Ninth Argument: No prophet, new or old can come after Mohammad (pbuh)

[ BACK ] If Hazrat Mirza had indeed claimed to be a prophet, he could not have written that because Jesus was a prophet he cannot now return to this world after the Holy Prophet Muhammad:

``Apart from these arguments, the second coming of Jesus is also barred by the verse: wa lakin rasul-Allahi wa Khatam an-nabiyyin [i.e. Muhammad is the Messenger of God and Last of the Prophets]; and also by the Holy Prophet's Saying: La nabiyya ba`di [There is to be no prophet after me]. How could it be permitted that, despite our Holy Prophet, peace and the blessings of God be upon him, being the Khatam al-anbiya [Last of the Prophets], some other prophet should appear sometime and the `revelation of prophets' commence.''

(Ayyam as-Sulh, p. 47)

``In the verses haveakmal-tu la-kum dina-kumday I perfect I perfected for you your [`This religion'], and rasul-Allahi wa Khatam wa lakin an-nabiyyinprophethood with , God has clearly terminated the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace and the blessings of God be upon him, and has stated unequivocally that the Holy Prophet is the Last Prophet. But those people who would have Jesus return to this world believe that he shall come with his prophethood, and for a full forty-five years the angel Gabriel shall come to him with the `revelation of prophets'. Now tell us how, under this belief, anything would be left of the finality of prophethood and the ending of the `revelation of prophets'? In fact, one would have to believe that Jesus is the last of the prophets.''

(Tuhfa Golarwiya, p. 83)

``Our unjust opponents do not consider the doors of the termination of prophethood to be fully closed. In fact, they believe that a window is still open to enable the Israelite prophet Jesus to return. If, therefore, a real prophet came into the world after the Holy Quran, and the process of `revelation of prophets' (nubuwwatwhat would hawahy ppen to the ) commenced, doctrine of the termination of prophethood? Would the revelation of a prophet be known as anything other than wahy nubuwwat?`

(Siraj Munir, pp. 2 -- 3)