Re: Brigitte Gabriel:A Brief History of Islam (1400 shocking years of Islam in 5 min, the undeniable truth) refuted -Part 1

Brigitte Gabriel claimed: 

"He (Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him) started preaching in his own city Mecca. He tried to recruit sons and followers to spread his religion and he tried for twelve years and failed. And after twelve years he was only able to recruit his immediate family and friends. So he decided if I go to Medina, which was the Jewish hub of Arabia, the business hub where the Jews lived: If I go there and preach my religion to them if they respect me that will buy me respect and stature with my own people who will then respect me."

The truth is that the Prophet and his people were tortured, murdered and eventually they were forcefully exiled out of Makkah. Even when the Muslims settled to get on with their lives they were still hunted down to be killed just for abandoning their former polytheistic faith:

Persecutions

Having fully perceived that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) could never be desisted from his Call, Quraish, in a desperate attempt to quell the tidal wave of the Call, resorted to other cheap means acting from base motives:

1. Scoffing, degrading, ridiculing, belying and laughter-instigating cheap manners, all of which levelled at the new converts in general, and the person of Muhammad (Peace be upon him) in particular, with the aim of dragging the spirit of despair into their morale, and slackening their ardent zealotry. They used to denounce the Prophet (Peace be upon him) as a man possessed by a jinn, or an insane person:
   

And they say: O you [Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] to whom the Dhikr (the Qur'an) has been sent down! Verily, you are a mad man. [15:6]

or a liar practising witchcraft,

And they (Arab pagans) wonder that a warner [Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] has come to them from among themselves! And the disbelievers say: This [Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] is a sorcerer, a liar. [38:4].

Their eyes would also look at the good man as if they would eat him up ' , or trip him up, or disturb him from the position of stability or firmness. They used all sorts of terms of abuse madman' or one possessed by an evil spirit', and so on:

And verily, those who disbelieve would almost make you slip with their eyes through hatreds when they hear the Reminder (the Qur'an), and they say: Verily, he [Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] is a madman! [68:51]

Amongst the early converts, there was a group who had unfortunately no strong clan at their back to support them. These innocent souls were ridiculed and jeered in season and out of season. Referring to such people, the highbrow Quraish aristocrats used repeatedly to ask the Prophet (Peace be upon him), with jest and scorn:

Allah has favoured from amongst us? [6:53]

And Allah said:

Does not Allah know best those who are grateful? [6:53]

The wicked used to laugh at the righteous in many ways:

1. They would inwardly laugh at their Faith, because they felt themselves so superior.
   
2. In public places, when the righteous passed, they used to insult and wink at them,
   
3. In their own houses, they would run them down.
   
4. Whenever and wherever they saw them, they reproached and called them fools who had lost their way. In the Hereafter, all these tricks and falsehoods will be shown for what they are, and the tables will be reversed. Allâh had said:

Verily! (During the worldly life) those who committed crimes used to laugh at those who believed; and whenever they passed by them, used to wink one to another (in mockery); and when they returned to their own people, they would return jesting; and when they saw them, they said: Verily! These have indeed gone astry!' But they (disbelievers, sinners) had not been sent as watchers over them (the believers). [83:29-33]

2. Distorting Muhammad's teachings, evoking ambiguities, circulating false propaganda; forging groundless allegations concerning his doctrines, person and character, and going to excess in such a manner in order to screen off any scope of sound contemplation from the public. With respect to the Qur'an, they used to allege that it was:
   

Tales of the ancients, which he [Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon. [25:5]

The iniquitous went on ceaselessly inculcating in people's ears that the Qur'an was not a true Revelation:

This (the Qur'an) is nothing but a lie that he [Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] has invented, and others have helped him at it. [25:4]

The wicked would also attribute to men of Allâh just such motives and springs of action as they themselves would be guilty of in such circumstances. The pagans and those who were hostile to the revelation of Allâh and Islam, could not understand how such wonderful verses could flow from the tongue of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) without having someone to teach, and claimed:

It is only a human being who teaches him. [16:103]

They also raised another baseless and superficial objection:

Why does this Messenger [Muhammad (Peace be upon him) ] eat food and walk about in the markets (like ourselves)? [25:7]

They were sadly ignorant and painfully at fault for they could not perceive that a teacher for mankind is one who shares their nature, mingles intheir life, is acquainted with their doings, and sympathises with their joys and sorrows.

The Noble Qur'an has vehemently refuted their charges and allegations and has explained that the utterances of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) are the Revelations of the Lord and their nature and contents provide a bold challenge to those who attribute his Prophetic expressions to some base origin, at times to the mental throes of a dreaming reformer, at others to the effusion of a frenzied poet or the incoherent drivelling of an insane man.

3. Contrasting the Qur'an with the mythology of the ancients in order to distract people's interests from Allâh's Words. Once An-Nadr bin Harith addressed the Quraishites in the following manner: O Quraish! You have experienced an unprecedented phenomenon before which you have so far been desperately helpless. Muhammad (Peace be upon him) grew up here among you and always proved to be highly obliging, the most truthful and trustworthy young man. However, later on when he reached manhood, he began to preach a new faith alien to your society, and opposed to your liking so you began to denounce him at a time as a sorcerer, at another as a soothsayer, a poet, or even an insane man. I swear by Allâh he is not anyone of those. He is not interested in blowing on knots as magicians are, nor do his words belong to the world of soothsaying; he is not a poet either, for his mentality is not that of a rambler, nor is he insane because he has never been witnessed to develop any sort of hallucinations or insinuations peculiar to madmen. O people of Quraish, it is really a serious issue and I recommend that you reconsider your attitude.
   

It is narrated that An-Nadr, at a later stage, headed for Heerah where he got conversant with the traditions of the kings of Persia and the accounts of people like Rustum and Asphandiar, and then returned to Makkah. Here he would always shadow the Messenger's steps in whatever audiences the later held to preach the new faith and to caution people against Allâh's wrath. An-Nadr would directly follow the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and narrate to the same audience long tales about those people of Persia. He would then always append his talk with a question cunningly inquiring if he did not outdo Muhammad (Peace be upon him). Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) related that An-Nadr used to purchase songstresses who would through their bodily charms and songs entice away from Islam anyone developing the least attachment to the Prophet (Peace be upon him); in this regard, Allâh says:

And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing, etc.) to mislead (men) from the Path of Allâh. [31:6]

4. In a fresh attempt to dissuade Muhammad (Peace be upon him) from his principled stand, Quraish invited him to compromise on his teachings and come to terms with their pre-Islamic practices in such a way that he quits some of his religion and the polytheists do the same. Allâh, the All-High says:
   

They wish that you should compromise (in religion out of courtesy) with them, so they (too) would compromise with you. [68:9].

On the authority of Ibn Jareer and At-Tabarani, the idolaters offered that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) worship their gods for a year, and they worship his Lord for a year. In another version, they said: If you accept our gods, we would worship yours. Ibn Ishaq related that Al-Aswad bin Al-Muttalib, Al-Waleed bin Al-Mugheerah, Omaiyah bin Khalaf and Al-As bin Wa'il As-Sahmy, a constellation of influential polytheists, intercepted the Prophet (Peace be upon him) while he was circumambulating in the Holy Sanctuary, and offered him to worship that they worshipped, and they worship that he worshipped so that, according to them, both parties would reach a common denominator. They added Should the Lord you worship prove to be better than ours, then it will be so much better for us, but if our gods proved to be better than yours, then you would have benefit from it. Allâh, the Exalted, was decisive on the spot and revealed the following Chapter:

Say: O Al-Kâfirûn (disbelievers in Allâh, in His Oneness, in His Angels, in His Books, in His Messengers, in the Day of Resurrection, in Al-Qadar, etc.)! I worship not that which you worship, nor will you worship that which I worship. And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping, nor will you worship that which I worship. To you be your religion, and to me my religion (Islamic Monotheism).(Safy Arrahman, the sealed nectar)

 

The failed plot:

Now that all the schemes and conspiracof Quraish had failed, they resorted to their old practices of persecution and inflicting tortures on the Muslims in a more serious and brutal manner than ever before. They also began to nurse the idea of killing the Prophet (Peace be upon him). In fact, contrary to their expectations, this new method and this very idea served indirectly to consolidate the Call to Islam and support it with the conversion of two staunch and mighty heroes of Makkah, i.e. Hamzah bin 'Abdul-Muttalib and 'Umar bin Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him). 

THE FIRST ‘AQABAH PLEDGE

Six Madinese who embraced Islam in the pilgrimage season in the eleventh year of Prophethood. They promised to communicate the Message of Islam to their townsfolk. 

 The following year, on the occasion of the pilgrimage, there came a group of twelve disciples ready to acknowledge Muhammad as their Prophet. They avowed their faith in Muhammad (Peace be upon him) as a Prophet and swore: “We will not worship any one but one Allah; we will not steal; neither will we commit adultery, nor kill our children; we will not utter slander, intentionally forging falsehood and we will not disobey you in any just matter.” When they had taken the pledge, Muhammad (Peace be upon him) said: “He who carries it out, Allâh will reward him; and who neglects anything and is afflicted in this world, it may prove redemption for him in the Hereafter; and if the sin remains hidden from the eyes of the men and no grief comes to him, then his affair is with Allâh. He may forgive him or He may not.” 

THE MUSLIM ENVOY IN MADINAH: 

 After the Pledge (in the form of an oath had been taken) the Prophet (Peace be upon him) sent to Yathrib (Madinah) Mus‘ab bin ‘Umair Al-‘Abdari, (May Allah be pleased with him) the first Muslim ‘ambassador’ to teach the people there the doctrines of Islam, give them practical guidance and make attempts at propagating the Islam among those who still professed polytheism. 

The Second ‘Aqabah Pledge

The next year, thirteenth of Prophethood, June 622 A.D., during the pilgrimage season, over seventy converts from Madinah came in the trail of their polytheist people to perform the rituals of pilgrimage in Makkah. The oft-repeated question amongst them was “Isn’t it high time we protect Muhammad instead of leaving him forsaken, deserted and stumbling in the hillocks of Makkah?” 

So, we have examined why Prophet Muhammad migrated to Madinah with God's permission and the circumstances that surrounded this event.

Mudejar: Spanish Muslim community

Mudejar, Spanish Mudéjar, (from Arabic mudajjan, “permitted to remain”),الـ موديخار/ الـمُدجَّـنون " any of the Muslims who remained in Spain after the Reconquista, or Christian reconquest, of the Iberian Peninsula (11th–15th century). 

In return for the payment of a poll tax, the Mudejars—most of whom converted to Islam after the Arab invasion of Spain in the 8th century—were a protected minority, allowed to retain their own religion, language, and customs. With leaders assigned by the local Christian princes, they formed separate communities and quarters in larger towns, where they were subject to their own Muslim laws.

The Mudejars were highly skilled craftsmen who created an extremely successful mixture of Arabic and Spanish artistic elements. The Mudejar style is marked by the frequent use of the horseshoe arch and the vault, and it distinguishes the church and palace architecture of Toledo, Córdoba, Sevilla (Seville), and Valencia. The Mudejar hand is also evident in the ornamentation of wood and ivory, metalwork, ceramics, and textiles; and their lustre pottery is second only to that of the Chinese.

By the 13th century, the Mudejars, especially those in the kingdom of Castile, had abandoned Arabic for the Castilian spoken by their Christian neighbours. They continued to write in Arabic, however, giving rise to their characteristic aljamiado literature.

Although valued for their artistic and economic contributions, the Mudejars faced increasing difficulties as Christian princes strengthened their grip on Spain, imposing an intolerable tax burden on the Mudejars and demanding forced labour and military service from them. The Mudejars also were expected to wear distinctive clothing and by the 14th century were forbidden to pray in public. When Granada, the last Muslim stronghold in Spain, fell in 1492, the situation of the Mudejars deteriorated even more rapidly. They were now forced to leave the country or convert to Christianity. Those who stayed and accepted baptism, the Moriscos (Spanish: “Little Moors”), often did not truly convert and practiced their Islamic faith secretly. Christian authorities continued to persecute them, and by 1614 the last of an estimated 3,000,000 Spanish Muslims had been expelled from the peninsula.

Source: Encyclopædia Britannica

SHARIAH-The Islamic Law

What is ‘SHARIAH’?

Well Shariah is the Islamic Law. It is the religious legal system that governs the political,social,economical, and moral duties of faithful Muslims.The sources of Islam on which all beliefs, principles and rulings are based are represented by the two Revelations: the Qur’an and Sunnah. This is what is implied by Islam being a divinely-revealed religion: its pillars are based on infallible texts that were sent down from heaven, which are represented in the verses of the Holy Qur’an and the texts of the saheeh Prophetic Sunnah. From these two sources the scholars derived other principles on which rulings may be based. Some scholars called them the sources of sharee’ah or the sources of Islamic legislation. They are: ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) and qiyaas (analogy). Imam al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: No one has any right whatsoever to say that something is halaal or haraam except on the basis of knowledge, and the basis of knowledge is a text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah, or ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) or qiyaas (analogy).

But, Unfortunately the term Shariah gets people excited. And as soon as the term Shariah is mentioned People’s imagination  goes to hands and heads getting chopped off. Thanks to Media!

Time for Education

Out of the 6236 verses of the Quran, less than 9% are about law or legal issues.When analysing a typical work of Islamic “law”, we can see that 65% of it is not even “law,” instead it is personal custom and devotion.If we took the 35% of Islamic legal compendiums dealing with contracts, family law, and state power as a derived from the Quran, that would be only 2.45% of the Quran. Only 5% of those works deals with issues of state power, which if one claimed was being drawn from the Quran directly would account for only 0.35% of the verses of the Quran.

and,

So don’t fall into propaganda. Learn and educate yourself by directly going to Islamic Sources and not to any Polemical and Orientalists works.

Addendum: These charts were created after analyzing the number of verses on law, approximated by most classical scholars to be 500 in number, then comparing those on a granular basis to the overall number of verse 6236. The percentages for the categories used, other than law and related topics, are approximations due to the overlap in topics. The categories themselves are taken from Ibn Ashour’s introduction to his al-Tahrir wal-Tanweer, an extensive exegesis of the Quran. The categories used in the second slide are found in almost every standard work of Islamic law (fiqh) and the percentages here are approximations based on chapter length and topical coverage in those works as a whole.

Source:  https://izhaarulhaqq.wordpress.com//

The Incoherence of William Lane Craig

By karkooshy

Introduction

William Lane Craig is without a doubt one of the top representatives for Christianity alive today. With countless debates against renowned opponents, he does a very good job thrashing the atheists who debate him. Dr.Craig’s primary argument against atheists for the existence of God is what he calls the “Kalam Cosmological Argument” (KCA for short from now onwards).

The KCA in Dr.Craig's words:
P1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.
P2. The universe began to exist.
C1. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

In this topic I will attempt to show why the KCA is incompatible with the Christian conception of God. This is because the KCA reaches conclusions that fundamentally contradict the Christian faith. Most significantly the conclusion that God is changeless.

The KCA and the Changelessness of God

One of the conclusions that follows from the KCA is that God is changeless. This is mainly because the KCA depends on the fact that the world changes in order to prove that the world began to exist (which is the second premise of the argument). Three reasons for the emergence of all changes will be briefly listed below:

-1- “Change” necessitates a new beginning. For a being that exists, "change" means a transition from one state (state-1) to another (state-2). When state-1 terminates, state-2 emerges. According to the first premise of the KCA, everything that emerges into existence is created. And since state-2 began to exist, state-2 is created. Thus to claim that God changes, is to claim that God is attributed with states that come and go. Those emerging states would be (according to the KCA) created. For the claimant, this means that God is at least in part created.

-2- It’s impossible for an infinity to come to an end, and the past ends with the present moment. From this we can know that the number of events (or changes) in the past is finite. As such there was a “first event” that emerged into existence. According to the first premise of the KCA, this first event would be in need of a Creator since it began to exist. If this creator was another event then it would not solve the problems of contingency, but would only push the goalposts back a step and extend the problem (this creator-event would itself be contingent upon a prior creator since it began to exist). Therefore the true Creator cannot be an event.

-3- Because a changing being accepts a multiplicity of states (either state-1 or state-2… etc.) then those states do not exist necessarily in of themselves. The first state terminated (it is succeeded by its non-existence) and the second began to exist (it is preceded by its non-existence). Therefore to claim that God changes, is to claim that He is attributed with states that do not exist necessarily. This by extension means God Himself does not exist necessarily. What follows from such a claim is that God is created.

In short, it would be hypocritical to claim that the world is emergent because it changes, but to then turn around and maintain that God is both eternal and changing. For this reason, one of the most fundamental conclusions of the KCA is that God is changeless.

The Incompatibility of Christianity

Dr.Craig understands that the KCA necessitates a changeless Creator, so the above is not the point of contention.

We find Dr.Craig writing in his article on the KCA: “Now the cause of the universe is permanently there, since it is timeless”

And in the same article he writes: "But one way to think about it is to envision God existing alone without the universe as changeless and timeless"

concluding his article with: “Ghazali’s cosmological argument thus gives us powerful grounds for believing in the existence of a beginningless, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, changeless, immaterial, enormously powerful, Personal Creator of the universe.”

However, the changelessness of God is very problematic for Christianity since Christians believe in an incarnation. So despite Dr.Craig’s admission that God is changeless, we find him preaching that the changeless Creator changed into a man, who walked and talked with the humans on earth, ate, slept, died and was resurrected.

How does Dr.Craig resolve this obvious contradiction between the KCA and Christianity? He does this by proposing that the changeless Creator entered time after creating time, and could since then change. Dr.Craig says in 1:07 of this video: “God is timeless without creation, and He is temporal since the moment of creation. So the decision to create on God’s part, is a decision to enter into time…”

And in the article he claims: “His free act of creation is a temporal event simultaneous with the universe’s coming into being. Therefore, God enters into time when He creates the universe. God is thus timeless without the universe and in time with the universe.”

Unfortunately Dr.Craig’s response does not solve anything. Dr.Craig argues that God must enter into time for God to change. However, this “entry into time” (which is supposedly the prerequisite to change) is itself an emergent temporal event. After all, a transition from timelessness to temporality is a change. So you’re still left with the exact same problem; the changing changeless Creator. In other words, since “entry to time” is a change, what Dr.Craig’s response boils down to is that “the changeless God must change before He can change” and that’s begging the question if anything at all.

Conclusion

The only way to maintain the KCA, is to believe that God is absolutely changeless. This is impossible on the Christian worldview, since Christians believe in the incarnation. So if Dr. William Lane Craig is consistent, he would either abandon the KCA or abandon his Christianity.

New Atheism Destroyed !

New Atheism Destroyed

A new illogical trend has emerged from the many illogical man-made religions that are out there. Intelligent thinking people have been turned off by the many Man-Made religions in the world, while at the same time they have done something even more illogical which is to deny the Creator who created them and this entire universe.

In this exciting Episode our guest is logically destroying the New Atheism. Thanks for tuning in! Enjoy !

Link: http://www.thedeenshow.com/new-atheism-destroyed/

Why I Left Atheism

Story of a young English man from Britain. Raised in a non-religious secular family, Believing science had all the answers and unhappy with the society around him. Having a Muslim friend who used to tell him about God and Islam he decided that it will not harm him and he had nothing to lose to find out for himself by looking into religion, and so his spiritual journey began.

Link: http://www.thedeenshow.com/why-i-left-atheism/

Qadianism (Ahmadiyya): ALL MUSLIMS ARE INFIDELS (KAFIRS)

Ahmadiyya: ALL MUSLIMS ARE INFIDELS (KAFIRS)

Ahmadiyya Jamaat and their followers today pretend to be the champions of Islam, claiming to have exemplary character. They go to extra length to advertise that Muslims have labelled them Kaafir whereas they are very peace-loving sect of Islam, who has never labelled anyone KAAFIR. They raise the slogan: LOVE FOR ALL, HATRED FOR NONE. However in real life all these claims fly in the face. The founder of Ahmadiyya Movement, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, has this to say about the Muslims (non-Ahmadi Muslims)

"Except for the CHILDREN OF PROSTITUTE, whose hearts have been sealed by God, everyone else believes in me and has accepted me."  (Aina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Roohani Khazain vol.5 p.547)
 
"God has revealed to me that anyone to whom my message has reached and he has not accepted me , he is not a muslim." (Letter of Mirza to Dr. Abdul Hakeem Khan Patialvi)
 
"I have God's inspiration that he who does not follow you and will not enter your Ba'ith and remain your opponent, he is disobedient of God and His Prophet, Hellish." (Advertisement in M'ayaar-ul-Akhyar by Mirza Ghulam p.8)
 
"Thus remember as God has informed me, it is forbidden and absolutely forbidden to pray behind any disbeliever and hesitant; but is should be that your imam should be one of you." (Arbaeen No 3, Roohani Khazain vol.17 p.417 footnote)
 
Some one asked a question and Mirza has replied to it. Both are mentioned in his book, Haqeeqat-ul-Wahi. I quote:

"Question: Huzoor-e-aali has mentioned in thousands of places that it is not at all right to call KAFIR a Kalima-go (one who recites a Kalima) and an Ahle-Qibla. It is quite obvious that except those Momineen who become Kafir by rejecting you, just by not accepting you no one becomes a Kafir. But you write to Abdul Hakeem Khan that anyone who has received my message and he has not accepted me, he is not Muslim. There is contradiction between this statement and the statements in previous books. Earlier in Tiryaq-ul-Quloob etc you had mentioned that no one becomes Kafir by not accepting you and now you are writing that by rejecting me he becomes a Kafir.
Answer: This is strange that you consider the person who rejects me and the person who calls me Kafir as two different persons, whereas in the eyes of God he is the same type; because he who does not accept me is because he considers me a fabricator.... apart from this, he who does not accept me, he does not believe in God and His Prophet as well, because there is God's and his Prophet's prophecy regarding me"  (Haqeeqat-ul-Wahi, Roohani Khazain vol.22 p.167)


"It is our obligation that we do not consider non-ahmadis as muslims and do not pray behind them, because for us they have rejected one prophet (Mirza Ghulam) of God. This is a religious matter and no one has any right to do anything in it."  (Anwar-e-Khilafat, by Mirza Mahmood, Khalifa 2, p.90)
 
"All muslims who are not included in the initiation of Maseeh Mowood, even if they have not heard the name of Maseeh Mowood, they are Kafir and out of the fold of Islam. I admit that these are my beliefs." (Aina-e-Sadaqat, by Mirza Mahmood, 2nd Khalifa, p.35) 

"Every one who accepts Moses but not Eesa or accepts Eesa but not Mohammad or accepts Mohammad but not Maseeh Mowood, he is not only Kafir but a hardened Kafir and is out of the fold of Islam. (Kalimat-alFasl by Mirza Basheer Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam p.110)
 
Question: "Is it permitted to say May God Bless the departed soul, forgive him and send him to Paradise for a person who was not included in Ahmadiyyat?"
Answer: "The KUFR of non-Ahmadis is proven by evident signs and it is not permitted to ask for forgiveness for non-believers (KUFFAR)."  (Al-Fazl Qadian vol.8, No. 59, 7th Feb 1921)
 
"Non-Ahmadis are the disbelievers therefore their funeral prayers should not be offered, but if an infant of non-ahmadi dies, why should we not pray his funaral prayer, he is not a disbeliever of Maseeh Mowood? I ask the inquirer, that if this is true than why don't we offer funeral prayer of a Hindu or a Christian child? How many people offer their funeral prayer?" (Anwar-e-Khilafat, Mirza Mahmood, 2nd Khalifa, p.93)
 
"It is the order of Hazrat Maseeh Mowood and firm order that no ahmadi should give his daughter to non-ahmadi. It is obligatory on every ahmadi to carry it out..... there is great loss in it, besides this marriage is not permitted." (Barakat-e-Khilafat by Mirza Mehmood p.73)
 
"Our prayers are separate from Non-ahmadis, it is forbidden to give our girls to them, we are stopped to offer their funeral prayers. Now what is left that we can participate with them? There are only two kinds of relations - religious and worldly. For religious relations, it is the gathering for prayers and for worldly relations, it is the marriage and both are forbidden for us." (Mirza Basheer Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam, Kalimat alFasl p.169)
 
"The point is now quite clear. If it is 'Kufr' (infidelity) to deny the Gracious Prophet (Muhammad pbuh), it must also be 'Kufr' to deny the Promised Messiah, because the Promised Messiah is in no way a separate being from the Gracious Prophet; rather he is the same (Muhammad incarnate). If anyone is not deemed a Kafir for denying the Promised Messiah, then anyone else who denies the Gracious Prophet also cannot be considered a Kafir. How is it possible that denying him in his first birth as Prophet should be regarded as Kufr, but denying him in his (reincarnated) second birth as prophet should not be regarded as Kufr, when, as claimed by the Promised Messiah, his (Mirza's birth as Muhammad incarnate) spiritual attainment is stronger, complete and severe." (Kalimatul Fasl, pages 146-147, as cited in the Review of Religions, dated March-April 1915)
 
"Any person who believes in Moses but does not believe in Christ, or believes in Christ but does not believe in Muhammad, or believes in Muhammad but does not believe in the Promised Messiah, is not only a Kafir, but a 'pakka' (confirmed) Kafir, and (he is) out of the fold of Islam." (Kalimatul Fasl, page 110, by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, M.A.)
 
"All such Muslims who did not swear allegiance to the promised Masih (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian), even though they did not hear the name of the Promised Masih, are Kafir and debarred from the fold of Islam." (Aiena-e-Sadaqat, page 35, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad Qadiani).
source