Is Denying Finality Of Prophet Muhammad (SWS) Prophethood Kufr?
I have a confusion regarding this matter. Apologies, I know this is a very controversial topic and I don’t mean to offend anyone whatsoever. I just mean to seek clarity based off the explanation provided by Ghamidi Sahab. Everything below is assuming Ghamidi Sahab’s interpretation on the Finality of Prophethood and the Second Coming of Hazrat Isa (PBUH) to be correct. Basically, my understanding is that Ahmadi people understand the Quran to be saying that Hazrat Isa (PBUH) will not return, which appears to be the correct interpretation given the evidence presented by Ghamidi Sahab. As such, they discredit any ahadith that suggest otherwise; however, the prophecy of the Messiah returning – alluded in many ahadith – is completed through Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. In contrast, the mainstream Muslim belief seems to derive an interpretation on Hazrat Isa (PBUH)’s discussion in the Quran through various ahadtih, believing him to return as a member of the current Ummah (and not a Prophet), who will fight the Anti-Christ. Bottom line – they also believe that the Messiah is returning, but through Hazrat Isa (PBUH). My question is – to what extent are the claims here similar? In the case of Ahmadi people, a correct interpretation of the Quran is leading them to add a personality and associated revelations into Islam, otherwise unsanctioned by Allah SWT. On the other hand, false events, prophecies, and status is being ascribed to Hazrat Isa (PBUH), which one could argue is also unsanctioned by Allah SWT. In both cases, is the finality of prophethood through Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) not being undermined by both parties? Either way, their interpretations are backed by the return of the Messiah, which – according to them – does not nullify the finality of Prophethood. If so, would Ghamidi Sahab’s explanation on kufar in the video above treat these interpretations differently? I hope the question is clear.