Why do people say Quran teaches stoning to death when it doesn't?

[stvdv]

Would the human race survive is the question! Lol

Probably we go back to Adam and Eve, and maybe a few more if all adulterers get killed. Definitely we would not have this overpopulation problem.

 

[stvdv]

Hi stvdv. I found a quote which explains the reasons why harsh laws were required in the desert in the times of Moses but not in the present day.

Thank you for the quote.

Moses dwelt in the desert. As there were no penitentiaries, no means of restitution in the desert and wilderness, the laws of God were an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Could this be carried out now? If a man destroys another man's eye, are you willing to destroy the eye of the offender? If a man's teeth are broken or his ear cut off, will you demand a corresponding mutilation of his assailant? This would not be conformable to conditions of humanity at the present time. If a man steals, shall his hand be cut off? This punishment was just and right in the law of Moses, but it was applicable to the desert, where there were no prisons and reformatory institutions of later and higher forms of government. Today you have government and organization, a police system, a judge and trial by jury. The punishment and penalty is now different. Therefore, the non-essentials which deal with details of community are changed according to the exigency of the time and conditions."

(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 168)

I also heard that the shepherds in those years (around Jesus) were quite barbaric, and considering the saying "you need a thorn to remove a thorn", it does make sense that such people, who were far from being subtle in their feelings, only would listen when they had such cruel punishments.

And knowing this, it's also clear that I better stay away from cruel people, esp. knowing that people can only change "that much" (very little)

 

[firedragon]

I think the spiritual meaning here is "if you commit adultery, you 'die spiritually', hence you are put to death". Maybe it was never meant to kill them. But people who were not spiritual, took it the wrong way (worldly). I can't imagine that God tells us to physically kill a human being over adultery.

DO you think stoning in the Bible are all spiritual stoning? Im just curious.

 

[stvdv]

DO you think stoning in the Bible are all spiritual stoning? Im just curious.

How I see it:
Divine Scriptures usually have different levels of understanding. So, probably whatever happens is meant to happen, because I don't believe anything just happens. The Divine is perfect, so His Creation must be perfect. So, whatever happens is according to His Plan, even if I don't understand (which is very likely to happen, as the Divine is beyond understanding).

The first thought that comes to mind on this issue of adultery is "stonehearted". IF you have a pure and soft heart, you will never commit adultery (esp. when having pledged 'till death do us part'). So, stoning to death symbolizes the adulterers "stone heart", being dead (dead to the Divine; not connected)

So, if other people take it "to kill adulterers" then that had to happen, but that would not be my Dharma, because I see the above figurative lesson in it

 

[Clara Tea]

This is one topic that has been hacked to death. But the same people who have been engaged in a conversation that cleared that the Quran does not speak of stoning to death for things like adultery, again state the same thing as if they never discussed this topic prior.

We must fight bigotry. We must correct false information.

We must pray for those who claim that Islamics say: Die and we'll take your village? Or, ask if they kindly offer a choice: convert or die?

We must pray for those who say: Quran doesn't advocate stoning, but Quran is not the only thing Islamists follow.

Militant Islamists 'behead more than 50' in Mozambique

British Broadcasting Company link (above) says: "Islamists beheaded more than 50 in Mozambique." We must pray that Christians don't believe news sources, nor believe pictures.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

Pew Research link (above) says: Muslims are the world's fastest growing religious group. We must pray that Christians are not scared of rumors of brutality and growing influence.

The Muslim (Islamic) religion is huge and important, and growing by leaps and bounds. We must, therefore, acknowledge the impact of the religion on the world, and its impact on our part of the world, which it likely could engulf.

Stoning - Wikipedia

Wikipedia (link above): "Although stoning is not mentioned in the Quran, classical Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) imposed stoning as a hadd (sharia-prescribed) punishment for certain forms of zina (illicit sexual intercourse) on the basis of hadith (sayings and actions attributed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad)."

This is one topic that has been hacked to death. But the same people who have been engaged in a conversation that cleared that the Quran does not speak of stoning to death for things like adultery, again state the same thing as if they never discussed this topic prior.

Why would you think that is?

Just to make sure you understand the question.

1. Some time ago, person A discusses a topic "Quran does not have stoning to death for adultery".
2. Currently the same person "A" claims "Quran has stoning to death or adultery".

Why does this happen? Any ideas?

 

[Clara Tea]

This is one topic that has been hacked to death. But the same people who have been engaged in a conversation that cleared that the Quran does not speak of stoning to death for things like adultery, again state the same thing as if they never discussed this topic prior.

Why would you think that is?

Just to make sure you understand the question.

1. Some time ago, person A discusses a topic "Quran does not have stoning to death for adultery".
2. Currently the same person "A" claims "Quran has stoning to death or adultery".

Why does this happen? Any ideas?

Please comment on the rumors, so I can gain a greater understanding of your culture and religion.

1. I've heard rumors about a Fatwa (contract to murder) Solman Rushdie for writing embarrassing things about Islam.

2. I've heard rumors that American women move with their husbands to the Middle East and find that their husbands beat them and won't let them go back to America, and force them to work (slavery).

3. I've heard rumors that Islamics don't have the right to protest the actions of their government nor spiritual leaders.

4. I've heard rumors that US reporters had their heads chopped off by ISIS.

I realize that one document, the Quran, is not the one that advocated stoning, but what accounts for the various other things (rumored above)?

 

[McBell]

This is one topic that has been hacked to death. But the same people who have been engaged in a conversation that cleared that the Quran does not speak of stoning to death for things like adultery, again state the same thing as if they never discussed this topic prior.

Why would you think that is?

Just to make sure you understand the question.

1. Some time ago, person A discusses a topic "Quran does not have stoning to death for adultery".
2. Currently the same person "A" claims "Quran has stoning to death or adultery".

Why does this happen? Any ideas?

My first guess would be that it stems from them not knowing the difference between the Koran and an Hadith.

The punishment of stoning/Rajm or capital punishment for adultery is unique in Islamic law in that it conflicts with the Qur'anic prescription for premarital and extramarital sex (zina)[7][2] found in Surah an-Nur,2: "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication — flog each of them with a hundred stripes".[8] For this reason some minority Muslim sects such as Kharijites found in Iraq, and Islamic Modernists such as the Quranists disagree with the legality of rajm.

However, stoning is mentioned in multiple hadiths[9] (reports claiming to quote what Muhammad said verbatim on various matters, which most Muslims and Islamic scholars consider an authoritative source second only to Quran as a source of religious law),[10][11] and therefore most schools of Islamic jurisprudence accept it as a prescribed punishment for adultery.[2] The punishment has been rarely applied in the history of Islam owing to the very strict evidential requirements stipulated by Islamic law.[2]
​

Rajm - Wikipedia​

 

[Spirit of Light]

This is one topic that has been hacked to death. But the same people who have been engaged in a conversation that cleared that the Quran does not speak of stoning to death for things like adultery, again state the same thing as if they never discussed this topic prior.

Why would you think that is?

Just to make sure you understand the question.

1. Some time ago, person A discusses a topic "Quran does not have stoning to death for adultery".
2. Currently the same person "A" claims "Quran has stoning to death or adultery".

Why does this happen? Any ideas?

I may think you reference is to my OP from yesterday, you was correct when you corrected my text in that OP, it was not in the Qur'an but in sharia law it is written about stoning, i corrected my OP and realized i mixed what book or text and when i read about it

 

[firedragon]

I may think you reference is to my OP from yesterday, you was correct when you corrected my text in that OP, it was not in the Qur'an but in sharia law it is written about stoning, i corrected my OP and realized i mixed what book or text and when i read about it

It was not about you brother. This was addressing missionary apologetics of a particular order.

 

[firedragon]

My first guess would be that it stems from them not knowing the difference between the Koran and an Hadith.

Thanks for that. But in all honesty, this was to do with the Quran.

 

[firedragon]

Please comment on the rumors, so I can gain a greater understanding of your culture and religion.

1. I've heard rumors about a Fatwa (contract to murder) Solman Rushdie for writing embarrassing things about Islam.

2. I've heard rumors that American women move with their husbands to the Middle East and find that their husbands beat them and won't let them go back to America, and force them to work (slavery).

3. I've heard rumors that Islamics don't have the right to protest the actions of their government nor spiritual leaders.

4. I've heard rumors that US reporters had their heads chopped off by ISIS.

I realize that one document, the Quran, is not the one that advocated stoning, but what accounts for the various other things (rumored above)?

Sure sure. But this is particularly about the Quran.

 

[firedragon]

We must fight bigotry. We must correct false information.

We must pray for those who claim that Islamics say: Die and we'll take your village? Or, ask if they kindly offer a choice: convert or die?

We must pray for those who say: Quran doesn't advocate stoning, but Quran is not the only thing Islamists follow.

View attachment 47829

View attachment 47830

Militant Islamists 'behead more than 50' in Mozambique

British Broadcasting Company link (above) says: "Islamists beheaded more than 50 in Mozambique." We must pray that Christians don't believe news sources, nor believe pictures.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

Pew Research link (above) says: Muslims are the world's fastest growing religious group. We must pray that Christians are not scared of rumors of brutality and growing influence.

The Muslim (Islamic) religion is huge and important, and growing by leaps and bounds. We must, therefore, acknowledge the impact of the religion on the world, and its impact on our part of the world, which it likely could engulf.

Stoning - Wikipedia

Wikipedia (link above): "Although stoning is not mentioned in the Quran, classical Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) imposed stoning as a hadd (sharia-prescribed) punishment for certain forms of zina (illicit sexual intercourse) on the basis of hadith (sayings and actions attributed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad)."

Good topic. But maybe for another thread. Please do open a new thread, and I would be interested in engaging objectively.

 

[Clara Tea]

Moses dwelt in the desert. As there were no penitentiaries, no means of restitution in the desert and wilderness, the laws of God were an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Could this be carried out now? If a man destroys another man's eye, are you willing to destroy the eye of the offender? If a man's teeth are broken or his ear cut off, will you demand a corresponding mutilation of his assailant? This would not be conformable to conditions of humanity at the present time.

President W. Bush went to war with Iraq (which was not involved with terrorism), killed a million, and made torture camps. That certainly sounds like punishment in modern times.

Some foreigners think that the US is too soft on criminals. They consider that OJ Simpson was guilty of murdering his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, but was let off with hardly any sentence.

When a US teen graffiti vandal, in Korea, was caned by a martial arts expert, US citizens thought that his punishment was too harsh.

If US punishments were not as light, they might serve as a deterrent to crime.

 

[firedragon]

Hi stvdv. I found a quote which explains the reasons why harsh laws were required in the desert in the times of Moses but not in the present day.


Moses dwelt in the desert. As there were no penitentiaries, no means of restitution in the desert and wilderness, the laws of God were an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Could this be carried out now? If a man destroys another man's eye, are you willing to destroy the eye of the offender? If a man's teeth are broken or his ear cut off, will you demand a corresponding mutilation of his assailant? This would not be conformable to conditions of humanity at the present time. If a man steals, shall his hand be cut off? This punishment was just and right in the law of Moses, but it was applicable to the desert, where there were no prisons and reformatory institutions of later and higher forms of government. Today you have government and organization, a police system, a judge and trial by jury. The punishment and penalty is now different. Therefore, the non-essentials which deal with details of community are changed according to the exigency of the time and conditions."

(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 168)

So, Abdul Baha did not understand anything about what he is saying here! I can't believe he made so many errors and had no clue of the scripture beyond the most superficial and top line reading but did not have any scholarship or understood the scripture any deeper.

I am sorry if this offends you, but you guys should do a little more research, and do the proselytising in every single thread there is in this forum that you set eyes upon.

 

[firedragon]

How I see it:
Divine Scriptures usually have different levels of understanding. So, probably whatever happens is meant to happen, because I don't believe anything just happens. The Divine is perfect, so His Creation must be perfect. So, whatever happens is according to His Plan, even if I don't understand (which is very likely to happen, as the Divine is beyond understanding).

The first thought that comes to mind on this issue of adultery is "stonehearted". IF you have a pure and soft heart, you will never commit adultery (esp. when having pledged 'till death do us part'). So, stoning to death symbolizes the adulterers "stone heart", being dead (dead to the Divine; not connected)

So, if other people take it "to kill adulterers" then that had to happen, but that would not be my Dharma, because I see the above figurative lesson in it

I respect your thoughts, but this is reading into scripture, not reading them.

 

[Samael_Khan]

The thing is, I am referring to people who have already engaged in the same question and are very well aware that the Quran does not contain stoning to death for adultery. Today, they are repeating it as if they are unaware. But they say it very confidently.

Do you understand?

Then they are practicing malicious deceit.

 

[firedragon]

Then they are practicing malicious deceit.

Brother. What do you think would be the gain?

 

[Samael_Khan]

Brother. What do you think would be the gain?

To convert people. I have seen this happen too often to think otherwise. It has even happened to me when I was a Christian discussing with a person of another faith about my own faith. The guy kept on bringing up the same objections which I already refuted a week before. Then my other colleague who was also christian and worked at the place before I did, was listening into the conversations and said that the same questions the guy asked me, he asked him as well, and we both gave the same answers, yet the guy continued to repeat the argument. This stinks of deceit.

But, maybe I am being too black and white with my reply to you. It could also be cognitive dissonance. I have come across people who, when I contradict their confident statement with facts, go blank faced and it is like they are struggling to compute the information. I think that it is a self defense mechanism because they are so indoctrinated into certain viewpoints. I don't fully understand it though as I have only been affected slightly by cognitive dissonance but even then I didn't repeat arguments.

But in both conclusions of mine, conversion is the goal. Also, they want to defend their own beliefs, so they will deceive themselves in order to maintain their beliefs and attack others beliefs.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I know what you mean. I had that problem with YEC. I explained how and why they misrepresented a scientific theory only for them to use the exact same misrepresentation in an other discussion with different people two days later.

This kind of thing, I believe, is deliberate. They use particular talking points without regard to their truth, because all they are trying to do is convince someone. They don't care about anything else. So, if someone is ignorant of the real story, then they may be willing/prone to believe the lie, and that is "good" for the one trying to get them to believe in things that don't have support other than these types of shenanigans. You "caught" them - and they had to relent... but I am sure all they did was take that talking point on to the next person and try their hand at using it again for the same purposes.

 

[stvdv]

I respect your thoughts, but this is reading into scripture, not reading them.

I would rather call this:
1) "Follow and trust my Conscience above Scripture"
2) "Common Sense before Divine Sense"