What would a Muslim do?

[Raymann]

Where does it say that specifically four men?

The witnesses have to be of upright character does not specifically mention only male or female.

I read it many times but I can't find the hadith right now.

Raymann said: ↑
Not only that, they have to have seen the actual penetration.

It doesn't say that, now you're making up s*****.

Here is an explanation by Khaled Abou El Fadl

Here is an excerpt from the article:

The second way fornication or adultery can be proven is by the testimony of four adult males who witness the actual act of penetration. It is not sufficient for the witnesses to catch the couple naked in bed. Likewise, if the witnesses see an act of oral copulation, that is not sufficient.

 

[LuisDantas]

This is rich coming from you. You have no room to talk about having knowledge on Islam.

Fortunately, it is not yours to decide.

That spares you from so much trouble! I hope that you appreciate that joy.

 

[sun rise]

"And for those who launch a charge against their spouses, and have (in support) no evidence but their own― their solitary evidence (can be received) if they bear witness four times (with an oath) by Allah that they are solemnly telling the truth; And the fifth (oath) (should be) that they solemnly invoke the curse of Allah on themselves if they tell a lie. But it would avert the punishment from the wife, if she bears witness four times (with an oath) by Allah, that (her husband) is telling a lie; And the fifth (oath) should be that she solemnly invokes the wrath of Allah on herself if (her accuser) is telling the truth. " (an-Nur, 24/6-9).

This is interesting, it says "their solitary evidence (can be received) if they bear witness four times".
What does that mean?
I would guess that means the accuser can offer his own evidence as long as he brings 4 witnesses.
Is that correct?

If that is correct then this doesn't change what I said initially on the OP.
A person cannot accuse his wife unless he brings at least 4 witnesses.

The passage was someone challenging the 4 witness requirement.

The outcome was that the accuser repeated his accusation 4 times. His wife denied the accusation 4 times. The result was a divorce.

To me this is significant beyond the question of 4 witnesses because it illustrates the difference between the law and justice. To me the correct decision in this "he said, she said" situation was a divorce rather than a literal interpretation of a rule.

 

[Raymann]

The outcome was that the accuser repeated his accusation 4 times. His wife denied the accusation 4 times. The result was a divorce.

To me this is significant beyond the question of 4 witnesses

Are we talking about an adultery accusation here?
Repeating his accusation 4 times instead of providing 4 witnesses in an adultery case is a pretty significant difference.
That would change what Muslims have believed for 1400 years.
I would need confirmation from Muslims that in an adultery case the accuser needs only to repeat the accusation instead of providing 4 witnesses.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

This is the scenario:
You get home and find your wife having sex with another man.
You are the only witness.

This would be a case of adultery according to Islam. A man and a woman having sex outside of marriage.
The problem is that following strict Islamic rules adultery is very difficult to prove.
You need four men witnesses of upright character (sinless)
Those witnesses have to actually see the penetration before making any accusation.
Those who make accusations without the required conditions are actually penalized for it.

How does this accomplish justice?
What would a husband do in this situation?
What would any Muslim do in this situation?

Get a divorce.

 

[firedragon]

This is the scenario:
You get home and find your wife having sex with another man.
You are the only witness.

This would be a case of adultery according to Islam. A man and a woman having sex outside of marriage.
The problem is that following strict Islamic rules adultery is very difficult to prove.
You need four men witnesses of upright character (sinless)
Those witnesses have to actually see the penetration before making any accusation.
Those who make accusations without the required conditions are actually penalized for it.

How does this accomplish justice?
What would a husband do in this situation?
What would any Muslim do in this situation?

Leave her.

Filing for divorce etc are upon latter considerations.

 

[QuestioningMind]

This is the scenario:
You get home and find your wife having sex with another man.
You are the only witness.

This would be a case of adultery according to Islam. A man and a woman having sex outside of marriage.
The problem is that following strict Islamic rules adultery is very difficult to prove.
You need four men witnesses of upright character (sinless)
Those witnesses have to actually see the penetration before making any accusation.
Those who make accusations without the required conditions are actually penalized for it.

How does this accomplish justice?
What would a husband do in this situation?
What would any Muslim do in this situation?

Your confusion is not surprising. But the Koran is no different from any other ancient religious text... it's filled with contradictions and claims that defy logic. That's why believers are encouraged to abandon logic and reason and replace it with mindless 'faith'.

 

[whirlingmerc]

That is exactly what I did.
I just asked questions on what to me is odd and makes no sense.
I just asked what Muslims do when a woman is known to have committed adultery?

If I was a Muslim this would have been the answer to my question:
I would not have accused my wife of adultery because Allah's rules expect me to produce at least 4 witnesses of upright character, etc, etc.
The problem is that I saw my wife committing adultery so how can I say justice was done?
I know the truth but Allah's rules don't allow me to tell it.
Does Allah expect me to follow the rules even when I know they don't do justice?
How do Muslims deal with this?

There is an example in the gospels.

In the gospels there was a point Joseph was grieved and thought Mary was pregnant for that reason, although it was a virgin birth. Joseph was said to plan to quietly divorce her because he was a righteous man.

Seems he could have made a public fuss but showed mercy and was going to quietly handle it. In this case he was betrothed and virtually married but not yet living together as was the custom

 

[whirlingmerc]

QUOTE="QuestioningMind, post: 6362041, member: 25412"]Your confusion is not surprising. But the Koran is no different from any other ancient religious text... it's filled with contradictions and claims that defy logic. That's why believers are encouraged to abandon logic and reason and replace it with mindless 'faith'.[/QUOTE]

There are also commands to love mercy given in the book of Hosea. The stunning picture in Hosea? Hosea set aside his wife Gomer's unfaithfulness twice and stayed married. And he did it at God's command.

Hosea and His Family, A Portrait of Grace

[


as far as judicial proceedings, Moses said there need to be 2 or 3 accusers not 4. Additionally other evidence was allowed to be presented besides eyewitness.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This is the scenario:
You get home and find your wife having sex with another man.
You are the only witness.

This would be a case of adultery according to Islam. A man and a woman having sex outside of marriage.
The problem is that following strict Islamic rules adultery is very difficult to prove.
You need four men witnesses of upright character (sinless)
Those witnesses have to actually see the penetration before making any accusation.
Those who make accusations without the required conditions are actually penalized for it.

How does this accomplish justice?
What would a husband do in this situation?
What would any Muslim do in this situation?

This is what I got from looking up prescribed punishments....

"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".

— Sahih Muslim, 17:4191

 

[Shad]

The first application of the verse was used for the family of Hilal. Hazrat Prophet summoned Bilal. Bilal swore by Allah four times that he was telling the truth; he wanted the curse of Allah to be on him if he lied. Then his wife was brought there. She swore the same way. She wanted the curse of Allah to become on her if her husband told the truth. Then, the Messenger of Allah divorced them.

In the end no one was cursed right.... So two standards completely failed so just make up a 3rd and ignore the failures.

 

[QuestioningMind]

QUOTE="QuestioningMind, post: 6362041, member: 25412"]Your confusion is not surprising. But the Koran is no different from any other ancient religious text... it's filled with contradictions and claims that defy logic. That's why believers are encouraged to abandon logic and reason and replace it with mindless 'faith'.

There are also commands to love mercy given in the book of Hosea. The stunning picture in Hosea? Hosea set aside his wife Gomer's unfaithfulness twice and stayed married. And he did it at God's command.

Hosea and His Family, A Portrait of Grace

View attachment 33623 [


as far as judicial proceedings, Moses said there need to be 2 or 3 accusers not 4. Additionally other evidence was allowed to be presented besides eyewitness.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for providing an example of just how contradictory and illogical the bible is as well. HERE you give an example of God stating that a man should forgive his wife for repeatedly cheating on him and remain married... yet in OTHER parts it states that god claims an adulteress should surely be put to death. How silly... it's almost as if you get to decide that the bible means whatever it is that you want it to mean.

 

[whirlingmerc]

There are also commands to love mercy given in the book of Hosea. The stunning picture in Hosea? Hosea set aside his wife Gomer's unfaithfulness twice and stayed married. And he did it at God's command.

Hosea and His Family, A Portrait of Grace

View attachment 33623 [


as far as judicial proceedings, Moses said there need to be 2 or 3 accusers not 4. Additionally other evidence was allowed to be presented besides eyewitness.

Thanks for providing an example of just how contradictory and illogical the bible is as well. HERE you give an example of God stating that a man should forgive his wife for repeatedly cheating on him and remain married... yet in OTHER parts it states that god claims an adulteress should surely be put to death. How silly... it's almost as if you get to decide that the bible means whatever it is that you want it to mean.[/QUOTE]

Hardly. Both are true. A sinner deserves judgement. God can glorify himself showing mercy and rescuing some from deserved judgement

Need I bring up the first convert in the promised land? Rahab the harlot?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Thanks for providing an example of just how contradictory and illogical the bible is as well. HERE you give an example of God stating that a man should forgive his wife for repeatedly cheating on him and remain married... yet in OTHER parts it states that god claims an adulteress should surely be put to death. How silly... it's almost as if you get to decide that the bible means whatever it is that you want it to mean.

Hardly. Both are true. A sinner deserves judgement. God can glorify himself showing mercy and rescuing some from deserved judgement

Need I bring up the first convert in the promised land? Rahab the harlot?[/QUOTE]

ROFL... sure. But what should poor human beings do? Are we SUPPOSED to kill the offenders OR are we SUPPOSED to forgive the offenders? OR does it not really not matter, since SOMETIMES it's okay with god and SOMETIMES it isn't? No wonder there are so many different Christian sects... no one can agree on what the silly book is trying to say.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Hardly. Both are true. A sinner deserves judgement. God can glorify himself showing mercy and rescuing some from deserved judgement

Need I bring up the first convert in the promised land? Rahab the harlot?

ROFL... sure. But what should poor human beings do? Are we SUPPOSED to kill the offenders OR are we SUPPOSED to forgive the offenders? OR does it not really not matter, since SOMETIMES it's okay with god and SOMETIMES it isn't? No wonder there are so many different Christian sects... no one can agree on what the silly book is trying to say.[/QUOTE]


I can give another example. King David commit murder and cover up.
David appeals to God for mercy not on the basis of the law in Psalm 51 but on the basis of God's love lovingkindness

 

[QuestioningMind]

ROFL... sure. But what should poor human beings do? Are we SUPPOSED to kill the offenders OR are we SUPPOSED to forgive the offenders? OR does it not really not matter, since SOMETIMES it's okay with god and SOMETIMES it isn't? No wonder there are so many different Christian sects... no one can agree on what the silly book is trying to say.

I can give another example. King David commit murder and cover up.
David appeals to God for mercy not on the basis of the law in Psalm 51 but on the basis of God's love lovingkindness[/QUOTE]

Very good... yet another example of God's contradictory and confusing messages. What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?

Then of course there's the whole, Thou Shalt Not Kill thing, which should really be Thou Shalt Not Kill... Unless, because there are so very many exceptions. Thou shalt not kill... unless of course your neighbor dares to work on the Sabbath... or happens to be a disobedient child... or commits adultery... or is unfortunate enough to live in one of the cities that God orders his followers to slaughter. I guess it's all of those confusing contradictions that have made it so easy for so many Christians to kill in the name of their god over the centuries.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I can give another example. King David commit murder and cover up.
David appeals to God for mercy not on the basis of the law in Psalm 51 but on the basis of God's love lovingkindness

Very good... yet another example of God's contradictory and confusing messages. What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?

Then of course there's the whole, Thou Shalt Not Kill thing, which should really be Thou Shalt Not Kill... Unless, because there are so very many exceptions. Thou shalt not kill... unless of course your neighbor dares to work on the Sabbath... or happens to be a disobedient child... or commits adultery... or is unfortunate enough to live in one of the cities that God orders his followers to slaughter. I guess it's all of those confusing contradictions that have made it so easy for so many Christians to kill in the name of their god over the centuries.[/QUOTE]


Not a contradiction at all.

David's prayer was 'create in me a pure heart' which is the center verse of 5 psalms on judgement. In the end it is glorifying God based on God's nature, mercy and covenant love

I would say more accurately it's a stumbling block for some and a marvel for believers

Jesus is a rock everyone falls over, some he breaks em before he makes em, some fall to their harm see the song Scandelon by Michael Card

 

[QuestioningMind]

Very good... yet another example of God's contradictory and confusing messages. What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?

Then of course there's the whole, Thou Shalt Not Kill thing, which should really be Thou Shalt Not Kill... Unless, because there are so very many exceptions. Thou shalt not kill... unless of course your neighbor dares to work on the Sabbath... or happens to be a disobedient child... or commits adultery... or is unfortunate enough to live in one of the cities that God orders his followers to slaughter. I guess it's all of those confusing contradictions that have made it so easy for so many Christians to kill in the name of their god over the centuries.

Not a contradiction at all.

David's prayer was 'create in me a pure heart' which is the center verse of 5 psalms on judgement. In the end it is glorifying God based on God's nature, mercy and covenant love

I would say more accurately it's a stumbling block for some and a marvel for believers

Jesus is a rock everyone falls over, some he breaks em before he makes em, some fall to their harm see the song Scandelon by Michael Card

[/QUOTE]

If there isn't a contradiction then why didn't you answer my question? What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Not a contradiction at all.

David's prayer was 'create in me a pure heart' which is the center verse of 5 psalms on judgement. In the end it is glorifying God based on God's nature, mercy and covenant love

I would say more accurately it's a stumbling block for some and a marvel for believers

Jesus is a rock everyone falls over, some he breaks em before he makes em, some fall to their harm see the song Scandelon by Michael Card

If there isn't a contradiction then why didn't you answer my question? What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?[/QUOTE]


Gid 'has shown you oh man what to do but s to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with your God." in Micah

In a sense both justice and love mercy

One would thing loving mercy is a higher bar than doing mercy

 

[QuestioningMind]

If there isn't a contradiction then why didn't you answer my question? What are mere humans supposed to take from it? Does God want us to practice JUSTICE, which means that murderers are put to death for their crimes? Or does God want MERCY, which means we forgo justice whenever a murderer appeals to our loving kindness?

Gid 'has shown you oh man what to do but s to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with your God." in Micah

In a sense both justice and love mercy

One would thing loving mercy is a higher bar than doing mercy[/QUOTE]

BOTH?????? THAT is a CONTRADICTION. Either the just and proper punishment for adultery is DEATH or it's appropriate to ignore what is just and proper and instead extend MERCY. How exactly does that work? Are you merciful for maybe a week and THEN you kill the offender? Can't really see how it's possible to kill them FIRST and THEN extend mercy. Wow... how confusing. It's almost as if people get to decide for themselves... in which case what God has to say about it is pretty much meaningless.