Stoning to death is not Islamic

Society Religion & Philosophy
81

Here is an excerpt from a very good essay that discusses this topic:

Al-Nisaa 4: 15 -- 16 and Al-Noor 24: 2. Al-Nisaa 4: 15 -- 16 :

And for the harlots among your women, call four witnesses, from among your people, against them. Thus, if they testify, then confine them to their houses until death claims them or God ordains for them another way. And for the two, who are guilty of lewdness from among you, punish them both [with a beating]. Then if they repent and [promise to] correct their behavior, then let them be. Indeed God accepts repentance most; Infinitely Merciful.

Al-Noor 24: 2 reads as:

For the male and the female guilty of fornication, flog them both a hundred stripes. Let not mercy for them overtake you in the implementation of God's law, if you truly believe in God and the Final Day. And let the implementation of the punishment be witnessed by a group of believers.

A thorough understanding of the two verses should sufficiently answer the questions raised

  1. Al-Nisaa 4: 15 relates to the crime of prostitution. This is precisely the reason why only women have been mentioned;

  2. The punishment for the crime is given as house arrest till death, so that the woman in question is effectively hindered from spreading mischief and lewdness in the society;

  3. The last words of the verse -- 'until God ordains for them another way' -- clearly implies that the stipulated punishment (of house arrest) is for a period of time, after which, when the society is prepared and organized for it, the permanent law shall be given;

  4. Al-Nisaa 4: 16 relates to a male and a female involved in fornication;

  5. Immediately succeeding the words 'until God ordains for them another way', it was clear that the stipulated punishment was also effective for a temporary phase, till the time that the society was prepared and organized for the permanent punishment to be given;

  6. The punishment stipulated in the verse is of an undefined beating, which is in keeping with the fact that during the initial phase, the punishment for the crime was not strictly prescribed;

  7. The above points should also explain why the punishment in the first case is more severe than that in the second case. The two crimes, as should be clear, belong to two different categories. The consequence of the latter of the two is restricted to the two individuals involved in it; while the former, if allowed to flourish, results in the moral degeneration of the society.

  8. Al-Noor 24: 2 (and the verses that follow) prescribe the final and the permanent punishment for the crime of fornication;

As far as the final and permanent punishment for prostitution is concerned, it is not given in Al-Noor 24: 2. However, besides these verses, Al-Maaidah 5: 33 -- 34 prescribed punishments for crimes that were of the nature of spreading disorder and anarchy in the land or of religious persecution or in any other way effecting the well being of the society at a macro level. Explaining the penal law of Islam, I had written in my response to a question:

It must be understood at the outset that Islam, in its injunctions regarding the penal law, has classified crimes into two major categories:

  • Normal crimes; and
  • Extra-ordinary crimes.

Examples of the first category may include crimes against someone's property, i.e. theft, crimes against someone's life, i.e. murder or physically harming a person and crimes against chastity and respect, i.e. fornication and defamation. Besides this classification, Islam has given another class of crimes, that may appear to be of the same nature as given above, but are committed with an absolutely different psyche.

For example, a person may quietly enter someone's premise and steal something from there, and in another case, a few people may form a gang of robbers and rob market places, houses and automobiles on the highway. Now, if you would consider closely, although a crime has been committed against property in both the cases, but the psyche of the criminals is quite different in the two cases. The first case entails a psyche of a simple criminal while the second case entails a psyche of a person who wants to create unrest and disorder in the society, as a whole. Like wise, in case of murder, a person may kill another person on provocation, in hot blood or only to "get even" for an insult, or to settle the score of an old enmity. While on the other hand, a person may install a bomb in a public place and thereby kill anyone -- man, woman or child -- that comes within the range of the blast. Now, again, even though the two acts have resulted in the same thing -- that is loss of life -- but still the psyche in the two acts is absolutely different. The same is the case with crimes against chastity and respect. A man and a woman may indulge in the act of fornication or adultry, while in another case, a man may rape a woman or a woman may open a brothel.

Crimes of the first category are basically against the person, property, respect and morality of individuals, while crimes of the second category are basically against the society, as a whole. The crimes relating to the second category are called "fasaad fil-ardh" in the Qur'an.

Regarding the punishment of 'Fasaad fil Ardh', the Qur'an (Al-Maaidah 5: 33 -- 34) says:

The punishment of those, who declare a war against God and His messenger and try to spread unrest in the land is nothing but that they be sentenced to a painful death or to crucifixion or that their one hand and one foot of the opposite side be amputated or that they be sent in exile. This punishment is a disgrace for them in the life of this world, and in the hereafter, a great punishment awaits them. Except for those who repent [and correct their behavior] before you catch them. Be mindful that God is Forgiving, Merciful [for the repentant].

Explaining the penal law of Islam, I had written:

Islam, in its penal law, has proposed two different kinds of punishments for the crimes of the two categories... the punishment for "fasaad fil-ardh" has been mentioned in Al-Maaidah 5: 34. In this verse the Qur'an says that such individuals should slain in a painful manner (taqteel) or should be crucified (tasleeb) or one of their hands and one of their feet should should be amputated or they should be sent in exile (they should be removed from their society and thereby from the influence of bad company). It is obvious from this verse that the court has been given the authority to decide and implement from amongst these four punishments according to the gravity of the crime and according to the psyche of the criminal.

In view of the above explanation, it is clear that the final and permanent punishment of prostitution (for which a temporary punishment was stipulated in Al-Nisaa 4: 15), rape etc. was derived from the given verse. Stoning to death was, in fact, one of the methods adopted by the Prophet (pbuh) for implementing 'taqteel' (slaying in a painful manner).

Thus, the punishments mentioned in Al-Nisaa 4: 15 -- 16 were, in fact, given for a temporary period, during which the newly formed society was organized and groomed. During this time, lighter forms of punishments were administered to the criminals[2]. However, later on, as the moral standard of the society elevated and as it became more organized, stricter punishments were prescribed for these crimes. The latter punishments replaced and abrogated the previous order.

I will support it further through the following Ahadith (PakistanAbroad, please dont mind complaining, its not for you!)

'Ubada b. as-Samit reported: "Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has ordained a way for those (women). When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female (they should receive) one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 17, The Book Pertaining to Punishments Prescribed by Islam (Kitab Al-Hudud), Number 4191)"

Jabir b. Samura reported: "As he was being brought to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) I saw Ma'iz b. Malik-a short-statured person with strong sinews, having no cloak around him. He bore witness against his own self four times that he had committed adultery, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Perhaps (you kissed her or embraced her). He said: No. by God, one deviating (from the path of virtue) has committed adultery. He then got him stoned (to death), and then delivered the address: Behold, as we set out for Jihad in the cause of Allah, one of you lagged behind and shrieked like the bleating of a male goat, and gave a small quantity of milk. By Allah, in case I get hold of him, I shall certainly punish him. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 17, The Book Pertaining to Punishments Prescribed by Islam (Kitab Al-Hudud), Number 4198)"

"It has been narrated on the authority of Amir b. Sa'd b. Abu Waqqas who said: I wrote (a letter) to Jabir b. Samura and sent it to him through my servant Nafi', asking him to inform me of something he had heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He wrote to me (in reply): I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say on Friday evening, the day on which al-Aslami was stoned to death (for committing adultery): The Islamic religion will continue until the Hour has been established, or you have been ruled over by twelve Caliphs, all of them being from the Quraish. also heard him say: A small force of the Muslims will capture the white palace, the police of the Persian Emperor or his descendants. I also heard him say: Before the Day of Judgment there will appear (a number of) impostors. You are to guard against them. I also heard him say: When God grants wealth to any one of you, he should first spend it on himself and his family (and then give it in charity to the poor). I heard him (also) say: I will be your forerunner at the Cistern (expecting your arrival). (Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 20, The Book on Government (Kitab Al-Imara), Number 4483)"

Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid: "Two men had a dispute in the presence of Allah's Apostle. One of them said, "Judge us according to Allah's Laws." The other who was more wise said, "Yes, Allah's Apostle, judge us according to Allah's Laws and allow me to speak (first)" The Prophet said to him, 'Speak " He said, "My son was a laborer for this man, and he committed illegal sexual intercourse with his wife, and the people told me that my son should be stoned to death, but I have given one-hundred sheep and a slave girl as a ransom (expiation) for my son's sin. Then I asked the religious learned people (about It), and they told me that my son should he flogged one-hundred stripes and should be exiled for one year, and only the wife of this man should be stoned to death " Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I will judge you according to Allah's Laws: O man, as for your sheep and slave girl, they are to be returned to you." Then the Prophet had the man's son flogged one hundred stripes and exiled for one year, and ordered Unais Al-Aslami to go to the wife of the other man, and if she confessed, stone her to death. She confessed and was stoned to death. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Punishment of Disbelievers at War with Allah and His Apostle, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 826)"

Wallahu Alam

82

Ibrahim says: Ahmadjee! Don’t be disheartened , after all you have been trying desperately to discount what the Muslims believe for a long time, with little success but keep trying. You see it is because of people like you Muslims get to learn Islam, failing which they become complacent.

Now the verses concerning slaves is not just about some concession for slaves, it is about embedding the principal that slaves are slaves because of their trial on this planet and they have to be treated better and more mercy is to shown towards them. End of the day Islam forbids slavery .

So you must ask yourself , Why this double standards when the those who commit lewdness immaterial of their status will be committing the same crimes?

Thus the principal here is that mercy is to be shown to those who deserve mercy, that is why we won’t find some tom dick and Harry presiding as the judge. The function of the judge is determine who deserves what punishment and basic guidelines have been revealed to them and records of past verdicts are available to them, thus using that as the rule of the thump, judges judge on this planet.
Even here immaterial of the judgment received on this planet, they is a FINAL judge who is Absolutely perfect in knowledge and wisdom and His judgment is Perfect hence needless to worry about judgment errors made by man.

Anyway, what was the problem?

Earlier you claimed it ( verse 4:25) was stoning and you wanted to know how to half stoning ( all that was in YOUR mind based on YOUR inability to THINK or rationalize or analyze what had been revealed)

Now even after I correct your error, you twist the answer and try to argue it was not about adultery > what up doc?

Ibrahim says: what would be wrong with that? There are slaves right? And even if one is not a slave the judge can reduce the sentence on a case to case basis, why?
THINK! Maybe I better tell you why.

You see, not everyone of us can stand certain kinds of punishments some can die even be hearing the punishment ( just like those who may die by hearing gun shots and those that do not die even after being shot many times) and others in the middle of the punishment , and others who are full of remorse and have repented showing no ignorance or arrogance, all this will be weighted by the judge before he passes judgment.
Why?

Because.

90: 12 ** And what will explain to thee the path that is steep?**

13 ** (It is

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

** freeing the bondman;

14 ** Or** the giving of food in a day of privation

15 ** To** the orphan with claims of relationship

16 ** Or ** to the indigent (down) in the dust.

17 ** Then will he be of those who believe** and enjoin patience (constancy and self-restraint) ** and enjoin deeds of kindness and compassion. **

18 Such are the Companions of the Right Hand.

This is like the command to cut of the thieves hands. Not all thieves will lose their hands because some may have stolen some bread to reduce their hunger or to save another’s life having no alternative but to steal . Thus judgments are to be done by the pious, knowledgeable and wise not by those who have read the Qur’an or bible and do not understand what is the meanings in them.

Hope that Clears your inability to Think rationally but keep searching ever so hard to argue based on what YOUR mind can conjure.

Was salaam
Ibrahim

** Too many are waiting for their ships to come in, but they are waiting at the bus depot! **

83

[quote]
Ibrahim; Your babbling has proven once again that you do not understand the qur'an. Bottomline, stoning cannot be found as a punishment in the qur'an.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: salaams to all

Gandalf dear, was my questions too difficult for you? I am sorry if they had fried your brains but since you have already trapped yourself with the earlier answer you gave, with the usual ramblings that only deserve the trash can , let me explain why I asked those simple questions.

1) since you are the one, who argues shi’a imams are infallible, and you know as a fact that the shi’a stone to death, any one caught in adultery. Now why was it to difficult for you understand that YOUR infallible imams also stone to death . Are you now going to claim they are following the torah or are you going to claim they are infallible in doing so?

Thus we can see why are have been skirting the issue , even after repeated requests.

2) Second, Apparently you do not realize that when you accepted the fact that you follow hadiths and you circumcised based on them , which WAS NOT CONVEYED IN THE QUR’AN but only known through the hadiths.

** Your claim that stoning is not mentioned in the Qur’an as such it is not Islamic falls flat on it face!**

Hope you understand what Muslims do is based on the Qur’an and Sunnah (hadiths)
BTW circumcision doe not make one a Muslim but it is an act that was prescribed to Prophet Ibrahim (as) by Allah (swt) as a lasting covenant for all generations.

So what was its significance other than the health benefit of circumcision.?

Now you won’t know such things because you are blind of even what the Qur’an has conveyed . so let me help you, not for any thanks from you but for the benefit of others, as usual.

Genesis 17: 9. ** Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. **

  1. This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, ** the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised.**

  2. On that very day Abraham took his son Ishmael and all those born in his household or bought with his money, every male in his household, and circumcised them, as God told him.

    1. Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised,

  3. and his son Ishmael was thirteen;

Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith Hadith 4.575 Narrated by Abu Huraira

Allah's Apostle said, "Abraham did his circumcision with an adze at the age of eighty."

Ibrahim says how did the Prophet know this?
when it is not revaeled in the Qur'an and neither was he present at that time?

so not all revealtions are found in the Qur'an.

Ibrahim says: As such, all Muslims have circumcised from his time and the people who guarded the ka’abah ( Arabs) even before the Prophet (pbuh) established Islam also circumcised , just as the Prohet (pbuh) and Christ even were circumcised from childhood , because they were the descendents of Prophet Ibrahim (as).

** This does not need to be mentioned in the Qur’an because it is a well established tradition just like stoning the adulterers was a well established tradition.**

** NOW since you and the so called thinkers, dispute this, I am asking and willing to reward anyone who can produce a verse in the Torah, Psalms, Gospel and Qur’an where stoning as a form of punishment was forbidden or abrogated for Muslims from the time of prophet Ibrahim (as) . **

I already made it clear the punishment mentioned in the Qur’an concerning lashing only applies to unwed couples and not to those who commit adultery after having made vows in public.

Hope that helps

Was salaam
Ibrahim

** you have built castle in the AIR, now put pillars for them **

84

[quote]
Ibrahim said: I already proved that
[/quote]

You proved it in your dreams, dear Ibrahim. Please THINK through the issue and you have to admit that you erred - it is not such a big deal to admit errors now and then.

Since Ibrahim can't prove his statement that John.7v53-8v11 was changed in 600AD after given the chance to retract, I will hence consider him to be a liar whenever he talks about Christian practices and their scriptures. I am sure that this statement will not in any way prevent Ibrahim from spewing forth his hatred for Christians in general as his skin is too thick to understand the errors of his ways.

For those interested the following:

The particular part of the Gospel of John under scrutiny was omitted in the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts. It is included in the Bezae, Vulgate (383AD), Jerusalem Syriac (5'th century), and Ethiopic (4'th cetury) manuscripts. Christian writers such as Jerome (378-430AD), Eusebius (374AD), and Augustine (395AD) quoted the verses. The Constitution of the Holy Apostles (in 250AD - done at least 150 years before the compilation of the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts) refers to this episode (Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol.VII 408). The second epistle of Callistus (217AD) refers to the incident (Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol.VIII 618). At least 300 parts of manuscripts agree in placing the incident in John's gospel.

The NIV is completely correct in stating that the relevant verses do not feature in all the full original manuscripts but the compilers of the NIV decided to keep it in the full body and not as a footnote AS THE EVIDENCE THAT IT SHOULD BE IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN IS VAST. In other instances where the compilers of the NIV felt that the evidence is not strong enough to include the particular part in the main body, they added the part as a footnote as done in the case of Acts.8v37.

Above is clear evidence that Ibrahim has but an elementary background in Christianity and is totally unversed with the doctrines. Unfortunately he will continue to show off his general lack of knowledge with lies, misquotes and cut-and-pastes from unreliable sources.

The "Awake" magazine is a publication of the Watchtower Society whom is not considered by Christians as a Christian sect. Their theology/doctrines clash so much with Christianity in that they had to change and publish their own Bible according to their doctrines.

Coming back to the discussion under hand:

Stoning was done as per the Mosaic Laws given to the Jews but even they now except that it is a barbaric custom for that time and age and not for the present age. Stoning was never part of the Christian ideology. Gandalf is thus incorrect in stating the origin for stoning as "Judean-Christian".

A question I have is whether a religion should "grow/change" with age, i.e. a law is made to kill someone if they do a certain thing. Initially the method of killing the person might be stated as stoning. With better and more humane ways being available to kill such a person, should the practice not be changed or should one remain with the old way - even if it is considered barbaric by some?

[This message has been edited by The Old Man (edited July 13, 2002).]

85

there is no chritian country follow religious
law most or almost all follow secular
law . i am sure ibrahim enjoys "secular
laws" and lives in christian country.
it is only poor illitrate pakistani villagers
suffer harsh religipous punishment.

86

[quote]
Originally posted by rvikz:
there is no chritian country follow religious
law most or almost all follow secular
law . i am sure ibrahim enjoys "secular
laws" and lives in christian country.
it is only poor illitrate pakistani villagers
suffer harsh religipous punishment.
[/quote]

That does not necessarily mean that no other religion should be tried in governmnent. Also, most of the Christian countries claim to be "secular" but they do form a global "Christian" community, of course not in an 'obvious' fashion.

May Allah SWT guide us all towards right and help us follow the right

87

No, we don’t. And we don’t fly planes into buildings either, a practice you sunnis have the highest expertise.

88

Okay guys, I went online to do a search thru the hadith collections and I got the following hadiths that stumped me.

I'd like to have these explained by those who support stoning as a punishment for adultery. Thanks.

Book 017, Number 4194:
'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

QUESTION FROM PCG: If Umar Khattab has seen proof of stoning in Revelation, then why is that particular verse not included in the collection of Surahs known today to us as the Quran?

Book 017, Number 4219:
Abu Huraira reported that he heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: When the slave-woman of any of you commits adultery and this (offence of hers) becomes clear, she should be flogged (as the presribed) punishment, but hurl no reproach at her. If she commits adultery again, she should (again be punished) by flogging, but hurl no reproach upon her. It she commits fornication for the third time. and it becomes clear, then he should sell her, even if only for a rope of hair.

QUESTION FROM PCG: Does anyone know the time reference to this hadith? Also, is the punishment of adultery committed by a slave girl different from a free female believer? And if there is a difference, why is that?

Book 017, Number 4224:
Abd al-Rahman reported that 'Ali, while delivering the address said: O people, impose the prescribed punishment upon your slaves, those who are married and those not married, for a slave-woman belonging to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had committed adultery, and he committed me to flog her. But she had recently given birth to a child and I was afraid that if I flogged her I might kill her. So I mentioned that to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and he said: You have done well.

Here again we see a slave-woman being flogged for adultery. So is a free believing woman to be stoned, while slaves are flogged?

Book 41, Number 41.1.8:
Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba ibn Masud that Abdullah ibn Abbas said, "I heard Umar ibn al-Khattab say, 'Stoning is in the Book of Allah for those who commit adultery, men or women when they are muhsan and when there is clear proof of pregnancy or a confession.' "

Here again we see a reference that stoning is mentioned in the Quran (if that is indeed what they mean by Book of Allah), so where is this verse?

And if this hadith is talking about the Torah, and not the Quran, then why are we not to follow the rest of the verses of the Torah? Or was it somehow revealed to the Prophet that this particular stoning verse is an authentic verse?

The last thing I want to say is the MAJORITY of hadith I found in the hadith collections were supportive of stoning for adultery. Thus, somewhere above, I believe it was Gandalf, wrote that only 2 hadith exist that mention stoning, and others dont. The ones I've listed above are the only ones that dont. But as you can see, the message from these hadith are different.

This is indeed a very confusing case. Stoning is a VERY HARSH punishment, and likewise, the proof is hard to come up with -- its not easy to come up with FOUR witnesses, unless if you buy fake witnesses (which happens most often in Pakistan regarding the Hudood Ordinance). I find it difficult to believe that such a harsh punishment would only be discusse in the Hadith (and for sooo many of them too) and not mentioned at all in the Quran.

Despite this difficult discussion, I think we've all raised some valid points, including Ibrahim.

89

[quote]
Originally posted by Mahiwal:
**Gandalf;

So then, who died and appointed you the man incharge of fatwas? I say this because your statement about Muslim leaders being obsessed with punishments + dress code is completely untrue and shows an absolute ignorance of Islamic History. And it seems that you have not studied ahadiths (their history and compilation) at all. If stoning seems to you to be a wrong punishment, why dont you take it up with local scholars rather than taking it here?!**
[/quote]

Being a ** Shia ** , he can't help it.

Before he used to repeatedly insist that he's not a Shia, but now probably he doesn't do that anymore, since he must have realized that he has been exposed beyond any doubt.

90

[quote]
Originally posted by Salman:
No, we don't. ** And we don't fly planes into buildings either, a practice you sunnis have the highest expertise.**
[/quote]

** OPEN CHALLENGE to all the SHIAS, JEWS, CRUSADERS & HINDUS: ** Please PROVE that it was Muslims who had flown the Planes in the building.

Till now, your Crusader and Zionist friends have given no proof, hiding themselves behind the excuse of "confidentiality". But it hasn't stopped the ** Shias (or the Zionists and Hindus) to believe in this fabricated theory, ** even though there is MOUNTING EVIDENCE that these attacks were not carried out by the Muslims.

The Muslims should be guard themselves against the ** vicious assaults by the Zionists, SHIAS and Hindus. **

When My servants ask you concerning Me, ** I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calls on Me: ** Let them also, with a will, Listen to My call, and believe in Me: That they may walk in the right way. (Holy Qur'an 2:186)

[This message has been edited by Khoon-e-Shaheed (edited July 14, 2002).]

91

Please you prove that it wasn’t muslims. if you can then you should be working for the CIA. Hey aren’t you late for flight school lol lol

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

BAhahahah Oh yea protect yourselves, the big bad shias and the big bad zionists and the big bad hindus, are gonna get you and shoot your planes down before you kill anymore innocent ppl. hahahhaha god you must be comedian. hey if we are so powerful i guess it’s ok to kill every fanatic. MIGHT IS RIGHT!! So suck it up.

[This message has been edited by Salman (edited July 13, 2002).]

92

I’d CHALLENGED you to PROVE that those people were Muslims, NOT to make a ** LOT OF NOISE ** and avoid my question.

Give us the evidence which your Crusader/Zionist friends are refusing to provide.

When My servants ask you concerning Me, ** I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calls on Me: ** Let them also, with a will, Listen to My call, and believe in Me: That they may walk in the right way. (Holy Qur’an 2:186)

93

Ibrahim,

What do you have to say about the following Hadiths from Bukhari Shareef:

[quote]
Volume 8, Book 82, Number 824:
Narrated Ash-Shaibani:

I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi 'Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual intercourse). He replied, "The Prophet carried out the penalty of Rajam," I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know."

[/quote]

It seems you do!

p.s: I prayed today that May HE forgive you for your judgment passing on my intentions, as I have forgiven you.

94

Mahiwal,

[quote]
Maybe, since you're confused about the dates, someone else can help you out there, but until then it would be helpful if you dig up references which show a few instances where the Prophet(PBUH) indeed prescribed flogging only for adultery, so as to strengthen your case regarding how Quran had over-ridden the previous command.
[/quote]

Quran indeed overwrites all previous commands.

There are numerous Hadiths that do not mention weather the guilty/confessor was married or not. Though in some cases he was stoned & in some flogged.

95

[quote]
Originally posted by The Old Man:
You proved it in your dreams, dear Ibrahim. Please THINK through the issue and you have to admit that you erred - it is not such a big deal to admit errors now and then.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says : Greetings of peace to one and all

Dear Old man, on the contrary I have not erred in the least and ** denying the evidence recorded from the horses mouth is just naïve on your part based on the flimsy statements you are making.** .

1) I Gave you the evidence of a 100 Christian scholars who insist they do not find such a passage in the earlier ** not only earlier but “RELIABLE” manuscripts ** but here you are trying to claim I have lied with your concocted facts

Old man for God’s sakes, it is written in your Holy Bible not on some newspapers or web sites or some hearsay and these are the protestants , not some cult making this claim.

2) ** In addition I already presented another article (Awake) publication ** also coming from Christians that confirms it.

3) It seems, What you do not know is that the ** RSV 1952 Bible publishers , threw this passage out since it was not worth printing it,** as part of the Holy Bible in addition to flushing down the drain Mark 16:9-20

Now your claim below that it appeared in such and such manuscripts is utterly false and laughable because such are not reliable or have been rejected by the Biblical scholars not by Muslims or any one else! because, if that is the case, 100 Christian biblical scholars and many other biblical scholars for RSV will not be attesting to this

Read again! And use that brains .( I mean contemplate, not just avoid its meanings, due to your established boundary markers.)

** [The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.]**
Key words to note:

1) Earliest manuscripts
2) ** Reliable ** manuscripts
3) ** Other ancient witnesses **

Hollooooooo, do I need to repeat this??? What they are saying?? NO< NO< NO< that passage does not exist in reliable manuscripts, meaning they can only be found in UNRELIABLE manuscripts. . But you and the nonsense you post below , is saying otherwise.

Now, any rational person will believe the NIV bible and the Christian “BIBLICAL” scholars not your words and the concoctions of those who need to refute them.

Now unless you are going to produce your credentials to prove you know better than the scholars who deal with manuscripts, kindly prove ( as you want to demand from me instead from your scholars ) that it did exist, I am waiting, show me prove that it did! Not your words but prove as you are asking from me!

No I do understand the need for you call me a liar, but how are you going to dispute with your scholars?

[quote]
Since Ibrahim can't prove his statement that John.7v53-8v11 was changed in 600AD after given the chance to retract, I will hence consider him to be a liar whenever he talks about Christian practices and their scriptures.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: Old man What would it matter to me what you THINK, what matters to me is that I am only quoting what “CHRISTIANS” have published, not something I imagined or misconstrued on my own.

[quote]
I am sure that this statement will not in any way prevent Ibrahim from spewing forth his hatred for Christians in general as his skin is too thick to understand the errors of his ways.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: Old man, go check out the numerous threads where you have been proven an “liar” in this forum and we know for sure who has thick skin, don’t we?

[quote]
For those interested the following:

The particular part of the Gospel of John under scrutiny ** was omitted ** in the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts. It is included in the Bezae, Vulgate (383AD), Jerusalem Syriac (5'th century), and Ethiopic (4'th cetury) manuscripts. Christian writers such as Jerome (378-430AD), Eusebius (374AD), and Augustine (395AD) quoted the verses. The Constitution of the Holy Apostles (in 250AD - done at least 150 years before the compilation of the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts) refers to this episode (Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol.VII 408). The second epistle of Callistus (217AD) refers to the incident (Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol.VIII 618). At least 300 parts of manuscripts agree in placing the incident in John's gospel.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: ** The Christian Bible scholars who approved the NIV Bible and the scholars who printed the NWT Bible and RSV bible are claiming you are quoting lies when they omit and side track such passages. So go after them. Me, I only reveal what has already been clearly established.**

Old man, even the above sounds so foolish because here you are claiming it was OMITTED in two manuscripts but included in three manuscripts plus 300 mentions, Not knowing as to how the bible was composed and what manuscripts had been used to compose the current bible.

A pity! but that is the fate of those who wish not to find out but follow others blindly and deny the TRUTH, when it goes against their preconceived notions.

BTW, you should bring this matter up to the publishers of the NIV bible, NWT Bible, The RSV Bible and sue them for saying what they have written, maybe you will end up a poor old man altogether. Who knows, but I am sure you can make a bundle, if you can prove your stand since they so boldly claim you are talking nonsense by the words and actions they have taken. .

** Go for it old, you can single handedly save Christianity! **

[quote]
The NIV is completely correct in stating that ** the relevant verses do not feature in all the full original manuscripts ** but the compilers of the NIV decided to keep it in the full body and not as a footnote AS THE EVIDENCE THAT IT SHOULD BE IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN IS VAST. In other instances where the compilers of the NIV felt that the evidence is not strong enough to include the particular part in the main body, they added the part as a footnote as done in the case of Acts.8v37.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says:

1) what you are saying is that, they doubt some passages and verses more than others, that’s about it! It does not mean that there is no doubt concerning that passage as it is not apart of the reliable or earlier manuscripts . But most of all removing them will destroy Christian theology altogether and hence they still maintain it with added footnotes in order to save themselves form future embarrassment.

2) Old man when you try to pull fast ones, it is going to backfire!

You see the NIV, publishers keep whole passages by first stating this

** [The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.]**
after which they print the rest of the passage, and they have done their job because they have technically conveyed it is false but had been accepted as true in the past , so lets carry on with the show.

** whereas the Revised Standard Version, will omit it all together, just like NWT version and surely more that I am not aware of. **

hence this are preferences the Bible publishers take on their own, in order to SELL the Bible ** but end of the day what it means is that, that passage is FALSE and doubtful .**

Look up mark 16:9-20 in the KJV, compare with NIV and compare with RSV, which will have the same words and the same problem because it is a passage about resurrection ( false passage) which has been marketed by Christians for a long time and cannot be easily erased or retracted.

On the other hand , singles verses which when doubtful will not cause much problem are simply omitted from the reading and placed as foot notes.

Omissions (missing verses in the Bible ) in the New International version compared with the King James Version

1) Acts 8:37
2) Matt 17:21
3) Matt 18:11
4) Mark 7:16
5) Mark 11:26

I can go on and on IF you want more missing verses in the Bible! but what use? You are guy who believes your bible is the word of God and I study it, for the purpose of cross references, not for finding faults, but the faults are too evident to be just passed by.

[quote]
Above is clear evidence that Ibrahim has but an elementary background in Christianity and is totally unversed with the doctrines. Unfortunately he will continue to show off his general lack of knowledge with lies, misquotes and cut-and-pastes from unreliable sources.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: Clear evidence??? Old man, your words is NOT evidence, compared to what is published and sold publicly world wide as the Bible! So get help.

[quote]
The "Awake" magazine is a publication of the Watchtower Society whom is not considered by Christians as a Christian sect. Their theology/doctrines clash so much with Christianity in that they had to change and publish their own Bible according to their doctrines.
[/quote]

Ibrahim says ah huh! And what does another 29,999 (???) denominations of Christianity having many versions of the Bible say, who say the same about the other?

[quote]
A question I have is whether a religion should "grow/change" with age, i.e. a law is made to kill someone if they do a certain thing. Initially the method of killing the person might be stated as stoning. With better and more humane ways being available to kill such a person, should the practice not be changed or should one remain with the old way - even if it is considered barbaric by some?
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: here is where wisdom applies old man. You need to ask why stoning why not poison, why not beheading or losing your private parts , why not hanging, why not crucifixion? All that existed for other crimes in ancient times.

1) because it is to act as the “deterrent”, to purge this evil from our society altogether

2) because the accusers will have to bear the guilt by throwing the first stones in taking that life. And the rest following suit, which makes all those who took part guilty, IF they have maliciously or accused an innocent out of hate.

3) Because when witnessed or enacted in public, it is a lasting impression , something that we would not want to witness or take part in thus effectively curtailing such temptations.

4) Because Adultery opens the door to many other evils and also destroys the whole family, it is not like other crimes in the sense that, no one else will suffer but just the accused, here two families are ruined by those who fall into such temptations. .

Let me make this simple for you, you know these days people can be put to death by hanging for carrying more than 15 grams of heroin on them . And many have been hanged already , did it stop such crimes, did people come to their senses, even though death is ordained and carried out! But try stoning and see what impression it will leave behind in that community when witnessed publicly .

BTW old man grow up and face the facts don’t make accusations and flee, when it comes to the crunch, like always !

Hope that helps

Regards
Ibrahim

** one just man cause the devil greater affliction than a million blind believers **

96

Ibrahim says: Salman dear

kindly visit http://members.ozemail.com.au/~azma/zina.htm
just a primer

after that

](http://www.etehadchap.com/is.htm/quote)

97

[quote]
Volume 8, Book 82, Number 824:
Narrated Ash-Shaibani:

I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi 'Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual intercourse). ** He replied, "The Prophet carried out the penalty of Rajam,"** I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know."
[/quote]

Ibrahim says: Ahmadjee , by your own mouth, you are deviating. See above hadith CLEARLY confirms the Prophet (pbuh) allowed the stoning as is the case from ancient times.

As for 'Abdullah bin Abi 'Aufa saying he does not know when, what else you want him to say?

Are you under the impression the Prophet (pbuh) went around looking for people to stone? (nauzubillah) as such others must know when it was done and when it was not done?

Haven’t you read earlier hadiths that the Prophet (pbuh) and companions, did not want to impose this penalty as much as possible ?

98

[quote]
Originally posted by Ibrahim:
** kindly visit http://members.ozemail.com.au/~azma/zina.htm
just a primer

after that

](http://www.etehadchap.com/is.htm
[/QUOTE)

**[/QUOTE]

** Gandalf: ** Care to comment now? **Please ** . Since you were very eager to oppose Mainstream Islam, lets see how you comment to the beliefs of Shiism.

99

[quote]
Originally posted by Khoon-e-Shaheed:
**
** Gandalf: ** Care to comment now? *Please * . Since you were very eager to oppose Mainstream Islam, lets see how you comment to the beliefs of Shiism.

**
[/quote]

are you sure it does not happen in sunni
countries too?
prositution exists in all religens sects and races.

100

Something relevant to the topic at hand:

*‘Death by stoning’ woman remarries

July 13 2002 at 08:50PM

Lagos - A Nigerian woman who escaped execution by stoning for committing adultery has married a local drummer and entertainer in her native village, a witness said on Saturday.

An Islamic court in northern Nigeria acquitted 35-year-old Safiya Husaini last March, lifting the sentence and clearing her of all charges.

Her conviction last year provoked international outrage and considerable concern in Nigeria.

Hussaini, a divorcee, married again on Friday in her village Tungar Tudu, a remote and dusty settlement about 40km from Sokoto in the north-west, said the witness, a journalist.

The ceremony was witnessed by about 40 people, mostly relatives.

Her new husband, Mohammed Sani, 45, is a widower.

The couple have been provided with a house by a major womens’ group, according to the witness.

Hussaini was convicted under under strict Islamic law or Sharia, which applies in a dozen northern Nigerian states, banning adultery, fornication, drunkenness, stealing, gambling and public dancing.

The law, denounced by many human rights organisations, was first reintroduced in January 2000 in Nigeria’s north-western Zamfara State.

The Nigerian federal government has declared its implementation to be discriminatory and unconstitutional. - Sapa-AFP*
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=68&art_id=qw1026585000879B252&set_id=1