Contact
Pigott, The False Claimant of Divinity
19033
page-template,page-template-full_width,page-template-full_width-php,page,page-id-19033,page-child,parent-pageid-18991,bridge-core-1.0.6,do-etfw,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,no_animation_on_touch,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-18.2,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_top,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.0.5,vc_responsive
 

Pigott, The False Claimant of Divinity

Islam is the complete religion which Allah has Chosen for us. At its essence, we have the concept of the Oneness of God. We see that the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw established the Oneness of God during his lifetime and brought thousands back to their True Creator However, at the same time, Allah had told the Prophet Muhammadsaw about the condition of Islam in the latter days. Hesaw stated:

عَنْ عَلِيٍّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ عَلَى النَّاسِ زَمَانٌ لَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْإِسْلَامِ إِلَّا اسْمُهُ وَلَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِلَّا رَسْمُهُ مَسَاجِدُهُمْ عَامِرَةٌ وَهِيَ خَرَابٌ مِنَ الْهُدَى عُلَمَاؤُهُمْ شَرُّ مَنْ تَحْتَ أَدِيمِ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ عِنْدِهِمْ تَخْرُجُ الْفِتْنَةُ وَفِيهِمْ تَعُودُ» .

“A time will come when nothing would be left of Islam except its name, and nothing would be left of the Qur’an except its script, their mosques would be full of worshippers but would be devoid of righteousness. Their Ulama – religious scholars – would be the worst of the creatures under the canopy of the heavens. Evil plots will hatch from them and to them they will return” (Mishkat al Masabih, Volume 1, Page 91)

The reason the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw mentioned “their scholars” is because he was referring to those sects of Islam that would reject the Imam of the age. We clearly see that the Prophet Muhammadsaw prophesied about the latter day reformer, who would bring back the true Islam:

حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ بِلاَلٍ، عَنْ ثَوْرٍ، عَنْ أَبِي الْغَيْثِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، رضى الله عنه قَالَ كُنَّا جُلُوسًا عِنْدَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَأُنْزِلَتْ عَلَيْهِ سُورَةُ الْجُمُعَةِ ‏{‏وَآخَرِينَ مِنْهُمْ لَمَّا يَلْحَقُوا بِهِمْ‏}‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ مَنْ هُمْ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ فَلَمْ يُرَاجِعْهُ حَتَّى سَأَلَ ثَلاَثًا، وَفِينَا سَلْمَانُ الْفَارِسِيُّ، وَضَعَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَدَهُ عَلَى سَلْمَانَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏”‏ لَوْ كَانَ الإِيمَانُ عِنْدَ الثُّرَيَّا لَنَالَهُ رَجُلٌ ـ مِنْ هَؤُلاَءِ ‏”

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were sitting with the Prophet (ﷺ) Surat Al-Jumu’a was revealed to him, and when the Verse, “And He (Allah) has sent him (Muhammad) also to other (Muslims)…..’ (62.3) was recited by the Prophet, I said, “Who are they, O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)?” The Prophet (ﷺ) did not reply till I repeated my question thrice. At that time, Salman Al-Farisi was with us. So Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) put his hand on Salman, saying, “If Faith were at (the place of) Ath-Thuraiya (pleiades, the highest star), even then (some men or man from these people (i.e. Salman’s folk) would bring it back.” (Sahih al Bukhari, Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 420)

Now we turn to the prophecies of Prophets. Firstly, we must focus on the following verse of the Holy Qur’an:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِنْ عِنْدِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ {8}

” He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it there are verses that are decisive in meaning — they are the basis of the Book — and there are others that are susceptible of different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations, seeking discord and seeking wrong interpretation of it. And none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’ — And none heed except those gifted with understanding. —” (Chapter 3 Verse 8)

Some verses are decisive in meaning and others are susceptible of different interpretations. Next we must focus on the following verse of the Qur’an:

وَقَالَ رَجُلٌ مُؤْمِنٌ مِنْ آلِ فِرْعَوْنَ يَكْتُمُ إِيمَانَهُ أَتَقْتُلُونَ رَجُلًا أَنْ يَقُولَ رَبِّيَ اللَّهُ وَقَدْ جَاءَكُمْ بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ مِنْ رَبِّكُمْ ۖ وَإِنْ يَكُ كَاذِبًا فَعَلَيْهِ كَذِبُهُ ۖ وَإِنْ يَكُ صَادِقًا يُصِبْكُمْ بَعْضُ الَّذِي يَعِدُكُمْ ۖ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِي مَنْ هُوَ مُسْرِفٌ كَذَّابٌ {29}

And a believing man from among the people of Pharaoh, who concealed his faith, said, “Will you slay a man because he says, ‘My Lord is Allah,’ while he has brought you clear proofs from your Lord? And if he be a liar, on him will be the sin of his lie; but if he is truthful, then some of that which he threatens you with will surely befall you. Certainly Allah guides not one who is a transgressor, and a liar. (Chapter 40, Verse 29)

Hadhrat Ahmadas has stated in regards to this verse:

“Prophecies are of two kinds: First, those bearing glad tidings, as God says in the Holy Qur’an:

وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ

The Ahl-i-Sunnah believe that prophecies of this kind imply certain fulfillment because God is Karim— Gracious. But, in case of prophecies of warning, God sometimes forgives, after He has sent the warning, because He is Rahim— Merciful. Anyone who says that prophecies containing warning are invariably fulfilled is ignorant and far removed from understanding Islam. He ignores the Holy Qur’an which says:

يُصِبْكُمْ بَعْضُ الَّذِي يَعِدُكُمْ

It is a pity that many who style themselves as clerics, neither know the Holy Qur ’an, nor the Traditions, nor, for that matter, the example of the prophets. They froth at the mouth out of malice only to deceive” (Lecture Ludhiana, Page 40)

Now we see that Hadhrat Ahmadas spent his entire life defending islam and challenged anyone who stood up against the Oneness of God, in the same way all other Prophets did. This article will deal with a challenge which Hadhrat Ahmadas made in 1902, to Reverend John Smyth Hugh Piggott, the leader of the organization of London called Agapemone.

Agapemone was founded by Reverend Henry Prince, and its fundamental teachings were similar to the teachings of Protestant Christianity. However the difference was that Reverend Henry Prince considered himself to be the second coming of the Messiah and immortal. However, he ended up passing away and after his death, John Smyth Hugh Piggott took over. When their “Everlasting Messiah” who was to live forever died, there was a great shock in the community. Piggott had told the community that Henry Prince was a harbinger and in reality he was the everlasting Messiah. Now it should be made clear that when Piggott made this claim, we do not see anywhere that he was defrocked. This shows that there was a difference in the claim of being a Messiah and God, and it was the claim of God that got his followers upset.

Initially, Piggott began to explain the Christian Doctrines, but also that he himself was the Second Advent of the Messiah. Then later, in 1902, he told his followers to stop looking for God in the heavens, as “he is present among you” referring to himself. (The Hackney and Kingsland Gazette, Wednesday 10th September 1902)

When he made this claim, he pointed to himself and many of his follower prostrated before him. But some of the other members from the audience were extremely offended by his claim to being god. They abused Piggott and pelted him with stones and whatever else they could lay their hands on. After witnessing the violence, the police took Piggott back to his residency. However, Piggott’s remarks had raised such an outcry that it was feared that his presence in any area can lead to war.

The newspapers jumped on this story and spread what had occurred as well. After this, Piggott was moved to Spaxton which became the new centre for the organization.

Piggott was mocking our God and spreading a belief contradicting the Oneness of God. The Muslim scholars were all sleeping and so was the entire ummah. Only one man and his companions stood up to the challenge of this false claimant of divinity, and that was Hadhrat Ahmadas of Qadian. He sent Piggott a warning, that if he did not stop such a blasphemous claim, he would be destroyed. He was sent this message in 1902. It is not known as to when he actually received this notification but research shows that he most definitely received it.

There is a person named Dr Joshua J Schwieso who is an expert in sociology and a lecturer at the University of the West of England. He made a study of Agapemone and his research is very thorough in comparison to the others. Even the newspapers did not do justice to Piggott or his claim.

The two important studies are Charles Manders’ The Reverend Prince and His Abode of Love, and the other is Donald McCormick’s book The Temple of Love.

The granddaughter of Piggott, Kate Barlow also wrote a book on her experiences but this was not as thorough as Dr Schwieso’s work. His title of his word was Deluved Inmates, Frantic Raves and Communists: A sociological Study of the Agapemone, a sect of Victorian Apocalyptic Milleniars’. He writes in it:

‘We can see traces of Agapemone activities in India in 1902…in this very year another claimer to messiahship in India, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, chief of Qadian, Punjab, published an announcement in which Pigott was given a warning that…….if he did not abstain from his claim to godship then he would immediately be destroyed/turned to dust and bones.’(Deluded Inmates, Frantic Ravers and Communists: A sociological Study of the Agapemone, a sect of Victorian Apocalyptic Milleniars, p.171)

The challenge of the Promised Messiahas was also published in newspapers in America and Europe. Piggott was most certainly told about this.

We now turn to the prophecies Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas made in regards to Piggott. For one to understand the actual outcome of this entire story, all references must be looked into in their context.

Firstly, we turn to Tadhkirah page 567 which has the following revelation:

When Piggott made his claim, many were angry and turned to violence which made it impossible for him to remain in London. Even the police told him that if such occurs again he would be arrested and prosecuted. He was getting a lot of warnings and threats during this time frame.

Piggott was then moved to Spaxton, in West England, where the founder of the Agapemonites, Henry Prince built a house which was like a church and a palace, stretching over a large area, with adjoining plots and houses which were used as offices and residencies for his followers. The colony’s name “Agapemone” means “Abode of Love”. Enclosed by four walls, it was far away from the city, and considered to be the safest place for Piggott to reside.

This colony propagated complete sexual freedom. Piggot spent his remaining years here, cut off from the world and in isolation. He would at times go abroad, but on his return, he would lock himself away in his fortress where no unauthorised person was allowed to enter. He wouldn’t even speak to the media or the journalists. Whenever colony members entered the village to buy provisions, they would be surrounded by various newspaper representatives vying for sensational titbits regarding the depravity occurring inside the Agapemone’s walls. That is why it was considered a bad omen for his followers to go outside. Piggott however, remained enclosed in this colony. Researchers have themselves commented about his change in character and personality. These two following references are perhaps the most important references for one to understand the repentance of Piggott. It is written:

“The flamboyant messiah of Clapton became the quiet, gentle pastor at Spaxton” (The Temple of Love by Donal McCormick, p.97, 1962, The Citadel Press, New York)

And:

“Smyth-Pigottt had learned his lesson at Clapton, that the opinion of the outside world still counted and he had no desire to face in Somersetshire the kind of demonstrations he had endured in London…..When (he) drove through the village he adopted the worldly role of a benign squire rather than that of the Messiah.” (The Temple of Love by Donald McCormick, p.95)

This condition of Piggott was an ongoing one, after had left London for Spaxton. The claim of Piggott had completely disappeared. When he registered the births of his children, he described his occupation as “Priest in Holy Orders”. This is the same designation he would use before his claim of divinity in 1889. He repeated this in 1905 as well, when he had another child. This proves that during the time of the Promised Messiahas Piggott did not repeat his claim.

In his own personal Bible, there is no place where he made the claim of god. When he gifted his son David a bible as a gift, it stated:


“To my first born son, David from your father who says with you “Our Father, Which art in Heaven”. This further proves that Piggott did believe in a Deity in heaven, who was unrelated to the begin of Piggott.

In his personal possessions, he had a plaque in Latin which stated:

“Homo Sum.Humani Nihil A Me Alienum Puto. The translation of this text recorded at the back of the pendulum reads “I am a Man. Nothing akin to Humanity do I consider alien to me”.

One may claim that these are not his own words, but I simply ask them whether a Muslim would have an idol in their room if they did not believe in the idol and believed opposite to it?

From all of these points, researchers have concluded that Piggott did change his claim of godship, into a flamboyant priest.

Dr. Nick Barratt, a well known family historian, who is also known by his BBC program called “Who do you think you are” has also conducted research into the life of Piggott and he too believes that Piggott did recant into a spiritual leader.

 

When Promised Messiahas warned Piggott, he wrote the word Prophet next to his own name making his claim clear. He maintained this very claim till his last day. The Muslims who raise allegations against the Promised Messiahas forget that they are in reality disrespecting Allah and his Magnificence. They forget that it was shirk against the Oneness of God and that they are supporting shirk, which further shows us the horrible condition of the Muslims.

Now we turn to the main allegations against this story. The allegation is that the Promised Messiahas passed away in 1908 while Piggott lived until 1927.The Promised Messiahas sent a warning in which he told Piggott that if he did not abstain from his claim to godship, he would be annihilated, possibly even in his own lifetime. The reason Hadhrat Ahmad(as) used “even in his own lifetime” was because the door to repentance was open. The full article is as follows:

Now Hadhrat Ahmad(as) made it clear that :

“I therefore warn him through this notice that if he does not repent of this irreverent claim, he shall soon be annihilated, even in my life time with sore torment proceeding from God and not from the hands of a man…”

The words we must focus on are firstly, even in my life time. What do these words mean? We must see the writings of the Messiahas to fully understand what he is  saying here. Why would the Promised Messiahas say even in my life time meaning that maybe he will die in my lifetime and may he won’t? The reason for this was that it was a mubahila challenge. Hadhrat Ahmad(as) made it clear that he is challenging Piggott to a mubahila and that if he didn’t accept then of course he wouldn’t have to die in the lifetime of the Promised Messiah(as) and for this reason the messiah gave two options of even in my lifetime. If he accepts mubahila than he would die in lifetime of the messiah and if not then it’s the choice of Allah as to when he dies.

For example, in the following reference of Malfuzat, Hadhrat Ahmad(as) clearly challenged Piggott to a mubahila and asked him to accept it:


In Tadhkirah, a book where the revelations of Hadhrat Ahmad(as) are compiled states in regards to Piggott;

Upon prayer with concentration concerning Piggott,631 the Promised Messiah[as] saw in a dream some books on which it was written three times: Tasbih, Tasbih, Tasbih. and then received a revelation:

This revelation indicates that the present condition of Piggott is not good or that he would not repent in future. It can also mean that he would not believe in God, or that what he has done by telling such a lie against God and planning against Him, is not good. The part [Allah is severe in retribution] shows that his end will be doomed and he will be afflicted with God’s chastisement. Indeed, it is a very daring thing to claim to be God.

We have another reference of Tadhkirah which further proves it was indeed a challenge to Piggott:

Piggott was a Christian priest of London who had claimed to be the Promised Messiah. A few people joined him. A typed announcement from him was received by Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, which he presented before the Promised Messiahas. Thereupon the Promised Messiahas gave a very short announcement of one page to Maulavi Muhammad ‘Ali to translate it, and get it printed and sent to England. In that announcement the Promised Messiahas said: My secretary has received the announcement containing your claim. You are false in making this claim. If you have the power, come and compete with me. God has informed me that I am the Promised Messiah and Islam is the true faith. When he received this announcement, he made no response. The announcement was published by newspapers in England, and cuttings from them were received in Qadian. In those days he [Piggott] was cohabiting with a woman, for which he received adverse publicity in the newspapers. After receiving the announcement of the Promised Messiahas he remained quiet and made no further claims, nor established any community. He died in this condition. [Jalal-ud-Din Shams] 632 Holiness belongs to Allah. [Publishers]

A mubahila generally requires both parties to accept the challenge and have their parties as well. Hadhrat Ahmad(as) was asking him to come and compete with him.

Now we see a similar example from the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (sa) and the Christians of Najran. For them, the ayah of mubahila was even revealed by Allah Himself, but despite this, the Prophet (saw) had passed away before them and no one can dare say that he (sa) lost the mubahila because they did not fulfill the conditions nor did they accept it.

Now it is proven that never did Piggott respond to this challenge of mubahila of the Messiah and therefore the Promised Messiah(as) saying even in my lifetime begin to make more sense. Secondly, apart from Piggott not being able to accept the prayer duel and therefore not dying in the lifetime of the Messiah, he also reiterated his claim and remained safe from punishment. Whether he did this out of fear of the people around him or fear of God is a secondary thing.

Now in 1909, after the Promised Messiah(as) passed away, Piggott repeated his claim to godship. He was living with many women who became his soul brides. One was Ruth Preece whom Piggott gave the title Chief Soul Bride. She bore him three children. When Piggott went to the local registrar of Somerset to record the names of these illegitimate children, the news got out, because he was also legally married to another woman. As Piggott was a Church of England Reverend, the scandal spread like wildfire. The Church removed him from his post. To this Piggott declared, I do not care for this decision I am God which fulfilled the prophecy of Tadhkirah of his future condition not being good!

The divine revelation granted to the Messiah was that Piggott would not repent and that his end would not be a good one. Indeed it was from this point on, after he reiterated his claim, that his descent into ignominy began. Newspapers in the Somerset Archive Centre dating from this time are full of accounts of his adulterous relationships and illegitimate children.

The mental health of Piggott started to deteriorate. His favourite soul bride also dissociated herself from him and left the colony. Donald McCormick refers to her departure as :

“It was a slow process, brought about principally through a disintegration of his character” (The Temple of Love by Donald McCormick, p.112)

McCormick has detailed Piggott’s cognitive deterioration (The Temple of Love by Donald McCormick, p.149)

His speech became muddled and his thought processes were confused. Those who were with him, referred to his tendency to paranoia. Some followers even went as far as to say that he be removed from his post or the whole community would be damaged. It is also written that due to his autocracy he could not be removed, but he spent his remaining days in aggravation, whilst his followers spent it in monotony and dreariness. His so called followers began to depart.

Now Piggott did not die until 1927, since he didn’t accept the challenge but his final days were spent in a state of mental, physical and social crisis and he did indeed repent. After his death he was buried in his own church. The church was later sold and is now a residential establishment run by a English family.

Dr Joshua Schwieso wrote about the end of Agapemone:

‘In exact opposite to Agapemone’s situation, the foundation for the Islamic sect which Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had laid down is today still flourishing.’

The annihilation of Pigott’s organisation and the propagation of the Promised Messiah’s(as) community to the corners of the earth, has been noted in Abingdon Dictionary of Living Religions. (Abingdon Dictionary of Living Religions, Keith R. Crim, 1981)

The granddaughter of John Smyth Hugh Piggott met the fifth successor of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community. The meeting lasted for half an hour and she asked for a picture as well. She repeatedly said:

“I never knew that such spiritual people still exist” And: “I have just met a very beautiful personality”

Upon seeing Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad’s(aba) photo she once again said: “It looks as if he can see the inside of people.”

This itself is a Living Sign of the truthfulness of Hadhrat Ahmad(as). A woman from his progeny experienced the divine light. She later even wrote a letter to the Khalifa.

“J.H. Smyth Pigott, Pastor of… London, has recently announced himself as God… on the 7th and 14th of September 1902… God has, therefore, commanded me to warn him… I, therefore, warn him through this notice that if he does not repent of this irreverent claim, he shall be soon annihilated, even in my life-time… God has borne witness to my truth with heavenly signs shown in thousands… The death of Mr. Pigott within my life-time shall be another sign of my truth. If I die before Mr. Pigott, I am not the true Messiah nor am I from God… God shall bring the false Messiah to destruction within the life-time of the true one… 24th November 1902.” (A Warning To A Pretender To Divinity)

Now the prophecy was clearly fulfilled. However, only the truth seekers will take heed.

Now the non Ahmadi Muslims try to bring some references to say that Piggott did not repent at all.

Firstly, even if we for argument sake, say that he did not repent, he did not accept the mubahila anyways nor did he respond to the Messiah(as) so he is still proven false in a sense while Hadhrat Ahmad(as) was proven truthful. However, Piggott did repent.

When we analyze these newspapers, we need to realize some important points. The statements which are attributed to Piggott are extremely ambiguous. Not a single quote is directly from Piggott. It is always the words of others. Who appointed them ? Did Piggott ever claim that they represent him? Never. We need to realize that the aim of the newspapers is also to create controversy and make money, in comparison to the PHD papers which are academic sources and free from such bias and goals. If the PHD articles make it clear that Piggott did repent, they should be given precedence and these newspapers should be secondary. The newspapers do not have a background of in depth research like the PHD papers do. Many quoted in the newspapers are recalling past events without any proof of their authenticity. Piggott was also forced to leave London and be separated from the people and lived a secluded lifestyle, so how can the newspapers have updated information on him?

However it is clear he repented. The article clippings non Ahmadis quote are the following:

The first newspaper they love to quote is:

The Rev. Smyth-Pigott, the self-styled “Messiah” of Clapton; and the leader of a sect called the Agapemonites is again receiving the attention of the London Press. It seems that the that the reverend gentleman whose claims to divinity caused a considerable stir some time ago, has left Clapton and is residing with his followers at the “Abode of Love” in Spaxton, Somersetshire, where he and about a hundred followers daily perform their mystic rites. He still claims divinity in blasphemous language. At a special gathering of his disciples on June 26 he again asserted his divine origin and dispensed blessings.

This newspaper has a lot of problems. Firstly, it states that the London Press is receiving the attention of the Agapemonites , but we hardly see any articles on this sect. Secondly it states that he still claims divinity but has given no proof for this. The article does not even mention the author. It then mentions a gathering from June 26 without any eye witness mentioned nor explaining what had occurred here. Secondly, even if we accept this article it does not affect us as we know Piggott repented but never did I claim he repented in 1904. He repented before 1908 and that is our argument. One with a right mind cannot argue against his repentance since the PHD papers already confirm this as quoted above.

“The flamboyant messiah of Clapton became the quiet, gentle pastor at Spaxton” (The Temple of Love by Donal McCormick, p.97, 1962, The Citadel Press, New York)

And:

“Smyth-Pigottt had learned his lesson at Clapton, that the opinion of the outside world still counted and he had no desire to face in Somersetshire the kind of demonstrations he had endured in London…..When (he) drove through the village he adopted the worldly role of a benign squire rather than that of the Messiah.” (The Temple of Love by Donald McCormick, p.95)

In his own personal Bible, there is no place where he made the claim of god. When he gifted his son David a bible as a gift, it stated:


“To my first born son, David from your father who says with you “Our Father, Which art in Heaven”. This further proves that Piggott did believe in a Deity in heaven, who was unrelated to the begin of Piggott.

In his personal possessions, he had a plaque in Latin which stated:

“Homo Sum.Humani Nihil A Me Alienum Puto. The translation of this text recorded at the back of the pendulum reads “I am a Man. Nothing akin to Humanity do I consider alien to me”.

 

The second clipping is the following:

On Monday the Agapemonites held a service at which Pigott again declared, “I am the Lamb of God,” at which the congregation fell on their knees and worshipped him.

Now instead of claiming to be God, it is written that he said “I am the Lamb of God”. When one calls their son the lamb of God, they do not mean that they are God. The same principle applies to even this clipping. Secondly, the title of  “Lamb of God” was given to Hadhrat Isa(as) by John the Baptist which further proves it’s not a title of divinity as John the Baptist rejected the so called goddhood of Isa(as) which Christians falsely attribute to him.

The next clipping is on the following website:
http://newspapers.library.wales/view/3347303/3347306/45/Messiah

Now when to turn to the context of this, it’s a vicar of Spaxton speaking. His aim is to prove that Piggott is a lunatic. He is an opponent of Piggott so this may be a total fabrication in the same way anti Ahmadis lie about Hadhrat Ahmad(as).

Now the next clipping is from Taunton Courier and Western Advertiser of 29 June 1904. This article has no author given. Secondly, it mentions that Piggott said I am the Lord Jesus. This seems as if its once again quoting his words from 1902.

In 1905, the lamb of God claim is again attributed to Piggott, which has been answered above.

The next clipping is on the following link:

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19050923.2.82.9

Even in this link, another person is simply saying Jesus is among us. There is no claim of divinity here by Piggott himself. It is possible that many of these articles are repeating the old claim of Piggott as they were not up to date with his repentance.

In 1906, another clipping says that Piggott was still claiming to be Jesus(as), but once again without any proof.

https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002063/19060915/084/0006

A few months Hadhrat Ahmad(as) passed away, an article was released where a person was interviewed and was speaking on behalf of Piggott.

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19090309.2.17.28

These are ambiguous statements of random people which do not prove anything nor can they be trusted over PHD studies.

Now in 1909, after Hadhrat Ahmad(as) passed away, Piggott has been quoted to have saying that he is God. This fulfills the other prophecy of Tadhkirah showing that his end would not be good, despite his original repentance.

The reality is clear for all truth seekers. Just focus on how much Ahmadiyyat has progressed in comparison to Piggott. Focus on how the anti Ahmadis support a claimant to godhood over a Prophet of Allah who defended Islam day and night. The Muslim scholars were asleep and it was only Ahmad(as) who stood strong like a Lion of Allah and defended the faith of Islam.

In the end, I pray that Allah Guides all Muslims to the true teachings of Islam ameen.