Islam vs Qadiyani Religion: A Quranic, Hadith-Based, and Linguistic Analysis of the Asrar Rashid–Ahmadiyya Debate

Participants

Sheikh Asrar Rashid — representing mainstream Muslims. He took the affirmative position: Jesus is alive in the heavens with his earthly body.

Razul Numan Sahib (Razi) — representing the Qadiyani Jamaat. He took the negative position: Jesus has died a natural death and is not alive in the heavens.

Raheel Sahib — moderator, from the Qadiyani Jamaat, accepted as neutral by both parties. His role was timekeeping and enforcing the agreed conditions.

The Agreed Rules: A Debate Within a Box

The conditions signed by both parties were unusually strict and became a recurring source of contention throughout the debate. The key restrictions:

Source limitation: Arguments must be based on (1) the Holy Quran, (2) narrations found in Sahih Bukhari, and (3) narrations found in Sahih Muslim only. Scholars could be cited solely for the purpose of authenticating narrators or discussing chains of transmission — not as general theological authorities.

Topic restriction: Neither party may cite Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's books as source material. Discussion of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's works could arise only if the opponent brought it up first, allowing citation of the opponent's own statements.

Conduct: No abusive language, no attacks on the character of religious leaders.

Format: 7-minute introductions, 25-minute opening statements, 10-minute first rebuttals, 5-minute second rebuttals, 10-minute closing statements, 30-minute cross-examination (5 questions each, alternating, 3 minutes per answer), then audience Q&A (4 questions from each side, 3 minutes per answer).

These restrictions shaped every exchange. Both debaters repeatedly appealed to the moderator when they believed the other had cited an impermissible source — creating a secondary meta-debate about what was and was not within bounds that ran alongside the theological arguments.

Among the theological questions in which the difference between the mainstream Muslim position and the Ahmadiyya/Qadiani position becomes most visible is the question of Sayyiduna Isa ibn Maryam : Was he killed? Was he crucified? Did he die a natural death? Was he raised to Allah? Is he alive in the heavens? Will he descend before the Day of Judgement?

The Crux of the Debate:

Is Hazrat Isa alive in the heavens with his earthly body according to the Holy Quran and the authentic narrations of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim?

The sole question for this day was whether Jesus is, right now, alive in the heavens with his physical, earthly body — and whether this can be proven from the Quran, Sahih Bukhari, and Sahih Muslim.

This question itself is not merely historical. It touches tafsir, Arabic grammar, hadith methodology, eschatology, and the boundaries of mainstream Islamic creed. The mainstream Muslim position, represented in the debate by Sheikh Asrar Rashid, is that Sayyiduna Isa (Jesus ) was neither killed nor crucified, but was raised by Allah with body and soul, remains alive in the heavens, and will descend near the end of time. The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani position, represented by Razi Sahib, is that Isa died a natural death, is not physically alive in the heavens, and will not descend bodily.

After examining the debate, the Quranic verses, the hadith texts, and the methodological structure of both arguments, the stronger and sounder conclusion is that Sheikh Asrar Rashid was correct in the substance of his argument. The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani case presented a sharp lexical challenge around the word tawaffa, but it failed to account for the full Quranic context, the grammar of refutation in Surah Al-Nisa, the explicit hadith of descent in Bukhari and Muslim, and the inherited understanding of the Muslim Ummah.

1. The Muslim Position in Brief

The mainstream Muslim position may be summarized as follows:

1. The Jews did not kill Sayyiduna Isa .
2. They did not crucify him.
3. Allah saved him from their plot.
4. Allah raised him to Himself.
5. This raising was not merely an elevation of rank, but a real raising of Isa with body and soul.
6. He remains alive in the heavens by Allah’s power.
7. He will descend before the Day of Judgement.
8. His descent will be a real descent, not a metaphor for the appearance of another person.
9. He will judge by the Shariah of Prophet Muhammad , break the cross, kill the swine, abolish jizyah, slay the Dajjal, and establish justice.
10. He will later die a natural death, and this will complete his earthly life-cycle.

This position is not built on one isolated word. It is built on the convergence of Quran, hadith, Arabic usage, and the transmitted understanding of Muslims.

2. The Central Quranic Text: Surah Al-Nisa 4:157–158

Allah Almighty says:

  وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ مَا لَهُمْ بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا 157 بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا 158 ¹

  And because of their saying: ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus () son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah,’ whereas they neither killed him nor crucified him. Rather, it was made to appear so to them; someone was made to resemble Jesus () for them. And indeed, those who differ concerning him are certainly in doubt about this matter of his killing. They have no knowledge of the reality of what happened, except that they follow conjecture. And they certainly did not kill Jesus (). Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself, and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

This is the foundation of the issue.

The verse does not merely say that the Jews failed in a minor plan. It negates their claim in three emphatic ways:

First:

  مَا قَتَلُوْہُ    ۝

  They did not kill him.

Second:

  وَمَا صَلَبُوْہُ    ۝

  They did not crucify him.

Third:

  وَمَا قَتَلُوْہُ يَقِيْنًا    ۝

  They certainly did not kill him.

Then comes the decisive correction:

  بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ    ۝

  Rather, Allah raised him to Himself.

The word بَل (bal)is extremely important. It is not a casual conjunction. In Arabic, ‘bal’ comes to overturn, negate, and replace the preceding claim. The Jews claimed killing, crucifixion, humiliation, and triumph over Isa . Allah negated that claim and then established its opposite: divine rescue, honour, and raising.

The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani reading weakens this structure by reducing ‘rafaʿahu Allahu ilayh’ to a mere spiritual elevation after death, and that too, without any evidence from the Quran or hadith. But spiritual elevation after death is not unique to Isa . The souls of the righteous are honoured. The martyrs are alive with their Lord. Prophets have exalted ranks. If the verse only meant that his soul was honoured after death, then it would not function as a direct refutation of the Jewish claim that they physically overpowered him.

The Jews claimed a bodily act: killing and crucifixion. The Quranic answer is also connected to his physical person, not merely to an abstract rank. The name Isa refers to the Prophet himself, body and soul, unless there is a clear contextual indicator restricting it to the soul only. However, there is no such indicator here.

Therefore, Sheikh Asrar Rashid’s point regarding بَل رَّفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ is strong: the grammar of the verse points to a complete divine reversal of the Jewish claim and successfully refutes the claim of the Qadiyanis.

3. Surah Aal Imran 3:55: Mutawaffika and Raafiʿuka Ilayya

Allah Almighty says:

  إِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَاعِيسَى إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا.....55²

  When Allah said: O Isa (), I am taking you fully, raising you to Myself, purifying you from those who disbelieved, and placing those who follow you above those who disbelieved until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I shall judge between you concerning that wherein you used to differ.

The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani argument places nearly all weight on the word: مُتَوَفِّيكَ. They argue that whenever Allah performs tawaffa upon a human being, it means taking the soul in death or sleep. Therefore, they say, Isa must have died.

But this argument is incomplete. The Muslim response is not that tawaffa always means bodily ascension. Rather, the Sunni response is that tawaffa has a broader root-meaning: to take fully, receive completely, or exact in full. Depending on context, it may refer to death, sleep, or complete taking. The context of 3:55 does not stop at mutawaffika. It immediately says:

  وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ    ۝

  and raising you to Myself.

Then it says:

  وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا    ۝

  and purifying/rescuing you from those who disbelieved.

The three expressions together form one divine act of rescue:

1. Allah takes Isa fully (body & soul).
2. Allah raises him to Himself.
3. Allah purifies and removes him from the reach of the disbelievers.

If mutawaffika is isolated from raafiʿuka ilayya, the verse can be forced into a natural-death reading. But if the whole sentence is read as one connected promise, the meaning is plainly rescue, removal, and elevation.

The Ahmadi/Qadiani argument therefore commits a methodological reduction: it turns a multi-part verse into a single-word debate, which is atomistic, selective, and context-breaking

4. The Meaning of Tawaffa: The Quranic Usage

The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani side cited Surah al-Zumar 39:42:

  اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ 42 ³

  Allah takes the souls at the time of their death, and those that have not died during their sleep. Then He keeps those upon whom He has decreed death and releases the others until an appointed term. Indeed, in that are signs for a people who reflect.

This verse indeed proves that tawaffa is used for death and sleep. But it does not prove that the root can never be used for complete taking in another context. In fact, the verse itself shows that tawaffa is not synonymous with death in every case, because it is also used for sleep.

Thus, the Qadiani side cannot say, ‘Tawaffa always means death,’ because their own evidence proves that it may mean sleep. Once the word is admitted to be context-dependent, the question becomes: What is the context in the verse of Isa ? That context is not ordinary human death. The context is attempted killing, attempted crucifixion, divine rescue, raising to Allah, and purification from the disbelievers.

Therefore, the Muslim reading is stronger: In 3:55, mutawaffika means that Allah took Isa fully (body and soul) out of the reach of his enemies, and raafiʿuka ilayya explains the direction and honour of that taking.

5. Why the Ahmadiyya “Third Meaning” Objection Fails

A major Qadiani challenge in the debate was:

‘Show us one place in the Quran, Bukhari, or Muslim where tawaffa means bodily ascension.’

At first glance, this sounds powerful. But on closer examination, it is not decisive. The Muslim argument does not claim that the word tawaffa, by itself, lexically means ‘bodily ascension into heaven’ in every usage. The argument is that in this particular verse, the phrase is part of a combined divine promise:

  ..... إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا.....55⁴

“I am taking you fully and raising you to Myself.”

Thus, the bodily ascension is not derived from mutawaffika alone. It is derived from the combination of:

• The attempted killing and crucifixion,
• Allah’s negation of that killing and crucifixion,
• the word ‘bal’ in Surah Al-Nisa 4:158,
• the phrase rafaʿahu Allahu ilayh,
• the phrase raafiʿuka ilayya,
• the purification from the disbelievers,
• the future descent hadith,
• and the Prophetic explanation of the end-times role of Isa .

The Qadiani objection therefore attacks a simplified version of the Muslim proof, not the actual Muslim proof which has been explained in detail.

6. Surah al-Maidah 5:117 and the ‘Two Time Periods’ Argument

The Qadiani side repeatedly cited the statement of Isa on the Day of Judgement:

  مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلَّا مَا أَمَرْتَنِي بِهِ أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنْتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ 117 ⁵

  I said to them nothing except what You commanded me: worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. I was a witness over them as long as I remained among them. Then when You took me, You were the Watcher over them, and You are Witness over all things.

The Qadiani argument says: this verse gives only two periods:

1. Isa was among his people and watched over them.
2. Allah performed tawaffi upon him, after which Allah alone watched over them.

They argue that if Isa were alive in heaven, there would be a third period. This argument is not decisive for several reasons:

First weakness: “Among them” means earthly presence among his direct people

The phrase:

  مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ

  …as long as I was among them..

It does not mean ‘as long as I existed anywhere.’ It means as long as Isa was physically present among his people, teaching them directly. Once Allah raised him, he was no longer among them in that earthly missionary capacity. Whether he was alive in heaven or not, he was no longer among them as their direct worldly witness. Thus, the verse proves departure from his people, not necessarily death.

Second weakness: Tawaffaytani is again context-dependent

The word tawaffaytani here can mean ‘You took me fully’ or ‘You removed me from them.’ It does not necessarily mean ‘You caused me to die permanently before the Day of Judgement.’

Third weakness: Bukhari 4625 does not prove the Ahmadiyya reading

In Sahih Al-Bukhari, the Holy Prophet himself recited this very verse in relation to certain people from his own Ummah who will be brought forth on the Day of Judgement, but will then be driven away from him because of the changes and innovations they introduced after him. At that moment, the Holy Prophet will express his innocence from their later actions and will say in the same manner as the righteous servant, Sayyiduna Isa , ⁶ had said:

  ۔۔۔وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ۔۔۔⁷

  …I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; then when You took me, You were the Watcher over them…

The Ahmadiyya side argues that because the Holy Prophet applied the verse to himself after his death, the word must mean death for Isa too. But this is an overreading. The Holy Prophet is drawing an analogy of responsibility and absence: while he was among them, he was a witness; after he departed from them, Allah knew what they did. The hadith does not state that every detail of Isa’s situation is identical to every detail of the Holy Prophet’s situation. The mode of departure differs. The shared point is that both were no longer among their communities as direct worldly witnesses.

The key word in the end of the hadith is also meaningful:

  منذ فارقتهم

  since you parted from them.

Therefore, the hadith is about separation from the people, not a technical proof that Sayyiduna Isa died a permanent natural death. The Holy Prophet quoted Isa because both Prophets were witnesses over their communities while present among them, and after their removal from direct supervision, Allah alone remained the Watcher. The mode of separation differs: the Holy Prophet departed through death, while Isa was raised by Allah. Thus, the hadith proves a parallel in witnessing, not an identical form of departure.

7. Surah Al-Nisa 4:159: The Future Faith of the People of the Book

Allah Almighty says:

  وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا 159 ⁸

  There is none from the People of the Book except that he will surely believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them.

This verse follows immediately after the statement that they did not kill or crucify Isa , but Allah raised him to Himself.

The mainstream Muslim interpretation is that before the death of Isa after his future descent, the People of the Book will believe in him correctly: Jews will no longer deny him, and Christians will no longer worship him or call him divine. This meaning harmonizes beautifully with the hadith that he will break the cross and judge justly.

The Qadiani reading usually tries to make ‘before his death’ refer to the death of each individual from the People of the Book. But this reading is less natural in the immediate context. The passage is about Isa : their claim about him, their failure to kill him, Allah’s raising of him, and his future witness against them. The pronouns naturally return to the central figure under discussion.

Furthermore, Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه himself, after narrating the hadith of the descent of Isa in Sahih al-Bukhari, recited this very verse:

  وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ……159

  There is none from the People of the Book except that he will surely believe in him before his death…

This indicates that Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه understood the verse in connection with the future return of Isa , not as a reference to a past and permanent death. His application of the verse shows that, before Isa dies after his descent, the People of the Book will recognize the truth concerning him. Thus, the Companion’s own explanatory usage supports the classical Muslim understanding: Isa was raised alive, will descend near the end of time, and only then will his earthly death occur.

8. Surah al-Zukhruf 43:61: Isa عليه السلام as a Sign of the Hour

Allah Almighty says:

  وَإِنَّهُ لَعِلْمٌ لِلسَّاعَةِ فَلَا تَمْتَرُنَّ بِهَا وَاتَّبِعُونِ هَذَا صِرَاطٌ مُسْتَقِيمٌ 61 ⁹

  And indeed, he (Isa عليه السلام, when he descends from heaven) is a sign/knowledge of the Hour, so do not doubt it, and follow Me. This is a straight path.

According to the mainstream reading, the pronoun refers to Isa , and his descent is among the great signs of the Hour. This coheres directly with the hadith of his descent before the final events.

The Qadiani position attempts to reinterpret this verse either metaphorically or by applying it to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. However, such a reading does not arise naturally from the Quranic context. The passage is speaking about a figure already identified and repeatedly discussed in the Quran: Sayyiduna Isa ibn Maryam . The pronoun and the surrounding discussion cannot be detached from this established Quranic referent without first importing an external theological assumption. Moreover, the authentic hadith literature explains this verse in connection with the actual descent of Isa near the end of time, making the classical understanding both textually and contextually stronger. Therefore, to shift the meaning from Isa himself to a later claimant is not the plain reading of the Quran and Sunnah; rather, it is a forced interpretation built upon prior biases/positions.

9. The Hadith of Descent in Sahih al-Bukhari

Sahih al-Bukhari narrates from Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه that the Holy Prophet said:

  والذي نفسي بيده ليوشكن أن ينزل فيكم ابن مريم حكما عدلا فيكسر الصليب ويقتل الخنزير ويضع الجزية ويفيض المال حتى لا يقبله أحد....¹⁰

  By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, the son of Mary will soon descend among you as a just judge. He will break the cross, kill the swine, abolish the jizyah, and wealth will become abundant until no one will accept it.

This hadith is devastating to the Qadiani position for several reasons:

First, it says:

  ينزل فيكم ابن مريم.

  the son of Mary will descend among you.

It does not say that someone resembling the spiritual qualities of Isa will be born in India. It says the son of Mary will descend. Secondly, the phrase “son of Mary ” identifies the historical Jesus , not a metaphorical reformer.

Third, the actions mentioned are concrete:

• he will judge justly,
• break the cross,
• kill the swine,
• abolish jizyah,
• and wealth will overflow.

These are not framed as private mystical symbols. They are public events.

Another narration in Sahih al-Bukhari states:

  كيف أنتم إذا نزل ابن مريم فيكم وإمامكم منكم. ¹¹

  How will you be when the son of Mary descends among you and your imam is from among you?

Again, the wording is plain: نزل ابن مريم — ‘the son of Mary descends.’

This implies that the hadith refers to the actual descent of the historical Sayyiduna Isa ibn Maryam , not the birth of a later spiritual likeness. The wording is explicit: نزل ابن مريم — 'the son of Mary will descend.' The title 'son of Mary' identifies the same Isa known from the Quran, not a metaphorical reformer. Thus, this is not the language of metaphorical inspiration. It is the language of real descent.

10. The Hadith of the White Minaret in Sahih Muslim

Sahih Muslim records the famous narration concerning the Dajjāl and the descent of Isa :

  ....فبينما هو كذلك إذ ‌بعث ‌اللّٰه ‌المسيح ابن مريم. فينزل عند المنارة البيضاء شرقي دمشق. بين مهرودتين. واضعا كفيه على أجنحة ملكين. إذا طأطأ رأسه قطر. وإذا رفعه تحدر منه جمان كاللؤلؤ....¹²

  While he is in that state, Allah will send the Messiah (), son of Mary. He will descend near the white minaret east of Damascus, wearing two garments lightly dyed, placing his hands on the wings of two angels. When he lowers his head, drops will fall, and when he raises it, drops like pearls will scatter from it.

This narration is one of the clearest evidences in the entire debate.

It mentions:

• Allah sending the Messiah,
• the title ‘son of Mary,’
• descent,
• a specific geographical location,
• the white minaret,
• east of Damascus,
• two garments,
• the wings of two angels,
• physical description of his head and drops,
• his pursuit and killing of Dajjal at the gate of Ludd.

Thus, in no rational or reasonable manner, can this hadith refer to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. Qadian is not Damascus. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad did not descend at the white minaret east of Damascus. He was not physically lowered with his hands on the wings of two angels. He did not kill Dajjal at Ludd.

The Qadiani interpretation here becomes strained because it must convert clear geographical and physical language into symbols, while keeping its own Kashmir narrative as quasi-historical. This is inconsistent. If explicit hadith geography can be spiritualized away, then the entire Prophetic description becomes unstable.

Sheikh Asrar Rashid’s point was therefore accurate: the Damascus hadith is a major weakness for the Qadiani reading.

11. The Mi’raj Narrations and Isa in the Heavens

The Mi’raj narrations mention that Prophet Muhammad met Isa in the heavens. In the narration of the heavenly ascent, he met Prophets in different heavens, including Isa and Yaḥya .

This does not by itself prove every detail of the bodily ascension of Isa , because the other Prophets are also seen in the heavens after death. However, it does prove something important: the heavens are not a conceptual impossibility in Islamic belief. The Holy Prophet was taken through the heavens. He met Prophets . The unseen world is real. Therefore, the Qadiyani argument that physical heavenly existence is somehow irrational or impossible has no force within an Islamic worldview.

The question is not: ‘Can Allah preserve a prophet alive in the heavens?’ Of course He can.

The question is: ‘Did Allah and His Messenger inform us that this happened to Isa ?”

The Quran and hadith together indicate that He did, as mentioned in the evidence provided above.

12. The ‘Allah Has No Location’ Argument

Another Qadiani objection is theological:

If Allah has no physical location, then ‘raised to Allah’ cannot mean physical ascension.

This objection misrepresents the Muslim position. The Muslims do not say that Allah is a body contained in a place, nor that Isa physically entered a location occupied by Allah. Allah is exalted beyond place, direction, containment, and bodily limitation. However, the phrase states:

  رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ    ۝

  Allah raised him to Himself

This phrase can affirm a real raising of Isa while also affirming divine transcendence. The Quran often uses language suitable to the majesty of Allah without implying bodily limitation. The raising is real for the created servant; the ‘to Himself’ is honor, nearness, and divine acceptance in a manner befitting Allah’s majesty. Thus, the Muslim position does not require anthropomorphism. It requires only belief that Allah raised His Prophet in a manner He willed.

13. The Argument from Surah Aal-e-Imran 3:144

The Qadiani side also cited:

  وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ …..144 ¹³

  Muhammad () is only a Messenger; messengers before him have passed away.

They argue that since Isa was a messenger before the Holy Prophet , he must be included among those who “passed away.” But this is not decisive. The verse was revealed to establish that Prophet Muhammad was a messenger and that Islam does not collapse with the passing of a messenger. Its purpose is not to list the biological condition of every previous prophet at that moment.

Secondly, the phrase قَدْ خَلَتْ means they have passed, gone, or preceded. It does not necessarily mean that every single messenger died in the ordinary way before the Holy Prophet . Even if the general rule is that messengers normally pass away and die, the Quran itself establishes an exception for Isa in Surah Al-Nisa 4: 157-158.

The Ahmadiyya argument is methodologically flawed because it uses a general statement about earlier messengers to cancel a specific Quranic exception about Jesus . A general rule cannot override a specific text. The Quran separately explains that Jesus was neither killed nor crucified, but raised by Allah. Therefore, the general verse must be understood in light of the specific verses, not against them.

14. The “Every Soul Shall Taste Death” Argument

Another argument is based on verses such as:

  كُلُّ نَفْسٍ ذَائِقَةُ الْمَوْتِ…..185 ¹⁴

  Every soul shall taste death.’

This verse is true and accepted. Muslims do not deny that Isa will die. Secondly their position is not that he is eternally alive. The position is that he has not yet died the final earthly death. He was raised alive, will descend, complete his appointed mission, and then die. Therefore, ‘every soul shall taste death’ does not refute the Muslim position. It refutes only the idea that Isa will never die, which Muslims do not claim.

15. The Argument from Sūrah Maryam 19:33

The Quran records the infant Isa saying:

  وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَيَّ يَوْمَ وُلِدْتُ وَيَوْمَ أَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ أُبْعَثُ حَيًّا 33 ¹⁵

  Peace is upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive.

The Qadiani side argues that this proves a normal life-cycle: birth, death, resurrection. The Muslim position accepts this fully as well. The verse does not say that his death had already occurred. It says, ‘the day I die.’ This refers to his future death after his descent.

The verse therefore fits the Muslim position perfectly:

1. He was born miraculously.
2. He was raised before being killed.
3. He will descend.
4. He will die.
5. He will be raised on the Day of Resurrection.

There is no contradiction.

16. The Kashmir Narrative: A Major Weakness

The Qadiani position often adds a historical narrative: Isa survived the crucifixion attempt, migrated eastward, travelled through various lands, reached Kashmir, preached to the lost tribes of Israel, lived to around 120 years, and was buried at Roza Bal in Srinagar. This narrative faces serious problems.

First: It is not stated in the Quran

The Quraan does not mention Kashmir, Srinagar, Roza Bal, or a post-crucifixion migration of Isa .

Second: It is not found in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim

The debate’s agreed sources were the Quran, Bukhari, and Muslim. The Kashmir theory cannot be established from them.

Third: It contradicts the logic of divine rescue

Allah says:

  وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا.....55¹⁶

  and purifying/rescuing you from those who disbelieved.

And:

  ..... وَإِذْ كَفَفْتُ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ عَنْكَ.....110 ¹⁷

    “I restrained the Children of Israel from you.”

If Isa was beaten, placed on a cross, wounded, treated medically, and forced to flee across continents, this does not resemble the Quranic picture of complete divine rescue and restraint. The Quran does not present him as someone who barely survived the plot of his enemies; rather, it presents Allah’s intervention as decisive, protective, and victorious. The words “they neither killed him nor crucified him” and 'Allah raised him to Himself' indicate that the enemies failed in their plan, not that they partially succeeded and Isa escaped only after suffering their intended punishment.

Fourth: It is historically speculative

The Kashmir narrative depends on later, disputed, and extra-Quranic material which is not even found in the authentic book of Hadith. Yet the same side demands from Muslims explicit wording for every point from Quran, Bukhari, and Muslim. This is a double standard.

17. The Problem of Selective Literalism

One of the most important weaknesses in the Qadiani argument is selective literalism. When the word tawaffa appears, they insist on a highly restrictive literal meaning: death. But when hadith mention descent, Damascus, the white minaret, two garments, angels, Dajjal, Ludd, and the son of Mary, they move to metaphor. This is methodologically unstable.

A fair method would either:

• read both Quran and hadith according to their apparent meanings unless evidence requires interpretation, or
• consistently allow figurative readings where context demands them.

But the Qadiani approach often becomes literal where it supports their doctrine and metaphorical where it opposes it.

Whereas, the Muslim method is more consistent: the apparent meaning of 4:157–158 is rescue and raising; the apparent meaning of the descent hadith is real descent; the general verses about death are accepted, but applied to Isa after his future descent.

18. The “No Single Decisive Verse” Objection

In the debate, an Ahmadiyya questioner asked whether there is one single verse or hadith that says in exact wording: ‘Isa is alive in the heavens today with his earthly body.’

This is rhetorically clever but methodologically weak.

Many doctrines are established by the combination of texts, not by one sentence written in later theological terminology. The Quran may establish one part, hadith another, consensus another, and Arabic grammar another. Islamic creed is often built by gathering the full scriptural evidence.

For example, the details of prayer, zakah, pilgrimage, the signs of the Hour, and many matters of creed are not always contained in one single verse with all later theological phrasing. They are established by the totality of Quran and Sunnah.

Here, the totality is clear:

• The Jews did not kill him.
• They did not crucify him.
• Allah raised him to Himself.
• Allah took him and raised him.
• He is a sign of the Hour.
• The People of the Book will believe in him before his death.
• The Prophet Holy said the son of Mary will descend.
• Bukhari and Muslim narrate his future descent.
• Muslim gives a precise physical and geographical description.
• He will kill the Dajjal.
• He will rule with justice.
• He will later die.

The combined evidence is decisive.

19. Why Sheikh Asrar Rashid’s Core Position Was Correct

Sheikh Asrar Rashid was correct for the following reasons:

1. He kept the debate tied to the whole Quranic picture

He did not isolate tawaffa from the surrounding verses. He connected 3:55, 4:157–158, 4:159, 5:110, 5:117, and 43:61.

2. He emphasized the force of the word ‘bal’

The phrase بَل رَّفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ is not a weak or vague phrase. It is a direct divine correction of a false claim.

3. He rightly treated the descent hadith as explicit

The hadith of Bukhari and Muslim are not vague allusions. They explicitly name the son of Mary and describe his descent.

4. He showed the weakness of relocating Damascus to Qadian

The Muslim narration says east of Damascus. The Ahmadiyya interpretation shifts this into symbolic geography, which is not persuasive.

5. He preserved the continuity of the Ummah’s understanding

The belief in the bodily raising and future descent of Isa is the mainstream inherited belief of the Ummah. A later reinterpretation must carry a very heavy burden of proof. The Qadiani argument does not meet that burden.

20. The Weaknesses of the Ahmadiyya/Qadiani Argument

The Ahmadiyya/Qadiani case has several major weaknesses.

Weakness One: Overdependence on Tawaffa

The entire case leans too heavily on one word while ignoring the full structure of the verses.

Weakness Two: Restricting a Polysemous Word

They admit tawaffa can mean sleep and death, but then deny that context can expand or specify the meaning in 3:55.

Weakness Three: Ignoring Raafiʿuka Ilayya

The phrase ‘raising you to Myself’ is treated as if it adds nothing decisive. But in the verse it is central.

Weakness Four: Weak Treatment of 4:157–158

The Quran’s refutation of killing and crucifixion is physical and historical. A merely spiritual raising after death does not fully answer the claim.

Weakness Five: Forced Interpretation of Descent Hadith

The hadith say ‘the son of Mary will descend.’ The Ahmadiyya reading makes this mean someone else entirely.

Weakness Six: The Damascus Problem

Sahih Muslim says the descent will occur near the white minaret east of Damascus. Qadian is not Damascus.

Weakness Seven: The Kashmir Theory Has No Primary Proof

The theory is not proven from Quran, Bukhari, or Muslim, despite the Ahmadiyya side demanding strict proof from those sources.

Weakness Eight: Selective Methodology

Literalism is used for tawaffa, but symbolism is used for descent, Damascus, Dajjal, and the son of Mary.

Weakness Nine: Confusing Absence from Earth with Death

Surah al-Maidah 5:117 proves that Isa was no longer among his people. It does not necessarily prove permanent death.

Weakness Ten: Misuse of General Verses

General verses about Prophets passing away and every soul tasting death do not cancel the specific texts concerning Isa .

21. Final Theological Synthesis

The Quran does not present Isa as a prophet who was defeated by his enemies, survived by medical treatment, wandered eastward, and died in Kashmir. It presents him as a mighty sign of Allah, born miraculously, supported by miracles, protected from the plots of the disbelievers, raised by Allah, and destined to return as a sign of the Hour.

The hadith of the Holy Prophet then complete the picture: the son of Mary will descend, judge justly, break the cross, kill the swine, abolish jizyah, slay the Dajjal, and establish justice.

Thus, the mainstream Muslim belief is not a later myth, nor a weak emotional attachment to Christian ideas. It is rooted in the Quran, clarified by the Sunnah, and preserved by the understanding of the Ummah.

The Qadiani argument, though rhetorically sharp, is ultimately reductionist. It narrows the debate to the lexical meaning of tawaffa, then uses that narrowed frame to reinterpret clear verses and explicit hadith. Its greatest weakness is that it cannot naturally accommodate the plain hadith of descent in Bukhari and Muslim without turning concrete prophetic descriptions into symbols.

The conclusion, therefore, is clear:

Sheikh Asrar Rashid was correct in affirming that Sayyiduna Isa ibn Maryam was raised by Allah with body and soul, remains alive in the heavens by Allah’s command, and will descend before the Day of Judgement. The Ahmadiyya denial of his bodily heavenly life and future physical descent is not supported by the combined evidence of the Quran and the authentic hadith.

Conclusion

The question of Isa is not solved by isolating one word, nor by forcing later biased/engineered claims into the Quran and Sunnah, as done by the Qadiyanis. The correct method is to gather all the texts, read the general in light of the specific, understand Arabic terms within their context, and allow the hadith of the Holy Prophet to explain the Quranic indications.

When this is done, the mainstream Muslim position stands firm:

• Isa was not killed.
• He was not crucified.
• Allah raised him to Himself.
• He is alive by Allah’s will.
• He will descend before the Hour.
• He will complete his mission under the Shariah of Muhammad .
• He will then die a natural death.

This is the creed of Muslims, and it remains the interpretation most faithful to the Quran, the Sunnah, Arabic language, and the inherited understanding of the Muslim Ummah.

• ¹  Holy Quran, Al-Nisa (The Women) 4: 157-158
• ²  Holy Quran, Aale-e-Imran (The Family of Imran) 3: 55
• ³  Holy Quran, Al-Zumar 39: 42
• ⁴  Holy Quran, Aale-e-Imran (The Family of Imran) 3: 55
• ⁵  Holy Quran, Al-Maidah (The Table Spread) 5: 117
• ⁶  Muhammad ibn Ismail Al-Bukhari (1999), Sahih Al-Bukhari, Hadith: 4625, Dar Al-Salam lil Nashr wal-Tawzi, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Pg. 791.
• ⁷  Holy Quran, Al-Maidah (The Table Spread) 5: 117
• ⁸  Holy Quran, Al-Nisa (The Women) 4: 159
• ⁹  Holy Quran, Al-Zukhruf 43: 61
• ¹⁰  Muhammad ibn Ismail Al-Bukhari (1999), Sahih Al-Bukhari, Hadith: 3448, Dar Al-Salam lil Nashr wal-Tawzi, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Pg. 581.
• ¹¹  Ibid, Pg. 581.
• ¹²  Muslim ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Neshapuri (2000), Sahih Al-Muslim, Hadith: 7373, Dar Al-Salam lil Nashr wal-Tawzi, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Pg. 1271.
• ¹³  Holy Quran, Aal-e-Imran (The Family of Imran) 3: 14
• ¹⁴  Holy Quran, Aal-e-Imran (The Family of Imran) 3: 185
• ¹⁵  Holy Quran, Maryam (Mary) 19: 33
• ¹⁶  Holy Quran, Aal-e-Imran (The Family of Imran) 3: 55
• ¹⁷  Holy Quran, Al-Maidah (The Table Spread) 5: 110