failed to accept throughout the lifetime of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

So, in short AMJ wants everyone to understand this document in light of the following points:

1.       The document is not a standalone prayer, but it is to be understood in terms of a mubahala challenge.

2.       While addressing this document, one must keep in mind the cowardice of Maulvi Sanaullah in failing to accept any challenges. 

Before we examine the document, there’s another aspect that is crucial to this case. The fact that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad signed a court legislation over refraining from making death prophecies and prayer duels In 1899. So if this is, indeed, a prayer duel, then Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is guilty of breaching court order.

Now, let’s examine the document “The Final Decision”:

The Last Decision with Mr. Maulvee Sanaaullaah (Amratsaree)

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Beneficent, the Ever Merciful

[Submitted] to Mr. Maulvee Sanaaullaah.

Salaam [peace] on whosoever follows the guidance. For a long time, your periodical Ahl-e-Hadeeth has been continuing to brand me a liar and a profligate. … If I am as much of a liar and a forger [‘muftaree’, an impostor, one who makes a false accusation, an accusation which, in this context, is to impute something to God] as you quite often refer to me in your periodical, then I shall die during your lifetime. Because, I know that the life span of a corrupter [mischief-monger] and a liar is not very long and, ultimately, he dies, unfulfilled, in humiliation and despair, during the life of his enemies. And it is better that he die so that he may not destroy the servants of God. And if I am not a liar and a rogue, and am honored by God’s discourse and address, and am the Promised Messiah, then I hope that by the Grace of God, according to the practice of Allaah, you shall not escape the punishment [given] to liars.

Hence, [I declare that] if, during my lifetime, you are not afflicted with such punishment as is not [possible] from human hands but is entirely from God’s hand, for example, fatal diseases such as plague, cholera etc., then I am not from God Almighty. This is not a prophecy based on revelation [of any sort]. [Rather] just in terms of a supplication I have desired a verdict from God Almighty. And I pray to God: O my Master, the Observer, the Powerful, who is the Knowing, the Omniscient, who is aware of the situation of my heart. If this claim of being the Promised Messiah is just an imputation from my self and, in your view, I am a mischief-monger and a liar and am engaged in making false imputations day and night then, O my beloved Master, I humbly pray to You to make me perish in the lifetime of Mr. Maulvee Sanaaullaah and make him and his group happy by my death. Aameen. But O my Perfect and True God, if Maulvee Sanaaullaah is not true in the accusations that he levels at me, then I humbly pray to You to perish him in my lifetime. But not with human hands [but] rather by fatal diseases such as plague, cholera etc. Except in the case that he openly repents, facing me and in the presence of my Jama`at, from all those vile epithets and the verbal abuse that he considers [his] official duty [and with which] he always inflicts pain on me.

 Aameen, O Lord of all the worlds, Aameen. … I see that Maulvee Sanaaullaah, by dint of these calumnies, wants to destroy my organization [the Ahmadiyya Movement] and dismantle that edifice which You made with Your own hands, O my Lord and O You who have sent me. For this reason, I am beseeching You, holding on to Your Holiness and Mercy: Provide a true verdict between me and Sanaaullaah and [as to the one] who in Your view is in reality a mischief-monger and a liar, make him depart from this world in the lifetime of the truthful one; alternatively, afflict him with some extremely severe tribulation that is equivalent to death. O my beloved Master, [please] do just as this [i.e., as supplicated]. Aameen and again Aameen. [Arabic text of a portion of the verse Quraan 7:90: … O our Lord, decide Thou between us and between our people with truth and Thou art the Best of those who decide.]

At the end I request Maulvee Saahib to publish this entire article in his periodical and write whatever [he] wants under it. Now the decision is in God’s hands.  The writer: Servant of Allaah, The Eternal -- Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Promised Messiah May God protect him and help him.

Date of writing: Monday, April 15, 1907 AD; Rabee`-ul-Awwal 1325 AH. [MAJMOO`AH, v. 3, pp. 578-579]

If your still wondering whether this was a prayer duel or a prayer alone? The image below finally puts an end to this debate:

The excerpt from Akhbar Badr 6 (34). 22 August 1907. P. 8. Col. 1 proves that this was solely a prayer supplicated by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to prove his "truthfulness".

The next excerpt from the then Newspaper Al-badr vol. 6 number 24 (dated 13 June 1907 page 2 column 1) presented is also further proof that the document was actually a prayer sought by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, apparently as his last resort to intimidate Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsaree:

Mufti Sadiq Qadiani writes on 5th May 1907:

Naqala Khat Banaam Molvi Sana Ullah Sahib

"...ap ka registry shuda card murasla 3 June 1907 Hazrat Masih Maud ki khidmat ma pohncha. Jis ma aap na 4 April 1907 k akhbaar k hawala da kar kitab HaqeeqaTulWahi ka aik nuskha manga ha. Es k Jawab ma aap ko mutla kiya jata ha k aap ki taraf HaqeeqaTulWahi bhajnay ka irada wo es liya zahir kiya giya tah, jab k aap ko mubahila k wastay likha giya tah ta k mubahila sa pahlay aap kitab parh latay. Magar choon'k aap na badeen khayal k Hazrat Mirza Sahib na Quran o Hadees k bar'khalaf to karna he nahi, ao aik aise baat paish karian k kisi tarha ya piyala tal jaway, apnay wastay ta'ayun(تعیین) azaab ki khawaish zahir ki. Or bagahir es k mubahila sa inkar kar k apnay liya faraar ki aik rah nikali. Es wastay Masheat-a-Aazdi(Allah) na aap ko dusri rah sa pakhra. Or Hazart Hujjatullah(Mirza Qadiani) k qalb main aap k wastay aik dua ki tahreek kar k faisla ka or tareeq(which was in poster of 15th April 1907 of Mirza) akhtiyar kiya(which was making Dua agianst Mollana Sanah Ullah Amratsari RA). Es wastay muhaila k sath jo shuroot tah wo sab k sab bawaja na iqraar patay ho'ay mubahila k munsookh hoay, lihaza aap ki taraf kitab bhajnay ki zuroorat na rahi."

Summary of the excerpt: 

Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsaree writes a letter to MGA asking him to provide him a book. Mufti Sadiq replies (on behalf of MGA) saying that providing him (Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsaree) a book was conditional, i.e., if the Mubahila chellenge had taken place, but since he did not accept it, they are no longer obliged to provide him with MGA's book. But instead MGA has made a prayer against him invoking God to manifest a divine decision as an "alternative" to Mubahala Challenge.

In yet another excerpt, this same author writes to Maulvi Sanaullah warning him of a prayer's fulfillment that will soon afflict him most certainly by annihilating him in the lifetime of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad:

"Molvi sahib aap k liya b Khuda ki gharat karishma dikhlay ge, Sadiq ki dua qaza samjhiya jo seedha jigr k paar honay wala ha, Haan ya maloom nahi k kab aisa ho ga, lakin ya zuroori ha k aakhri fiasla zuroor ho. us waqt maloom ho ja'ay ga k Allah ta'ala kabhi pasand nahi karta k us k mamoroo ki zillat ho. main aap ko koi dhamki nahi daita bal'k sirf aap ko ya samjhanay ki khater k aap ka ya kahna k chon'k aap barhay sakht mukhalif silsa Aalia Ahmadiyya k hain or aap ki mukhalfat oroon tak asar karti ha, es liya chahiya k aap ka pahlay khatima ho, Ba-zroor pora ho ga magar jis tarha Khuda Ta'ala ko manzoor ha."(Al-Hukm number 14 vol. 12 page 6 first column dated 22 February 1908)

The result of the prayer:

·         Mirza Ghulam Ahmad died shortly according to his own criteria and that which he cursed his opponents with

·         He died of a disease similar to Cholera (if not cholera itself)

·         Maulvi Sanaullah lived on for 40 years after MGA’s death (as opposed to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's position: "a liar does not have a long life").

·         He was reported to have died in a car accident.

·         At the time of MGA’s death, his last words were “I have developed epidemic cholera".  (reference provided below)

The Final Decision in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's own writings:

http://files.qern.org/qarchives/haneef/

AMJ contradicts the works of Abu Hurairah r.a

Case 1:

One of the most presented hadith by AMJ is the one related by Hazrat Abu Hurairah, this hadith is used in support of AMJ’s tafsir on Surah Jummah as an attempt to prove that Muhammad saw will "spiritually" come into the world again in the form of the Promised Messiah:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were sitting with the Prophet (ﷺ) Surat Al-Jumu’a was revealed to him, and when the Verse, “And He (Allah) has sent him (Muhammad) also to other (Muslims)…..’ (62.3) was recited by the Prophet, I said, “Who are they, O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)?” The Prophet (ﷺ) did not reply till I repeated my question thrice. At that time, Salman Al-Farisi was with us. So Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) put his hand on Salman, saying, “If Faith were at (the place of) Ath-Thuraiya (pleiades, the highest star), even then (some men or man from these people (i.e. Salman’s folk) would attain it.”(Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith #420)

 Ahmadiyya Commentary:

The prophet Muhammad(saw) made it clear that it would be a spiritual coming of a man from the people of Salman Farsi, meaning he would be of the Persian lineage as the Promised Messiah Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as) indeed was.

So according AMJ’s commentary we understand the following:

1.     Prophet Muhammad (saw) made it clear that it was the Promised Messiah who would appear in the latter days and not Esa ibne Maryam.

2.    Which also clarifies that during the life time of Muhammad saw Abu Hurairah was clear on the death of Esa a.s.

Now let’s look at Case 2: 

According to this passage, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has stated that Abu Hurairah (r.a) believed Jesus was alive and was only corrected on this “erroneous” belief of Jesus’s bodily ascension, at the occasion of Muhammad’s saw demise.

So the obvious contradiction is as following:

1.     According to Case 1 During the lifetime of Muhammad saw, Abu Hurairah (r.a) believed Jesus a.s had died.

2.     According to Case 2 During the lifetime of Muhammad saw, Abu Hurairah (r.a) believed Jesus a.s was alive.

This is a very nerve wrecking contradiction as a right minded person cannot draw the same conclusion from both the cases as AMJ has. It is also noteworthy that it was Abu Hurairah (r.a) who questioned Muhammad saw 3 times about the coming of a person in the latter days:

…I said, “Who are they, O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)?” The Prophet (ﷺ) did not reply till I repeated my question thrice..”

If this hadith is indeed the background for Surah Jummah, Why would Abu Hurairah (r.a) inquire about the latter day Messiah, when he himself believed it was Jesus a.s who was to return? Why didn’t he (r.a) clarify this belief in the presence of Muhammad saw when the subject at hand was concerning the coming of a "Promised Messiah"? 

It could perhaps be because this hadith was never narrated in regards to the coming of any "Promised Messiah" and the fact that Abu Hurairah (r.a) believed Jesus is alive makes it obvious that this hadith has only been quoted by AMJ based on their own interpretation (as opposed to the orthodoxy and the scholars from the last 1400 years), and have deliberately drawn their own conclusions from it to suit their agenda.  

Have Revelations ended?

This letter was written to an Ahmadi brother in response to his invalid interpretation of the verse 2:4.

Salam Alaikum Brother Razi,

For the purpose of keeping our discussion as clear cut as possible, I will be using MS word as a platform to indicate any inconsistencies that I may find in your refutation on the topic “Have revelations ended?” What is crucially important for both of us to understand is the position we uphold regarding the topic of discussion.

So the topic at hand is “Whether Revelations have ended or not?”

Clarification before we head towards the analysis of your article:

Being a follower of Imam Abu Hanifa, I adhere to the following belief that Prophetic Revelations have ended. Inspirations (ilham), however will continue as a means of blessings from Allah subhantallah. Why I do not specifically call Ilham a medium of communication, is because we as Muslims are blessed with the opportunity to communicate with Allah 5 times a day, and also through making Dua’h/Zikr. Restricting means of “communication” with Allah to only means of inspirations/ilham is minimizing the bounty of Allah. Because, receiving Ilham is a bounty that is mostly bestowed to pious worshippers. But Allah is merciful and promises to hear even the duah of the non-believers. So communication with Allah is indeed open through various ways, and also to the weak and hedayah seeking Muslims.

As aforementioned, Prophetic revelations according to orthodox Islam have ended with the coming of the final revelation of the Quran. As I read your refutation Brother Razi, I realized that you have confused “ilham” with the specific kind of revelation that we believe has ended.

Difference between Ilhaam and Wahy (although sometimes the terms are used interchangeably but nonetheless the characteristics of both differ):

1. The Arabic word wahi comes from the root word waha and is used to describe divine revelation. It has a variety of different meanings in the Arabic language, being interpreted as “a quick or divine indication”, “to give or convey a message”.

2. Another difference between Prophetic wahi and non-Prophetic wahi is that Prophetic wahi is to be compulsorily accepted/complied with by the ummah of the Messenger. But non-Prophetic wahi is for personal guidance of the person receiving wahi; Hazrat Isa’s companions and Hazrat Musa’s mother received wahi for their personal guidance.

3. Ilham is open to both a follower and a prophet, but ‘Wahi’ that descends upon a prophet to propagate a message from Allah, is solely confined to Prophets of Allah.

4. Such is the revelation that requires Muslims to profess faith in.

5. No pious being is required to “propagate” his ilhaam so that Muslims may attest faith in it.

It is also worthwhile to know, that the basic idea behind prophetic revelations ending and not revelations as a whole because “prophetic revelations” fall in line with the Quranic revelations or hadith e qudsi. Receiving any prophetic revelation after Muhammad saw, would be an addition to the two sources of Islam, the Quran and the Ahadith. However, an example of non prophetic revelation is the one received by Hazrat Asiya. Such may prevail for as long as Allah wills.

Difference between the interpretations of verse 2:4:

Orthodox Interpretation:

“And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith].”

Ahmadiyya Interpretation:

And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come (Chapter 2 Verse 5)

Quranic Syntax:

wa-alladhīna: And those who yu'minūna: believe bimā: in what unzila: (is) sent down ilayka: to you wamā: and what unzila: was sent down min: from qablika: before you wabil-ākhirati:and in the Hereafter hum: they yūqinūna: firmly believe. Ulāika: Those ʿalā: (are) on hudan: Guidance

Evidence from the Quran in support of Orthodox interpretation (prophetic revelations have ended):

Whether or not Al-Akhirah can be interpreted in the way you have interpreted is not the subject of concern, because by giving you the benefit of doubt, and accepting both the definitions attributable to this term, it still does not eliminate the inconsistency found in applying your version of definition to the word “Al akhirah” in 2:4.

Because in the light of other verses in the Quran, where part of verse 2:4 is identically repeated it clearly shows there is no mention of any revelation/message that is termed as "yet to come". And it also shows one is definitely not required to believe in anything other than revelations sent to Muhammad saw and to prophets before Muhammad saw in order to receive rewards in the hereafter.

Verse 4:162:

Sahih International

But those firm in knowledge among them and the believers believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you. And the establishers of prayer [especially] and the givers of zakah and the believers in Allah and the Last Day - those We will give a great reward.

In this verse the promise that Allah makes is clear on this condition that those who believe in what was sent to prophets before Muhammad saw and in that which was sent to Muhammad saw will attain a great reward. Believing in “what is yet to come” is not required.

Verse: 3:99:

Sahih International

And indeed, among the People of the Scripture are those who believe in Allah and what was revealed to you and what was revealed to them, [being] humbly submissive to Allah . They do not exchange the verses of Allah for a small price. Those will have their reward with their Lord. Indeed, Allah is swift in account.

The verse indicates two crucial points:

(1) Allah guarantees rewards to these people from among the People of Scripture for believing in what was revealed to Muhammad saw and what was revealed to the prophets before him (notice: these people were not required to believe in revelation that “WAS YET TO COME”).

(2) This verse speaks of believers who embraced faith before the advent of Muhammad saw (why I mention this, is because I know the counter argument that I may receive regarding this can be to the effect: “the reason why they are not required to believe in revelations after Muhammad saw, is because the revelations did not exist at that time or were not determined”. But Allah subhantallah still made the revelation of Muhammad saw necessary to believe in when it also did not exist in their time).

Verse: 5:59:

Sahih International

Say, "O People of the Scripture, do you resent us except [for the fact] that we have believed in Allah and what was revealed to us and what was revealed before and because most of you are defiantly disobedient?"

The verse indicates a few crucial points:

(1) This verse was revealed to Muhammad saw, it indicates that Muhammad saw and his followers had no fault, but to have believed in what was sent before him, and what was sent to him.

(2) It also indicates that “what was yet to come” was not a part of Muhammad saw’s faith.

(3) This surah was revealed after surah Baqarah in which “Al akhirah” is translated to mean “revelations yet to come” by AMJ.

(4) Surah Baqarah was one of the earliest revealed Surahs. It was also revealed before surah Al Nisa (Al Nisa verses mentioned above).

This is a crucial point to ponder over because as per the AMJ interpretation, the promise of revelation which “was yet to come” (2:4) was made in the earliest time and yet the verses revealed after (2:4) STILL DIDN’T require Muslims to believe in revelations to come after Muhammad saw.

  

Verse: 4:60:

Sahih International

Have you not seen those who claim to have believed in what was revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you? They wish to refer legislation to Taghut, while they were commanded to reject it; and Satan wishes to lead them far astray. 

The verse indicates:

This verse speaks of the hypocrites, who claim to have believed in what was sent to the prophets before Muhammad saw, and in what was sent to Muhammad saw, yet still wished to derive judgment from Taghut. Again, this verse indicates that the requirements for submission to Allah was to profess faith in the revelations sent to the prophets before Muhammad saw, and to that of Muhammad saw. Again, nothing of the sort which is “yet to come” appears in this context.

Inconsistencies in your refutation:

PART 1:

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“The non Ahmadi Muslims try to quote:

“And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come (Chapter 2 Verse 5)”

“The translation of the non Ahmadi Muslims differ and they state that because the translation according to them is:”

“And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith].”

“This would mean revelation has ended.”

Correction: It means “prophetic revelations” have ended, revelations which require Muslims to profess faith in. Ilhaam would indeed continue among the pious believers.

PART 2:

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad^ra states: …The word “al-Akhir” (what is yet to come” means either “the message or revelation which is to follow” or “the Last Abode”, i.e. the next life. Of these two meanings the first is more applicable here; for it fits in with the other two parts of the verse which speaks of God’s revelations”

“The other two parts of the verse which speak of God’s revelations” are also identically mentioned in verses 3:199, 4:60. 5:59 and 4:162, then why don’t these verses also include connotation that refers to future revelations?

PART 3

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“…In this connection it is also noteworthy that….future revelation was not yet definite and determined at the time when the verse was revealed, so the word ىقىن  was used for it.”

“The subject of the matter of the latter part of this verse, referred to in the words, “what is yet to come” finds further explanation in 6:3,4” 

“…. Promised Messiah… in whose advent have been fulfilled also the prophecies of other Prophets regarding the appearance of a World-Messenger in the latter days”

These are three inconsistent statements. Mirza Bashirudin first proposes that “future revelation was not yet determined”, then he quickly offers 6:3 to explain how the advent of Promised Messiah was definitely determined, and foretold by many of the prophets even before the advent of Muhammad saw.

I fail to understand what Mirza Bashirudin has intended to imply by saying future revelation was not yet definite and determined at the time of this revelation? Hypothetically he could mean any of the possibilities:

a.      Allah Almighty was not sure whether to send the Promised Messiah or not?

b.      The time and location was not yet determined?

c.       What kind of message Allah almighty wished to send?

But all of these 3 cases are devoid of logic in a matter relating to the Supreme Being. They are also self refuted by Mirza Bashiruddin’s own following statements (shown above). Allah Almighty is all knowing and the knowledge of unseen is ever so clear to him.

PART 4

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“Furthermore, the non Ahmadi Muslims accuse us of translating al-akhir as what is yet to come, and claim that the word can only mean what is in the hereafter or in regards to the hereafter. This is totally false and their own translations have translated al-akhir as something which had to come in the end times. Allah States:

Now, if you do well, you will do well for your own souls; and if you do evil, it will only go against them. So when the time for the latter warning came, We raised a people against you to cover your faces with grief, and to enter the Mosque as they entered it the first time, and to destroy all that they conquered with utter destruction. (Chapter 17 Verse 8)

‘We have not heard of this even in the latest religion. This is nothing but a fabrication.(Chapter 38 Verse 8)”

“The non Ahmadi Muslims accuse Ahmadi Muslims of such a translation, when their own primary translators have translated al-akhira as we have.”

You claim the Non Ahmadis scholar also translate “al akhirah” in the same sense as you have, but “al akhirati is not used to mean “what is yet to come” or “what is to follow” in neither of the examples that you have quoted.

If you read the context of  17:8, Allah speaks of Children of Israel causing corruption on earth “twice”, Allah gives them two promises in relation to that (17:4,5,6) First promise is of wealth, to perhaps test them, and the second (al akhirati) promise is of punishment. The word Al akhirati only means “second”, or final”. It cannot mean “what is yet to come” because the promise is already established and drawn upon the Israelites. The following reasons also demonstrate why it cannot be defined in the same way:

(1)    The verse speaks in a past tense: “..So when the time for the latter warning came..” therefore, you cannot define “Al akhirati” to mean “what is yet to come” or “what is yet to follow”.  The structure of the verse will not make sense: So when the time for the “what was yet to come/what was yet to follow” warning came..”

(2)    You also fail to realize a very crucial point here the word ‘Al Akhirati’ is placed next to another noun “promise”, which is also being modified by it.  If you add “what is yet to come/what is yet to follow” next to “promise/warning”, you’d see the context would become incoherent. 

(3)    Also since preceding verses show the promise/warning was already made clear to the Israelites before it was sent upon them, it was definite and determined, therefore “Al akhirati” cannot be referred to as “what was to come” because “what was to come” signifies something that is yet unknown.

(4)    You also mentioned “al akhirahti” is translated as “something which had to come in the end times” in relation to this verse but the verse does not even relate to the “end days/end times AT ALL  (please read the background of every verse before you quote).

So in short Verse 17:8 uses al-akhirati as “second/latter” promise. It is used in connotation to describe a noun. It doesn’t stand alone as a noun (as it does in the case of verse 2:4).

Same goes for verse 38:8, “last/latest” religion. The word al-akhirati again modifies the noun “religion”. It doesn’t stand alone as a noun. You cannot apply “what is yet to come/what is yet to follow” in this context either, because “latest” is actually modifying the noun “religion”.

“We have not heard of this even in the “what was yet to come”/”what was yet to follow” religion. This is nothing but a fabrication. (Chapter 38 Verse 8)”

Also, it is apparent you have never bothered reading the background of this verse, this verse refers to the religion brought by Jesus a.s. When the idolaters were told to worship one God and abandon their idolatry by Muhammad saw, they furiously retorted saying “We did not even hear this in the last/latter/latest religion that was brought” – i.e., the religion that came before Islam.

Your understanding of this verse surprises me Br Razi. If you think this verse refers to a religion which was “yet to come” then, why does the verse state: “We have not heard of this even in the latest religion”

How do you think these idolaters would know what was in a religion that was “yet to come”?

Now, coming back to the verse 2:4, Al Akhirah used in this verse stands as a noun alone and does not modify anything in relation to itself “and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith]”.That is a crucial difference between this verse and the 2 examples that you have quoted. To translate “al akhirah” to mean “revelation which is yet to come” also puts burden of proof on you to prove  whether “what is yet to come” actually refers to revelation, judgment  or resurrection?

PART  5:

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“Allah has made it Clear in this verse that how can the people of Moses^as take a calf as a Lord when it is condemned as a deity, since it does not speak or guide them in any way. This shows that the only way Allah can remain a true deity, is if He speaks to His servants and Guides them.  Those who think that God used to Speak and reveal Himself in the past alone are in complete error and should not have such a blasphemous belief. Speaking is an attribute of Allah which will never cease and Allah Speaks at all times, and those who possess the capacity and quality to hear Him, can Hear Him till today. It is a foolish belief to say that all types of revelation have ended since the Death of the Holy Prophet Muhammad^saw. Revelation does not mean a new law and it is needed for the freshness of spiritual life and helps one become Closer to his Creator.”

You have quoted a number of examples implying Allah communicates with his people. But the dispute is not over whether “Allah communicates with his people or not” the dispute is over the certain kind of revelation the verse 2:4 speaks of:  

And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith].

(1)  This verse speaks of revelations that we as Muslims are required to believe in, in order to be Muslims. Which are the revelations all prophets were given by Allah.  These revelations are known as “prophetic revelations”.

(2)  The difference between prophets and followers is that Prophets receive both kinds of revelations: Ilham and Wahy.

(3)  Whilst Pious followers only receive Ilham.

(4)  The revelation that all prophets receive are meant to be propagated to others. Allah subhantallah states in the Quran that every prophet was given the revelation to propagate God is one (that is an example of prophetic revelation).

(5)  The ilhaam that pious followers receive are personal inspirations from God, which are blessings that comfort our souls. It is not a message that one has to convey to other Muslims. It can be shared nonetheless but it doesn’t require propagation.

(6)  It is not a message which Muslims need to profess faith in.

Many Muhadith have claimed to have received Ilhaam, many pious worshippers are also given Ilhaam, but that is a specific type of revelation, it not a prophetic revelation. That is why it doesn’t go against the verse 2:4.

This is why we believe Prophetic Revelations have ended with the demise of Muhammad saw, who was the last Prophet to come. The Quran in many places signifies the belief in previous prophetic revelations and the revelations of Muhammad saw. It does not signify belief in any prophetic revelations “as yet to come”. The Quran is itself a final book of revelations. The sunnah is the final code of shariah. If more prophetic revelations were to come, what Islamic source would you compile these revelations into? The Quran? Or the Ahadith? If these additions are to be made, then Rasulullah saw would have never said Islam has been completed in verse:

5:3 “This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

PART 6:

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“These verses make it clear that Allah spoke in the past, He Speaks now, and will always Speak in the future as well. Some have a misconception that Allah only reveals to the prophets. “

Again, I had made it clear to you, the revelations in question were a specific type of revelations known as the prophetic revelations. Because 2:4, clearly speaks of believers “who professed faith in former revelations and in that of Muhammad saw” – it doesn’t speak of all Ilhaamic revelations sent upon people. 

“Surely, We have sent revelation to thee, as We sent revelation to Noah and the Prophets after him; and We sent revelation to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and his children and to Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and We gave David a Book.(Chapter 4 verse 164)

This verse only mentions of revelation to Noah^as and the Prophets after him, but there were Prophets before Noah^as which included Idris^as and also Adam^as. With the non Ahmadi Muslim logic, it would mean they were not revealed to and were false prophets, God forbid.”

You allege that based on our logic we would interpret this verse to mean Allah only sent revelations to selective prophets. This only reflects ignorance on your part Br. Razi because you have demonstrated that you simply do not understand the basic meaning of verse 2:4 and you think everything is based on “assumption”. Which is never the case, we Muslims do not “assume” the meaning of Quranic verses. So to break it down to you, verses 3:199 and 4:162 clarify the following meaning:

Those of you who believed in A

And those of you believed in B

Will be given a reward in the hereafter.

This verse doesn’t cause us to assume “there will be no revelations to follow” but it causes us to UNDERSTAND that belief is only required in the revelations sent to Muhammad saw and to those before Muhammad saw. And since Allah mentions that we must believe in all prophetic revelations that means when there is no requirement of believing in revelations after Muhammad saw, there shall be no prophet after Muhammad saw either!

The verse (4:163) was revealed as a rebuttal to Jews claiming that Hazrat Musa a.s as was the last recipient of “revelation”. The rebuttal was to prove that Allah has revealed to Muhammad saw just as he revealed to other prophets. Perhaps the reason why names of prophets are selectively mentioned is because to refer to their method of revelations. Notice, the name of Musa a.s is also not mentioned in this verse, but it is mentioned in the following verses, where Allah subhantallah mentions of “directly” speaking/revealing to Musa a.s. The verse doesn’t say “believe in the the revelation sent to Nuh a.s and the prophets after him” so there’s no way you can use it to prove that we're making assumptions with verse 2:4. 

(the following text in red is from Br Razi’s blog)

“Despite all of this proof form the Qur’an, the Non Ahmadi Muslims are forced to believe that the Messiah^as would be revealed to. Indeed if the latter day messiah is a prophet according to Allah, than of course he would be revealed to as Sahih Muslim states:

“Allah would reveal to Isa these words: I have brought forth from amongst My servants such people against whom none would be able to fight; you take these people safely to Tur.” (Sahih Muslim 2937a)”

The hadith aforementioned doesn’t raise any disputes for a Muslim who believes “prophetic revelations” have ended. The content of this hadith doesn’t require “propagation” to other Muslims. This could merely be an “Ilhaam” that assures Hazrat Esa A.S of Allah’s foreshadow and mercy and provides a solution. Again, this hadith doesn’t prove anything to the effect that “prophetic revelations” will continue. Perhaps, one thing you might also want to notice, this information is already a part of the ahadith, related to us by Muhammad saw. 

Conclusion:

Your whole argument has been rendered inconsistent because of the fact that you have not even understood the “type” of revelation verse 2:4 speaks of. You were also mistaken to believe that Muslims believe “all kinds” of revelations have ended, yet in reality we only believe prophetic revelations have ended. The reason why we believe that is so because it is necessary for a prophet to receive “prophetic revelations” and then call people to adhere to them. And since, we are only required to believe in the revelations sent to former prophets and those sent to Muhammad saw, it is made clear that no other prophet is to follow Muhammad saw.