Is it permissible to lie to avert a disaster? The Shaykh mentioned a discussion that took place with one of the Qadiyans in Damascus regarding the hadith of the three lies of Ibrahim (peace be upon him)

The questioner : Lying is forbidden, but if a person is compelled to lie to prevent a disaster that is on the verge of occurring if the truth is spoken, does the same ruling remain?

The Shaykh : If this question is valid, the same ruling does not remain. If the scenario is valid, the same ruling does not remain.
One of the attendees: Is lying not permissible except in three cases?

The Shaykh : Yes, lying is not permissible except in three cases.

The questioner : And in this question, it is permissible, because it is a disaster.

The Shaykh : Yes, this reminds me of one of the discussions that took place between me and the Qadiyans in Damascus. These people, of course, have very serious deviations. It appears I have forgotten his name. The important thing is: many sessions took place between me and them, and then we agreed to hold a written discussion or debate... He said: This hadith does not befit the status of the prophets. How can Ibrahim lie when our Lord says in the Noble Qur'an: Allah says: And this hadith says: This hadith is false. This discussion was between me and their great da'iyah, after that Pakistani. This is Munir al-Husni, in front of his office... The following discussion took place between me and him: but it is logical and very beautiful. I said to him: You purify Ibrahim (peace be upon him) from these three lies, which are explained in the hadith. Do I understand from you that lying is forbidden, even if it involves saving a believing soul from a disbeliever? He said to me: Yes. And we were at that time recently involved in the French Revolution, or rather the Syrian revolution against the French. The revolutionaries would attack what we call the fortifications. Do you know what you call them? ... A revolutionary, two or three, true fedayeen, would sneak up on the French and the Senegalese, who brought in the blacks, and throw two or three bombs at him. And with the speed of lightning, he would enter between the alleys and the graves, and disappear from the group. And it was a very normal matter, as happens today in Palestine, unfortunately. Quickly they would pull him out and search for who? The perpetrator. They would enter the houses and knock on the door. So I said to him, for this reason . I said to him: If this incident happened to you, and they came and knocked on your door, and a man from these Muslim revolutionaries had taken refuge with you, and this one came who we call the gendarmerie, meaning the soldier, the French gendarme, knocked on your door and said to you: Did a person enter and hide with you? What would you tell him? Did he enter? You tell him: Yes. He said: Yes. I say to him. Here the question and answer took place, and here is the precision. I said to him: I want to ask you a question. Truth is obligatory because it is composed of three letters: S, D, Q. And lying is forbidden because it is composed of three other letters: K, D, B. Is it because there is good in truth and evil in lying? He said: Of course, that is it. I said to him: So in an incident where the results differ, and what results from S, D, Q is what usually results from K, D, B, do you give it the ruling of S, D, Q or the ruling of K, D, B? Then the disbeliever was stunned.