. :
your argument has multiple separate problems. on “it’s only in hadith not the Quran”, the sunnah is divine revelation. Allah ﷻ says “He does not speak from his own desire, it is nothing but revelation revealed” (53:3-4) and “Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it” (59:7). the Quran doesn’t contain the exact detailed mechanics of how to pray, the exact amounts of zakah, or dozens of other obligations either, we take all of these from hadith. if you reject rajm because it’s “only in hadith” you have to apply that standard consistently and your entire religion collapses. you don’t get to selectively accept hadith for things you’re comfortable with and reject them for things you’re not. on the hadith being unreliable, this is factually wrong. the narrations on rajm aren’t isolated reports. The Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq alone lists 70 hadith reports of rajm linked to the Prophet ﷺ and 100 from his Companions. it’s reported in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and the Sunan collections through multiple independent chains. Umar ibn al-Khattab رضي الله عنه explicitly warned about this exact situation from the minbar of the Prophet ﷺ: “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say ‘we do not find the verse of rajm in the Holy Book’ and consequently they may go astray.” he said this 1400 years ago and here we are. regarding “it was stolen from Jewish scriptures”, this proves the opposite of what you think. the Prophet ﷺ applied it to a Jewish couple because their own scripture commanded it and their rabbis were hiding the ruling out of leniency, and this is in Sahih al-Bukhari. shared rulings between divine scriptures confirm divine origin, not borrowing. on the verse from al-Nisa 4:19, that verse is about inheritance of women and treatment of wives, mentioning adultery only as a condition for rulings around divorce and dowry. it isn’t legislation for the punishment of adultery at all and using it as a contradiction shows a complete misreading of what the verse is talking about
2026-05-13 20:41:32