In his book Anwar-e-Islam, Hadrat Ahmad (as) discussed those Muslims who were spreading falsehood that his prophecy regarding Abdullah Atham failed. Abdullah Atham repented for mocking the Prophet Muhammad (sa) which his why he did not die in the appointed time given. The anti-Ahmadis raise the allegation that Hadrat Ahmad (as) said that those who deny his victory are ‘haraam zada’. What the anti-Ahmadis fail to explain is that this term is used metaphorically for those who are touched by satan. It is not referring to the person’s actual parents. Hadrat Ahmad (as) in the very same pages explains that haram zada refers to that person who does not adopt the right path and is unjust and unfair. This shows that it is not literally referring to anyone’s parents rather the person himself. Such terminology has always been used for the evil people.
We must remember that if we study the Qur’an, when prophets speak of progeny, they are referring to spiritual progeny. A person who does not believe in the Prophets and is of unrighteous conduct is called waladul haram metaphorically. This is mentioned in the Qur’an in chapter 11 verses 46-47, when Nuh (as) is told that his son is not of his family. Allah did not accept him because of his wickedness. Allah also says the wives of the Prophet are the mothers of the believers in chapter 33 verse 7.
In Nurul Islam, Hadrat Ahmad (as) is speaking of the Muslims who declared Christianity as being victorious against Islam and persisted in this. Such a person is cut off from the spiritual progeny of the Prophet (sa). He (as) explained:
Some people calling themselves Muslims, who should be called semi-Christians, were so pleased that Abdullah Aatham had not died within fifteen months that they could not restrain their joy. They made announcements in which, according to their habit, they expressed themselves in intemperate language and on account of their personal rancor against me they even attacked Islam inasmuch as my controversy with the Christians was in support of Islam and did not involve the question of my being the Promised Messiah. They might have considered me a disbeliever, or satan, or Anti-Christ, but the discussion related to the truth of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and the superiority of the Holy Quran. A truthful one is he who believes sincerely in the Khatamul Anbiya, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and accepts the Holy Quran as the Word of God. He who considers that Jesus was God and rejects the prophethood of the KhatamulAnbiya, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is a liar. I had cited a revelation of mine in support of this, but I have to affirm in sorrow that in order to prove me false the opposing divines did not keep in mind the honor of Allah and His Messenger and did not in the least mind the conclusion which the enemy would draw from defeat of the Islamic side. Mian Sanaullah, Saadullah, Abdul Haq, and others, having conceded the victory of the Christians, why do they complain about the Christians that they use their alleged victory as an argument against Islam, when the whole controversy was about the truth or falsehood of Islam and Christianity and not about any particular doctrine of mine. (Anwarul Islam p. 48)
He (as) himself explains:
For proving himself legitimately born it was necessary for such a one if he considered me false and the Christians as victorious to meet effectively the argument that I have set forth … It is a sign of the bastard that he does not adopt the straight path and continues to love the ways of wrong and injustice. (Anwarul Islam, p. 30)