The Supernatural Powers of Solomon in the Koran,Part 1

I doubt you were ever referred to the metaphorical importance of such Quranic verses. The language of birds is not a literal dialogue between a physical bird and Solomon. The metaphor in this case shows how Solomon was able to master the use of birds as sending messages to others, kind of like ‘pigeon mail’. In the example of the ants it is known that many Arabian tribes where named after animals. But of course any meaning of such verses any Sunni or other sect will tell you is some kind of miracle and that such a language did literally exist. Next time save yourself the effort and psychodrama and refer to the only logical explanations of such supernatural seeming verses in the Holy Quran. http://www.alislam. o r g 

THE AHMADIYYA CULT

“A cult within Islam founded in 1889 by Ghulam Ahmed, Ahmadiyya’s believe that Ghulam Ahmed was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ, and this was the fulfillment of the messianic expectations of Christianity being Jesus Christ’s return, Judaism, Islam and other religions. In other words, they believe this was the Second Coming of Christ. They believe that Jesus survived the Crucifixion, lived to be 120 and that His tomb can be found in Kashmir (this lie surfaces in many cults following a book written by a fraudster called Nicholas Nontovich. Nontovich was proven a liar and a fraud by explorers who tried to verify even one of his findings, all were proven false). This group are [sic] very large (believed to be about 74 Million), believe they are the true Islam, and are vigorous in their condemning of Christianity. Most Ahmadiyya’s are from Pakistan or India. Many have come to America and Europe. There is a large concentration of them in England with 77 meeting centres and a main mosque in Putney.” (An Encyclopedia of Religious Cults by Shaun Aisbitt)

This brief description seems to be accurate and does not digress fundamentally from the Ahmadiyya’s own documents as well as from orthodox Islamic sources. I can only assume that the Ahmadiyyat Movement is as intolerant and arrogant as any other messianic cult or fanatical grouping but not sufficient enough for it to be considered a threat or dangerous and certainly not deserving of the punishment meted out to it by the Islamic groups in Bangladesh or Pakistan. I think it is probably the assertions of Ghulam Ahmed that he is the Messiah, Mahdi or a Prophet (not the Prophet) which annoys most of the orthodox Islamic believers as these distinctions appear meaningless and to me nonsensical. From a Christian and Islamic theological standpoint the claims of Ghulam Ahmed are supremely preposterous. Still this would not be sufficient reason to oppress or intimidate this group there must be something more compelling for that to happen.

The strongest argument against the Ahmadiyya’s is actually a constitutional and legal question not based on theology or obscurantist argument. If we accept the constitutional provisions concerning religious freedom and tolerance does this provision equally apply to groups that are intolerant and if put in a position of power would most likely subvert the rights of others practicing a different faith such as Christianity and orthodox Islam? Orthodox Islam professes tolerance but the same cannot be said of the Ahmadiyya’s. In an article written by Louis J. Hammann Ph.D. and published by The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam Inc. it is stated, “… not only did he [Ghulam Ahmed] affirm that he had ‘a special resemblance to Jesus’ but, on the negative side, that he had been sent … ‘so that I should demolish the doctrine of the cross. I have been sent,’ he goes on, ‘to break the cross and slaughter the swine.” Elsewhere in the article Ghulam Ahmed is quoted as saying that the Christian misconceptions about Jesus have had an, “unwholesome and poisonous influence of which has for long been noticed in the morals of the Muslims of this country [India].” (May 15, 1985)

In regard to orthodox Muslims, Ghulam Ahmed has reportedly stated that, “All Muslims who have not entered allegiance to Maseeh Maw’ood (Mirza) [Mirza Ghulam Ahmed] even though they have not heard the name of Maseeh Maw’ood, are kaafir and out of the fold of Islam.” (Aai’nae Sadaaqat, Page 35; Ahmadiyya’s booklet Review of Religions). This seems to have preempted the orthodox Muslims from declaring the Ahmadiyya’s as non-Muslims and most recently it is reported that, “… on the occasion of their centennial inauguration, the head of the Qadiani cult accused all the Muslim ummah to be disbelievers and liars and practically extended the Mubahala (religious prayer challenge of June 10th 1988 on General Zia ul Haq calling for his death by God) to all the Muslims.” (Idara Dawat-o-Irshad, USA)

These pronouncements if not expressly renounced by the Ahmadiyya’s should disentitle them to any protection under the constitution as their beliefs are in contradiction to the letter and spirit of the constitutional provisions and its ethos (I personally do not think the framers of the constitution had any idea what they were doing but that’s a different story) and ironically for the same reasons with Islamic doctrine also. There is no evidence however that the Ahmadiyya’s are paid agents of any State but the same cannot necessarily be said for the supporters of their cause. This does not exclude the possibility that the Ahmadiyya’s may have some nefarious design similar to secret societies in the West that have not yet been uncovered but as we would treat religious leaders (e.g. Bangla Bhai) with automatic suspicion should we not do the same for a cult that preaches intolerance or have we all become hypocrites.

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, you take no part in them in the least; their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (The Holy Quran, Al-Anaam, 6:159).