Mirza Ghulam Ahmed's arguments about signs of end of time

Question:
Do you agree with Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani's arguments, because from what I know, he was of the opinion that Dajjal, Yajooj Majooj and other signs of the end of time were allegories and not to be taken literally?

Response:
My opinion is completely different from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's and his followers'. They insist that it is a part of a Muslim's belief that Eesaa, alaihisssalaam, has to return before the Judgement Day. They also claim on the basis of a Qur'anic verse (3:55) that Eesaa, alaihissalaam, is already dead, and therefore his own literal return is not possible. Therefore, someone similar to Eesaa has to come to fulfill the prophecy, and that someone, they say, is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. When they come to me with their case, I tell them that the return of Eesaa is not a part of my faith - full stop. However, they have been able to convince at least some Muslims who believed Eesaa's return to be a part of their faith, and they got them converted to their belief. I just tell them that it would be a privilege for me if I get the opportunity to live in a world where Eesaa, alaihisssalaam, returns. Whether he will actually return or not is not clear to me. My conversation with them, therefore, ends in no time.

In case the prophecies about the return of Eesaa are correctly transmitted, then there doesn't seem to be anything allegorical in them. The prophecies of Dajjal and Yajooj Majooj are more likely to be allegorical, although I wouldn't mind if they turn out to be literal.

Views: 658