The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Is Ahmadiyya Islam a false branch of Islam?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,240 times Debate No: 79834
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (0)




The Ahmadiyyas are not in the right spiritual path no matter how good of a people they may be and I'll explain why. For those who don't understand their view on Islam, the Ahmadiyyas are the Mormons of Islam, absurdly claiming that their "prophet" is of God and has the answer for all of Islams problems today.In order to truly understand the falsity of the Ahmadiyyas, we must take a trip to the past, where the British were invading India. As every British colonist knows, the British used their trading companies to enter countries and after it was established, the military would be sent to guard those trading routes which basically annexes that land into their empire. However it was a different case in India. The one thing the Britsh feared more than anything, was the Muslims. In every Muslim dominated country that the Brits knocked on, fierce Islamic opposition would face them and this was no different with the Muslims of India.In 1857, after nearly a 1000 years of peaceful rule, the British snatched power from the Muslims. But, one interesting thing to note is that, the "prophet" and his family were not opposed with the British take over and murder of Muslim men women and children.In fact, in one of the books the "prophet" wrote, he proudly boasted, "My father was a well-known landlord in this country and he enjoyed great eminence in the Government's offices. He was a true devotee and well wisher of the British Government. In the mutiny of 1857 (the Muslim independence movement against colonialism is called 'mutiny' by Mirza), my father supplied fifty horses and riders to aid the British Government. For this favor to the Government, he was very popular among the officials."(Izala-e-Auham, P. 58, footnote).There are many indications where the "prophet" writes himself that he and his family are loyal subjects to the British and aid them in their take over of India. Insterestingly, the Holy Quran says, " O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: THey will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom."(Al-Imran, 3:118)So, in conclusion, the Ahmadiyya belief is the spawn of the British, designed to take the attention of the true Muslims away from the theft and uprise of the British Crown and focus of the "internal" conflist that is now arisen. A British Officer sums this conclusion up beautifully by saying the following, "We only request that the government should take good care of this self-implanted seedling family which has continually proven itself to be a faithful and devoted familyfor fifty years and about which there are issued letters from the British government attesting to their faithfulness and servitude for a long time."What do you think? False Prophet or Traitor....or both?


Ahmadiyya a sect of Islam they follow the five pillars and six article of Islamic faith, they accept the Quran, they pray toward Mecca and practice the Sunnah, they also believe in the authority of the Hadiths. Ahmadis claim their prophet is the Mahdi who was prophesied by the prophet Muhammad, as a redeemer of Islam. I doubt the British had any fear of unique Muslims that was more so than their fears of Sikhs and Hindus who at times also caused problems for the British, India is a vast place and what the British felt about Muslims and other groups depended on which region of India they were situated in. Also while there was some Islamic resistance to the British, lots of Muslims societies simply joined the British empire for protection and economic reasons, Dubai is a good example of this. India wasn't completely run by Muslims before British conquest, Maratha empire was Hindu there was also the Sikh empire the ruled much of Pakistan and Northwest India, the subcontinent by Muslims but rather by local rulers of many faiths. There was no great conflict between Islam and the British as you seem to suggest. Their prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, probably supported the British because he lived in the Sikh empire which treated Muslims as second class citizens and the British probably enjoyed the support in many Muslims from that empire. While I am not a Muslim i think Ahmadis are still Muslim.
Debate Round No. 1


persianimmortal forfeited this round.


The other thing i forgot to mention about the rebellion of 1857 is that it was not a Muslim rebellion it was an Indian rebellion with both Muslims and Hindus participating in the uprising. Also another reason he was probably opposed to the rebellion is because the rebellion did not taken place in the Punjab so it would have almost been a foreign rebellion in his eyes.
Debate Round No. 2


persianimmortal forfeited this round.


sysnthesis-anarchists forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


I apologize for the tardiness of my reply; I have been dealing with final exams.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claims greatness but continually contradicts himself on numerous occasions. So let us begin:
Before we get into this, we must understand that there is a difference between Nabi (Like Aaron was to Moses) and Rasool (the Messenger that God Appoints). Nabi is the one who is guided (indirectly) by Allah to better spread the Message that God had already given to the Rasool. The Rasool is the one with whom Allah talks directly and is granted with a Book of Laws and Commandments. Therefore, Messengers of God including and before the Prophet Muhammad were a Rasool AND a Nabi but no Nabi is a Rasool and there are many Nabi's who have nabis under them (lesser prophets). I hope that makes sense, if not I can clarify later.

In relation to the above paragraph, Ghulam Ahmad never claimed to be Rasool, at all. Over and over he mentions that he is a nabi. For example, he writes, "A prophet never gets education from any one and because I (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) am Nabi, so I didn't get religious education from any one. I got my education directly from Allah" (Rohani Khazain, vol 394).

It would have been understandable to call himself a "nabi" because nabi"s claim to get visions, but it"s up to the believer to investigate and deem it true or false. However the claims he makes after get weird and contradictory. Let"s have a look:

He again writes, "i was 6-7 years old when i got a teacher to teach me Persian, he taught me Quran and Persian, his name was Fazal-e-Elahi. When i was 10 years old, a molvi sahab was elected to teach me Arabic. His name was Fazal-e-Ahmad. And then there was another teacher who kept on teaching me".When i was 17-18 years old, i learned Principals", and other religious books. His name was Gul Ali Shah. My Father elected him as my servant (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad often called his teachers as his servants in his books). And molvi sahab taught me"all religious courses as much as Allah wanted"(Rohani Khazain, vol 180,181)

It"s funny because earlier he mentions that, "I am a nabi and I require no education", but later he says his father elected teachers to teach him about religion. That"makes no sense. How can someone claim something and then contradict himself right after in clear action? Furthermore, by saying "I don"t need a teacher" AFTER being taught by one, just goes to show how good of a job that teacher did to teach you everything he knows".that"s the first contradiction.

2nd Contradiction, is the claims of being Jesus. On one occasion he said "i never claimed to be Jesus. Neither do I believe that he will come back again, I am just saying that I am like him, not exact him" (Tableeg e Risalat..vol 21)
On another occasion, he says that "Jesus who was to appear is me, i am the real Jesus. Now it"s up to you to believe. For two years I was Mariam (Mother of Jesus) and was raised having the properties of Mariam, and was raised behind a certain. When 2 years passed a spirit was installed inside my tummy. When it happened i became pregnant and remained pregnant for many months, which are not more than 10 months. Then by a message from Allah I was converted from Mariam to Jesus. That is how I became Jesus son of Mariam" (kisteay e Nooh, page 68,69 Braheen e Ahmadia, vol 4, page no 556,696 Fathey 15)

Okay"loads of problems here. First statement to Mr. Ghulam Ahmad, if you think you are the return of Jesus then, make up your mind and stick to that decision, because saying you are something that you later on say you"re not, makes you look illegitimate"which you are. Second question to the Con side, do you think he is a guy or a girl or...both? He stated that he was the Mother of Christ for 2 years, described his female features, said a spirit was installed in him, then gave birth to Jesus, the same Jesus who he says that he is the return of. After "giving birth" to Jesus, apparently God told him to transform from Mariam to Jesus and that"s how he became Jesus. This completely goes against anything that is considered logical and obvious fact. In simple terms, you can"t be the mother of the child that you claim to be the return of especially when he hasn"t even left yet after birth for there to be a return, then transform from the mother to the child, because you think God told you to""in other words he has no idea what he"s talking about.

On top of his claims to be the return of Christ, he also claims to be the return of Muhammad and the Mahdi. Let's just clear something up first...Nowhere did Muhammad say that He will come back. But apparently, this Mr. Ghulam Ahmad thinks he is His return when he says that, "I'm the last prophet who appeared again, first i appeared in Mecca and now in Qadiyan" So I won't even explain that because there is no scriptural proof. Second, the Prophet Muhammad said that there will be 2 individuals guard and pave the way for the the Imam Mahdi when he comes back. This sign also did not appear before Gulam as the only people had paved the way for him was the British Colonial Government and not the 2 individuals (Qalima E 104)" So we've cleared that he's not Muhammad and He's not the Mahdi. Period.

The Muslims will pledge allegiance to the Mahdi in Makkah near the Ka"aba. The Prophet Muhammad said: "Some people of Makkah will come to him (Mahdi) and will take him out though he will be unwilling. Then they will make him accept their allegiance between the black stone and the place of Ibrahim.
(Abu Daw"d)

Point is, nobody pledged allegiance with Mirzah Ghulam in Mecca or anywhere other than the people in India, who were directly influenced by the family members of the ones closest to Mr. Ghulam Ahmad.

In conclusion, his writings are in constant contradiction. How can they be considered Muslims when the most fundamental understanding and teachings of Islam are totally ignored?? They aren't muslims...they are Ahmadiyyans, just like how mormons aren't christian..they are mormon.


in regards to the contradictions about education, ahmad's education in persian and arabic (two important languages for muslims at the time) were strictly religious education and not information he would have needed from allah. In reagrds to the quranic education, most of his leassons were simple reading of the book done by many muslims.

When he said he was pregnant it was in an allegorical sense not literally and once this "pregenancy" was over jesus's was said to b infused into him thus they were merged into one and not the same being to begin with. this is not really a contradiction.

Whether or not Ghulam ahmad was muhammed reincarnated or not is not that important as long is it does not break islamic rules. hadith Narrated by Abu Huraira is seen by some to suggest the return of muhammed.

in regards to your last point about his lack of acceptance in mecca, if ahmadiyyas were to dominate islam in the future that could still happen if he were to return (given his knack for reincarnations) and his faith is now not only in India and Pakistan but also indonesia pockets in Africa and in diaspora around the world.
Debate Round No. 4


I would like to point out that Con has not addressed each point from my previous argument but rather provides his/her feelings in summary form regarding the debate subject.
In order for you to understand this, I will break it down:

As a child, his father employed a teacher who taught Farsi and Arabic in order for him to access religious scriptures. When he was ready as teenager, his father once again hired a teacher who taught him religious principles. So his younger years wasn"t bad because he wrote about the Islamic concepts that were acceptable to the Muslim Intellectuals and community of the time. Over the years, he began claiming prophethood and that he was superior to all the Companions of Muhammad and His descendants. He claimed to be greater than Hussain (Al-Hukum, Jun 16, 1904), greater than Ali (Al-Hakam, Vol. 4, Nov 10, 1900) and many others, which is absolutely preposterous considering that they were in the lifetime of Muhammad, unlike himself.

Later, he mentions that he is a partial prophet (Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, Page 149-150) and that he is "not a full-fledged prophet" but only a partial prophet one (Touzeh-ul-Maram, Page 18). Not even Imam Ali (Shia Successor to the Prophet Muhammad), who's relationship with Muhammad was like Aaron to Moses, claimed to be a prophet of God or in communication with God (Sahih al-Bukhari 5, Bk 57, Hadith 56). This clearly shows us that Muhammad warns us of people like Ghulam who will come to make such claims and guided us away from them.

As I mentioned before he claimed that he was the Promised Mahdi, the reincarnation of Prophet Muhammad, the Return of Jesus Christ, and God Himself!!!.... I will address them each respectively:

Mr. Ghulam claimed he was the Mahdi but did not even fulfill one of the many Prophetic requirements to assume that title. The problem with him claiming this title was that he did not even defend it. In Me'ar-ul-Akhyar on page 11, he tells the reader that many people have claimed this title and they are different Mahdis each, some conquering some reasoning. So clearly he can"t defend his title with scriptural evidence and has no intention of doing so.

Mr. Ghulam claimed he was the reincarnation of His Holiness Muhammad, but as a young he had said that the coming of any prophet was impossible so what was his reason? Well in short, he had none nor did he prove this claim with ANY scriptural evidence. In fact, he says that his reincarnation is "better" than what Muhammad's station was (Al-Badr, Oct 5, 1906; Qadiani). He tells us that his miracles are a million times better than Muhammad"s (Ijaze-e-Ahmadi, Page 79; Tadhkira tul Shahadatain, Page 41), and his wish to be better than Muhammad was granted and even invites others to be better than Him (Daily Al-Fadl, Jul 17. 1992, Qadiani) which is scriptually and Divinely impossible. It is impossible, nay heretical that anyone can be greater than ANY Messenger of God, because they were the one God deemed worthy to spread His Message. I don"t need to explain anymore on this blasphemous claim. GOD IS GREATER THAN US ALL...Abraham said it, Buddha said it, Krishna said it, Jesus said it, the B"b said it, Baha'u'llah said it, Moses said it, Muhammad said it, Zoroaster said it...all of them said it and emphasized on it, and Ghulam has to say that he's greater than the choices God made... HA!...suree

Mr. Ghulam claimed he was the return of the Lord Jesus Christ the Messiah, which at this point is becoming more and more ridiculous. Again, he goes on to mention that he is greater than the Messenger chosen by God Himself to spread His Message. He tells us to FORGET Jesus Christ and believe in him instead, which to a Christian and a Muslim is utterly offensive (Dafi-ul-Bala" Page 20). Even he is confused as to what line Jesus and Muhammad come from when he says that he is the Messiah of Muhammad"s line (Khutba Ilhamia, Page 60, 61, 98)and his miracles are 3 million times more (Tatimma-i-Haqiqat-ul-Qahi, Page 68)"3 million haha" yea sure dream on buddy.

Mr. Ghulam claimed he was the All-Powerful, the All-Forgiving God (may the Almighty God forgive me for even writing this). Okay, I"ll let that sink in a little. He called himself seriously? He tells us God stands where he stands (Al-Bushra, Vol 2, Page 24) and tells us that he is the God that made the heavens and the earth and the men that walk on it (Kitab-ul-Bariya, Page 78; Aina-i-Kamalat, Page 564). The New Testament (Christian Holy Book), the Quran (the Holy Book of Islam), the Torah (Jewish Holy Book), the Bhagavad Gita (Hindu Holy Book), the Pali Canon (Bhuddist Holy Book), Al-Kitab Al-Aqdas (the Holy Book of the Baha"i Faith), the Bayan (the Babi Holy Book), the Avesta (Zoroastrian Holy Book)".ALL SAY THERE IS ONE GOD AND THERE IS NONE (I repeat) NONE LIKE HIM. Therefore, how can he say that God follows where he chooses to stand? Any religious man or woman who may read the misguided writings of the Ghulam would be utterly shocked and disgusted to see that a mere human who has no scriptural evidence other than the words he says to back up his claims.

So let"s recap so far: He claimed that he didn"t need education but in fact he got it. He claimed that he was a partial prophet which is impossible. He claimed he was better than Jesus, Muhammad and the other Messengers of God which is an insult to God"s choices and His believers. He even took a risk and said he was God, the All-Sufficing!...which is so ridiculous and unfathomable.

Now let's jump into false prophecies by Mr. Ghulam Ahmad:

"I will die either in Mekkah or Medina."
(Tadhkira, P. 591)
***The problem is, Ghulam didn't even SEE Mecca OR Medina instead died in Lahore, Pakistan and was buried in Qadian, India, north of Punjab, 3,695 km away from Mecca and 3,583 km away from Medina.***

"It is God's intention that He will bring two ladies in my wedlock. One will be virgin and the other widow. Therefore, this inspiration that is related to Bikr (virgin), it has been fulfilled and, presently by the grace of God, I have four sons from this wife. I am still waiting for the fulfillment of the inspiration regarding widow."
(Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 15, P. 201)
***Mirza Ghulam never married a widow so the rest of what he says is void***

"In February 1886, I made a declaration after receiving revelation from God that He gave me good news of marriages after this declaration and soon I shall marry women of good omen and virtue and to me will be born children from them."
(Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. 1, P. 89) & (Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. 5, P. 58)
***Mirza Ghulam made this statement when he was 46 years old and the thing is that he did not marry anyone after this prophecy.***

"Enemies wish for my death and prophecise about it. God has, however, given me the good news that I shall live for eighty (80) years or more."
(Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 19, P. 239; Mawahib-ur-Rahman, P. 21)
***Mirza Ghulam Qadiani died when he was sixty eight (68) years old.***


He challenged, his arch enemy, Allama Sanahullah, who had publicly called him a liar and an impostor and Ghulam predicted that because of the thing he said and did, he will die before him. He tells his opponent, "I pray that if I am a liar and an innovator, as you refer to me in your magazine, then I shall die during your life-time, because I know that the life-span of a liar and a corrupter is not long" (Badr, April 15, 1907). It's funny because he himself said that if he was a liar then he will be the one to die and not Sanahullah. Ghulam was generous enough to even provide his opponent the way in which he would die (Cholera). So, like any man would, Ghulam prayed to God to take out the liars of the Earth. Well, God heard his prayer alright and on May 26, 1908, Ghulam died of.....CHOLERA!! And the dude that was against him, lived for 40 years more, and continued his work like it was nobody's business. In simple terms, the liar will die first was Ghulam. (And people say there isn't a God....)

There are many, many more false prophecies that were mentioned when talking to Islamic and Christian intellectuals such as Dr. Abdul Hakim and Dr. Abdullah Khan Atham, respectively. But, I won't mention them due to the lack of characters and because the last thing God wants is the spread of such fake illusions. I dare anyone with a sane mind to go read his books yourselves.

So let's look at the Quran:
The Quran tells us that, "Who doth more wrong than those who invent a lie against Allah? They will be turned back to the presence of their Lord, and the witnesses will say, "These are the ones who lied against their Lord! Behold! the Curse of Allah is on those who do wrong!-Those who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah and would seek in it something crooked: these were they who denied the Hereafter! (The Holy Quran, Hud, 11:18-19)

If we even compare the principles set by Ghulam, we should have no doubt that he was an impostor and the same false prophet that the Holy Books of the Past spoke about. God, despite being insulted has continuously proved Ghulam's falsehood and diverted those who truly seek guidance. Therefore we must read the Holy Books carefully, we can see that in the Quran for example, it says, "evil as an example are people who reject Our signs and wrong their own souls" (The Holy Quran, Al-Araf, 7:177). Evil is the direct opposition to the clear Commandments God has provided us. So, again I ask you because you didn't answer my question: how can Ahmadiyyas say they are Muslims when every lesson, logic, reason, commandment, law, and revelation of God have ignored and disregarded and insulted? Ahmadiyyas believe in a false, lost soul.....Muslims are believers in God, the Almighty, the All-Knowing, the All-Merciful. So there is still a chance for these guys to move over to the Straight Path until its too late.

God bless and Vote for Pro


sysnthesis-anarchists forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by persianimmortal 2 years ago
You should just accept it, my friend. debates rely on proof, therefore the conditions you requested of my debate here is automatically included :)@mayahcw
Posted by mayahcw 2 years ago
Hmm... This is interesting. If I accept this debate, will you take the burden of proof (meaning I win if you cannot give enough proof to support your argument)?
Posted by persianimmortal 2 years ago
The conflict on the Succession of Muhammad was forced on the Muslims so It is impossible for a Muslim not to identify with a denomination. The only denominations they should affiliate with either Shia or Sunni and no more.
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
Not necessarily. As long as a Muslim doesn't identify with a denomination, I feel like that would mean that particular Muslim isn't breaking that command.
Posted by Yassine 2 years ago

"The Qur'an specifically commands not to make denominations, so I would say that any denomination of Islam is a false denomination as every denomination breaks a command."

- You just refuted all Muslims! Much smarts, such wow! *sarcasm*
Posted by persianimmortal 2 years ago
Pbuh = Peace be upon Him

The 2 words of the comment are Sunni Split :)
Posted by persianimmortal 2 years ago
Very true. However, in order to settle the dispute between the denominations, one must analyze the epicenter of the main split in Islam which is Shia and Sunni. After analyzing their history, we can see that the split in Islam happened not because of practices and the religion, but from a major power struggle regarding Succession that occurred after the passing of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (pbuh).

According to the Shia, there are many instances in the Qur'an and the Hadith itself where Muhammad (pbuh) indicates that Ali ibn Abi Talib will be the Successor. They also claim that the succession was not through the line of Caliphs as the Sunnis do but through Imams (specifically twelve), Startım with individe also that were from the direct blood line of Muhammad (pbuh). Although the numbers of adherents are far less than the Sunnis, numbers mean nothing in the face of solid evidence, which is what the Shias claim they have.
(Some examples include: Sahih Muslim, a prominent figure at the time states in the Hadith,"
The Islamic religion will continue until the Hour has been established, or you have been ruled by Twelve Caliphs, all of them being from the Quraysh" Hadith 4483) In this case the term "Caliph" would mean Imam as to the number of Imams that is also provided, compared to the Sunni Caliphs who number above 100. There are more examples but not enough characters :).

According to the Sunnis, Abu Bakr was the Successor of Muhammad (pbuh) and he was to lead Islam to glory. Unlike the Shias, the Sunnis believe that Abu Bakr gained authority through the majority vote of the people around at the time of the Prophet's passing (pbuh). Abu Bakr's majority voted inauguration was not attended by by the Family of Muhammad (pbuh) due to the arranging of the funeral and the forced pledging to Abu Bakr, in which Fatima miscarried at the hands of Omar.

Branches after that have minor disputes as to why they branched off but the main issue is the Shia and S
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
I wasn't even talking about Islam as a religion. The Qur'an specifically commands not to make denominations, so I would say that any denomination of Islam is a false denomination as every denomination breaks a command.
Posted by persianimmortal 2 years ago
Here's the definition of an illusion: a thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses.

Your phrase, "But in reality, Islam is not real..." has issues. You say it doesn't.....welllllll....

....To say that while in the realm of reality, Islam (which is a real, structured, lawful belief system) is not real, indicates 2 things. First, your unwillingness to look past the insane actions of fundamentalists in order to truly understand the foundation of this belief system. And the second, to say that, while something in reality that is actually real, isn't..... points to a disease called Schizophrenia, where the individual loses track of what is real and what is in your terms, an illusion.

There's a difference between knowing what you feel about a religion and what you ACTUALLY know through repeated studies, personal investigations and academic searches. Yes, Islam is wrongly perceived by people exactly like you and generalizations are made and spread based on the actions of a relitively small group of fanatics who have no logical reason for their actions and in no way represent the larger community of believers who are just as clueless about their actions as you and I are.

In conclusion, either you have schizophrenia or you're unwilling to open a book, read and more importantly ask questions.

Once again, no offence...just making a point :) c96;
Posted by canis 2 years ago
...But in reality islam is not real. it is limited to the 2D pages of af comic book...Batman/islam..No difference. just different illusions...
No votes have been placed for this debate.