To what extent is Engineer Adnan Al-Rifai's denial of the abrogation (nasikh wa mansukh) in the Holy Quran valid, and his assertion that abrogation applies only to rulings found in other religions, as well as his denial of stoning (rajm) on the grounds that it is not mentioned in the Quran?

The occurrence of abrogation (naskh) in the Holy Quran is a matter of consensus among the Companions and the general body of jurists. This is supported by explicit Quranic verses, such as the Almighty's saying: "Whatever a verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it." Its occurrence is evident in rulings such as the change of the Qibla from Jerusalem to the Sacred Mosque, the specification of the waiting period ('iddah) for a widow, and the easing of the steadfastness of one [believer] against ten [disbelievers] in battle. Denying abrogation is an anomalous view that should not be heeded. Scholars have warned against denying it due to its immense benefit in understanding rulings.