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

[InvestigateTruth]

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?

It depends how one views the Quran.

Some Muslims believe some of the verses of Quran have a historical story behind them, meaning some verses of Quran were revealed for a specific situation. Thus, to know what a verse was revealed for, one needs to get the background knowledge from the recorded traditions.

Now, if we follow this approach, there is at least a verse, which according to a recorded tradition, was revealed for the stoning for adultery. This verse is Qur’án 4:46

I quote from Baha'u'llah's book of Iqan on this:

"When the people of Khaybar asked the focal center of the Muḥammadan Revelation concerning the penalty of adultery committed between a married man and a married woman, Muḥammad answered and said: “The law of God is death by stoning.” Whereupon they protested saying: “No such law hath been revealed in the Pentateuch.” Muḥammad answered and said:
“Whom do ye regard among your rabbis as being a recognized authority and having a sure knowledge of the truth?” They agreed upon Ibn-i-Súríyá. Thereupon Muḥammad summoned him and said: “I adjure thee by God Who clove the sea for you, caused manna to descend upon you, and
the cloud to overshadow you, Who delivered you from Pharaoh and his people, and exalted you above all human beings, to tell us what Moses hath decreed concerning adultery between a married
man and a married woman.” He made reply: “O Muḥammad! death by stoning is the law.” Muḥammad observed: “Why is it then that this law is annulled and hath ceased to operate among the Jews?” He answered and said: “When Nebuchadnezzar delivered Jerusalem to the flames, and put the Jews to death, only a few survived. The divines of that age, considering the extremely limited number of the Jews, and the multitude of the Amalekites, took counsel together, and came to the conclusion that were they to enforce the law of the Pentateuch, every survivor who hath been delivered from the hand of Nebuchadnezzar would have to be put to death according to the verdict
of the Book. Owing to such considerations, they totally repealed the penalty of death.” Meanwhile Gabriel inspired Muḥammad’s illumined heart with these words: “They pervert the text of the Word of God.” Qur’án 4:46

 

[firedragon]

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

You could absolute trust your conscience. You could also absolutely trust your common sense.

But you cannot read you into text.

Hope you understand.

 

[stvdv]

But you cannot read you into text.

Hope you understand.

God speaks to the prophets, God also speaks to us from within.

Hope you understand.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

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?

Wasn't there a law in the Quran concerning stoning that was later abrogated?

 

[firedragon]

Wasn't there a law in the Quran concerning stoning that was later abrogated?

No. Never. There is not a single Quran manuscript with any of that.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

No. Never. There is not a single Quran manuscript with any of that.

Did not Muhammad claim that that ruling was revealed to him though? Was it or was it not considered revelation?

I mean - he made the ruling and committed the deed himself - then afterwards told his companions not to include the revelation in the written text - with no reason given.

Isn't that abrogation?

 

[firedragon]

Did not Muhammad claim that that ruling was revealed to him though? Was it or was it not considered revelation?

I mean - he made the ruling and committed the deed himself - then afterwards told his companions not to include the revelation in the written text - with no reason given.

Isn't that abrogation?

See, the topic is the Quran. Where ever you are getting this information from, its not in the Qur'an. So, its absolutely irrelevant.

Maybe you could open a new thread purely to discuss this. Yep, I will engage.

Cheers.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

See, the topic is the Quran. Where ever you are getting this information from, its not in the Qur'an. So, its absolutely irrelevant.

Maybe you could open a new thread purely to discuss this. Yep, I will engage.

Cheers.

I suppose my contention is the subject of revelation.

Whether or not it is recorded in the Quran is irrelevant to the fact that Muhammad claimed to have received the revelation that adulterers should be stoned and he was so sure of the truthfulness of this idea that he performed the deed himself.

Yes - he did tell his followers not to record this particular revelation in the Quran - after the fact - but that looks more like an admission of guilt or cover up than anything else.

So - yes - it was never written in the Quran - but Muhammad taught it as revelation and acted on it - which is more historically relevant.

 

[firedragon]

Whether or not it is recorded in the Quran is irrelevant

Well, that's irrelevant to the topic.

 

[firedragon]

God speaks to the prophets, God also speaks to us from within.

Hope you understand.

Yeah. But you cannot read things "Into" text. That is working against God. You have made yourself God.

 

[firedragon]

I suppose my contention is the subject of revelation.

Whether or not it is recorded in the Quran is irrelevant to the fact that Muhammad claimed to have received the revelation that adulterers should be stoned and he was so sure of the truthfulness of this idea that he performed the deed himself.

Yes - he did tell his followers not to record this particular revelation in the Quran - after the fact - but that looks more like an admission of guilt or cover up than anything else.

So - yes - it was never written in the Quran - but Muhammad taught it as revelation and acted on it - which is more historically relevant.

When a topic is opened to discuss something about the "Quran", saying that "Whether or not it is recorded in the Quran is irrelevant" is in fact "irrelevant". Its like "its irrelevant to discuss water in a thread named water". It seems hard to make you understand this, so I opened a new thread to discuss "your topic".

Here you go.
Did Muhammed receive revelation to stone adulterers, commit adultery, then tell his disciples to Shh

 

[stvdv]

Yeah. But you cannot read things "Into" text. That is working against God. You have made yourself God.

I agree, we better not go against God

 

[Sand Dancer]

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?

Because most non-Muslims haven't read it. Funny that it's in the Old Testament though. Violent book.

 

[stvdv]

God speaks to the prophets, God also speaks to us from within.

Hope you understand.

Yeah. But you cannot read things "Into" text. That is working against God. You have made yourself God.

You missed the essence of Koran 5:48

 

[Fallen Prophet]

When a topic is opened to discuss something about the "Quran", saying that "Whether or not it is recorded in the Quran is irrelevant" is in fact "irrelevant". Its like "its irrelevant to discuss water in a thread named water". It seems hard to make you understand this, so I opened a new thread to discuss "your topic".

Here you go.
Did Muhammed receive revelation to stone adulterers, commit adultery, then tell his disciples to Shh

I don't know why you did that considering that I was merely sharing the motivation behind my initial comment. We were done here.

 

[firedragon]

I don't know why you did that considering that I was merely sharing the motivation behind my initial comment. We were done here.

Great.

 

[firedragon]

You missed the essence of Koran 5:48

Thanks for rhetorical statements. Just empty statements to show your discontent. Let me cut and paste it and say it right back at you so that you realise that's how rhetoric works. After that you can cut and paste this post because this is also rhetorical.

You missed the essence of Koran 5:48

 

[loverofhumanity]

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.

I believe this to be very true. As in the time of Muhammad, He appeared among savage tribes of the Arabian Peninsula who pillaged, murdered, raped and buried their children alive in the sand if the first born were a girl. These are established facts not opinions.

Actually, I often gave this reason to people for why harsh penalties were used in past ages, because I believe it, then one day to my surprise I found Abdul-Baha had said the same thing!

 

[firedragon]

I believe this to be very true. As in the time of Muhammad, He appeared among savage tribes of the Arabian Peninsula who pillaged, murdered, raped and buried their children alive in the sand if the first born were a girl. These are established facts not opinions.

Actually, I often gave this reason to people for why harsh penalties were used in past ages, because I believe it, then one day to my surprise I found Abdul-Baha had said the same thing!

Thats not relevant. This was about "tooth for a tooth, eye for an eye".

Thats what Abdul Baha has not understood.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Thats not relevant. This was about "tooth for a tooth, eye for an eye".

Thats what Abdul Baha has not understood.

Its very relevant and clear scripture law at that time.

Exodus 21

24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Leviticus 24

17 And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 18 And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. 19 And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;

Matthew 5 Christ confirms it was the law also

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.