Sodomy "For the Sake of Islam"

by Raymond Ibrahim

As a possibly convenient way of rationalizing what one desires while still being able to feel "pure," anything and everything that is otherwise banned becomes permissible. All that supposedly matters is one's intention, or niyya.

Not only did the original "underwear bomber" Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri hide explosives in his rectum to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayef—they met in 2009 after the 22-year-old holy warrior "feigned repentance for his jihadi views"—but al-Asiri apparently had fellow jihadis repeatedly sodomize him to "widen" his anus in order to accommodate the explosives— all in accordance with the fatwas [religious edicts] of Islamic clerics.

A 2010 Arabic news video that is making the rounds on the Internet gives the details. Apparently a cleric, one Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, informed jihadis of an "innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake this jihadi approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives."

Others inquired further by asking for formal fatwas. Citing his desire for "martyrdom and the virgins of paradise," one jihadi, (possibly al-Asiri himself) asked another sheikh, "Is it permissible for me to let one of the jihadi brothers sodomize me to widen my anus if the intention is good?"

After praising Allah, the sheikh's fatwa began by declaring that sodomy is forbidden in Islam,

However, jihad comes first, for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it. For the overarching rule of [Islamic] jurisprudence asserts that "necessity makes permissible the prohibited." And if obligatory matters can only be achieved by performing the prohibited, then it becomes obligatory to perform the prohibited, and there is no greater duty than jihad. After he sodomizes you, you must ask Allah for forgiveness and praise him all the more. And know that Allah will reward the jihadis on the Day of Resurrection, according to their intentions—and your intention, Allah willing, is for the victory of Islam, and we ask that Allah accept it of you.

Two important and complementary points emerge from this view: 1) that jihad is the "pinnacle" of Islam—for it makes Islam supreme (based on a hadith, the formerly oral history of the life of Muhammad); and 2) that "necessity makes permissible the prohibited." These axioms are not limited to modern day fatwas, but in fact, were crystallized centuries and ago agreed to by the ulema [Islam's leading religious scholars]. The result is that—because making Islam supreme through jihad is the greatest priority—anything and everything that is otherwise banned becomes permissible. All that comes to matter is one's intention, or niyya.

From here one may understand the many ostensible incongruities of Islamic history: lying is forbidden—but permissible to empower Islam; intentionally killing women and children is forbidden—but permissible when performed during holy war, or jihad; suicide is forbidden—but also permissible during jihad, only then called "martyrdom."

Indeed, the Five Pillars of Islam—including prayer and fasting—may be ignored during the jihad. So important is the duty of jihad that the Ottoman sultans—who often spent half their lives on the battlefield—were not permitted to perform the obligatory pilgrimage to Mecca.

More recently, these ideas appeared in a different form during Egypt's elections, when Islamic leaders portrayed voting as a form of jihad and justified anything—including cheating, which was deemed "obligatory"—to empower Islam.

According to these two doctrines—which culminate in empowering Islam, no matter how—one may expect anything from would-be jihadis, regardless of how dubious the effort might seem to us.

Ironically, this mentality, prevalent throughout the Islamic world, is the same mentality that many Western leaders and politicians think can be appeased with just a bit more respect, well-wishing, and concessions from the West.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum

No wonder!

and some Muslims,do not want us to expose the Wahhabis and their fatwas and talk against them when they are giving us Muslims and islam a bad image.wahhabism and their ugly fatwas only embolden non-muslims to further misunderstand Islam and oppose it and also attack it.

and this isnt the first ridiculous fatwa.you just need to review the below to see that such ridiculous fatwas under the guise of "purity,religion and jihad" is the trademark of wahhabism aka salafism:

https://www.nairaland.com/976055/tomatoes-christian-egyptian-salafist-group

actually this Wahhabi fatwa on sodomy was first exposed by a Shia Muslim satellite channel of the fiery Shia preacher,Sheikh Yasser al-Habib, if i am not mistaken.the Shia TV channel of Sheikh Yasser al-Habib (a Shia Muslim Kuwaiti preacher living in exile) broadcasts from London and is known as "Fadak TV".the Shia channel exposed this wahhabi terrorist haram fatwa.

i know i have watched it on youtube.it was Fadak tv that exposed the wahhabi fatwa.here is the video (2 minutes 39 seconds):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik5GZap_-_A

Its always the wahabbi....Never other sects like Shias, always wahabbi.

proo212: Its always the wahabbi....Never other sects like Shias, always wahabbi.

lol

so now you're "evangelical christian wahhabi".or may be you have now become Sunni Muslim.

it is so obvious that Islam haters love to bash Islam and are happy when the Wahhabis among Sunnis issue such appalling statements and fatwas.their aim is to target Islam.

but whether they like it or not truth will come out!

watch the video i posted.is that not enough evidence for you to be convinced? if you have anything against the Shia,bring it and start your thread.i know it is paining you as an enemy of Islam when Islam is convincingly defended.

Tell me this isnt true?


What kind of sick practice is this? However, I have been laughing at the irony!

Logicbwoy: Tell me this isnt true?


What kind of sick practice is this? However, I have been laughing at the irony!

ask BataThing and Vedaxcool (the Sunni champs in the house) to explain

Sodomy for jihad? Venerable LGBT magazine
The Advocate spreads vile Islamophobic hoax


Screenshot from The Advocate article The Religious Exemption: Sodomy for Suicide Bombers that shows a photo collage with an erroneous caption.
Note: This post contains a translation of a sexually explicit and defamatory joke targeting Muslims
The Advocate, an important US-based national gay and lesbian news magazine, has published a homophobic, racist, sectarian and Islamophobic hoax as if it is actual news. An article headlined “The Religious Exemption: Sodomy for Suicide Bombers” by Advocate.com editor Lucas Grindley published 12 July 2012 makes the following astonishing claim: Suicide bombers were allowed to ask fellow militants for anal sex so it would be easier to hide explosives in their rectums — at least according to a researcher at a conservative think tank.
Raymond Ibrahim, a fellow at the conservative David Horowitz Freedom Center, said he’s found a 2010 Arab news video in which a Muslim cleric is caught explaining why sodomy is permissible if part of “martyrdom operations.” “Is it permissible for me to let one of the jihadi brothers sodomize me to widen my anus if the intention is good?” someone asks
cleric Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, according to Ibrahim’s account. Although the cleric reminds everyone that sodomy is forbidden, he offers an exception. “Jihad comes first,” he said, according to Ibrahim’s translation, “for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it.”

Origins of a Hoax

[b]This claim reported by The Advocate is pure nonsense. It is a hoax purveyed by someone affiliated with the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an extreme right-wing organization whose founder and namesake is well-known for uncivil and racist attacks on liberal, progressive and leftist political groups. The Advocate’s source is Raymond Ibrahim, a fellow at the Horowitz Center and at the Middle East Forum , who claimed that the religious directive was contained in a “2010 Arabic news video that aired on Fadak TV” and was advice given to Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri, who blew himself up in an attempt to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayif in 2009. Some press reports stated that al-Asiri had carried explosives in his rectum. In his post on the Gatestone Institute, Ibrahim elaborates:
Apparently a cleric, one Abu al-Dema al- Qasab, informed al-Asiri and other jihadis of an “innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake this jihadi approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives.[/b]”

To a non-Arabic speaker, it would be reasonable to believe that the person speaking in the video is “Abu al-Dema al-Qasab” because Ibrahim does not give any context to the video. Apparently The Advocate believed this, because it posted a screenshot of the man from the video next to a photo of al-Asiri with the following caption: Cleric Abu al-Dema al-Qasab (left) reportedly said suicide bombers like Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri (right), who hid explosives in his rectum, were allowed anal sex. However, the person in the video is Abdallah al- Khallaf, host of “The morals of the Prophets, Peace Be Upon Them,” a show broadcast on UK-based satellite channel Fadak TV whose target audience is
Shia Muslims. In the video, al-Khallaf tells the audience that he is going to read an item from a website called “Muntadayat Usud al-Sunna” (Lions of the Sunnah forums).
Al-Khallaf reads the item from the website as if it is real. He also characterizes the alleged protagonists as “Wahhabis.” It appears his intention is to incite his audience’s disgust at the supposed thinking and behavior of Wahhabi Sunni Muslims who, he suggests, will justify anything in pursuit of their goals.
“one Abu al-Dema al-Qasab” I found the likely source that Abdallah al-Khallaf reads in the video. The Internet Archive includes a forum post from 28 August 2009 on montdiatna.com. The text appears to be at best an extremely vulgar joke and at worst sectarian defamation. It is written in a style commonly used for stories in which both the teller and listener know it is a joke or fiction. The Electronic Intifada has translated this text into English. Please be warned that it contains very explicit language and imagery:
It is said that the terrorist who blew himself up in an attempt to assassinate Prince Muhammad bin Nayif inserted capsules of explosives in his anus like suppositories. It is said – only God knows – that before he acted, the terrorist asked a sheikh, that he intends to insert explosive capsules in his rectum, seeking jihad, in order to carry out jihad operations, in desire for virgins. The terrorist asked the sheikh the question in the following way: Our Sheikh, May God give you martrydom and virgins in paradise. I want to carry out a martrydom operation and so I presented myself to “Sheikh Bloody Butcher” [Sheikh Abu al-Dema al-Qasab]. He told me we devised a completely new and unprecedented way for martyrdom operations and that is to put explosives in your rectum. And in order to train you for this method of jihad you must agree to be sodomized for a period in order that your anus will be widened such that your rectum can take the explosives. And my question, God have mercy on you: Is it permitted to offer my anus to one of the mujahidin brothers if the intention is pure
and the goal is to train for jihad, and to widen my rectum?
And the sheikh offered praise to God and said: In principle sodomy is forbidden and out of the question. Except that jihad comes first, it is the pinnacle of Islam. And if the
pinnacle of Islam cannot be achieved except through sodomy then there is no wrong in it. The jurisprudential rule says: necessity overcomes what is forbidden. And if the only
way to carry out a duty is with a certain thing, then that thing becomes a duty, and there is no greater duty than jihad. After you are sodomized you must ask forgiveness from God and praise him abundantly and you must be certain my son that on Judgment Day, God rewards the mujahidin according to their intentions, and your intention, God willing is the victory of Islam. This text, or versions with slight variations, can be found on several other websites by searching for the name “Sheikh Abu al-Dema al-Qasab” in Arabic.
Several features identify this story as a tasteless joke, especially the name “Sheikh Abu al-Dema al-Qasab.” It translates to Sheikh Bloody Butcher. This is not a real person. The post is peppered with phrases like “it is said” and “only God knows” which
indicate storytelling.

The Advocate’s ongoing Islamophobic crusade
The Advocate was a cornerstone of the LGBT civil rights movement, providing serious journalism and analysis since 1967 for a community that suffered discrimination and even violence as it struggled for legitimacy and recognition. Civil rights activists, artists and journalists such as Tony Kushner, Urvashi Vaid and Randy Shilts found a home there. However in the past decade, The Advocate began publishing Islamophobic, anti-Palestinian and pinkwashing rants from pornographic filmmaker Michael Lucas . Now it is relying on racist trash put out by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, whose racism targeted African Americans even before its main focus became Muslims. As Ali Abunimah wrote in 2011: Ten years ago Horowitz notoriously ran ads in college newspapers across the country saying that black people should be grateful that their ancestors were slaves in America and in fact owed America a debt for slavery. The ads caused an outcry on campuses all over the United States. More recently, Horowitz has defended Robert Spencer, another notorious bigot and inspiration for Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik, as “a man of great courage and decency.” Notably the comments under Grindley’s article are replete with Islamophobia, indicating that if his goal was to incite the The Advocate’s readers against Muslims, he succeeded. The Advocate must retract this hoax This hoax is reminiscent of previous ones, including the fake “ Muslim rape epidemic” and one in April when it was widely reported that Egypt’s newly elected Muslim Brotherhood dominated parliament had passed a law allowing husbands to have sex with their dead wives. These reports were entirely without any factual basis. The Advocate must retract this vicious hoax and apologize to its readers before it does more damage. With thanks to Ali Abunimah for translation.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/benjamin-doherty/sodomy-jihad-venerable-lgbt-magazine-advocate-spreads-vile-islamophobic-hoax

The behavior of shias towards farbricating the truth is not new even the nasibi al kufr told a lie while fasting today so to the shias lying is a religious duty, but I wonder that everybody who responded believed such fallacy without asking for evidence or even a link is very strange and shows the underlying fanaticism towards believing anything that tickles ur fancy! Again such lies have been told before.

vedaxcool: The behavior of shias towards farbricating the truth is not new even the nasibi al kufr told a lie while fasting today so to the shias lying is a religious duty, but I wonder that everybody who responded believed such fallacy without asking for evidence or even a link is very strange and shows the underlying fanaticism towards believing anything that tickles ur fancy! Again such lies have been told before.

asked


Sharaa there!

I asked if it was true;

Logicbwoy: Tell me this isnt true?


What kind of sick practice is this? However, I have been laughing at the irony!

Ahead of elections, Egypt's state propaganda
machine rolls on
Egypt's government paper Al Ahram was the
central arm of state propaganda during the
reign of Hosni Mubarak. Ahead of elections, it's
taking aim once again at Egypt's Islamists.

Last week, Egypt's state-owned newspaper Al Ahram helped kick up an international storm with a bit of dodgy journalism: It ran an opinion piece by Amr Abdel Samea, a former loyalist of deposed President Hosni Mubarak, that stated that Mervat el-Tallawy, the head of Egypt's National Council for Women, had complained that Egypt's parliament was considering a piece of legislation sponsored by Islamists to allow men to have sex with their wives after their death.

The story was translated into English by Al Arabiya, and was quickly picked up by outlets like the Huffington Post and the sensationalist British tabloid The Daily Mail, which distorted the original claim from a proposal to a done deal: "Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives," the tabloid claimed, apparently having misunderstood the original Arabiya translation. The story buzzed around the world, held up in blogs as evidence of the immorality of Islamist politicians. The current version of the Wikipedia article on necrophilia even has a section devoted to the claim.

RELATED: Salafis 101

The problem is that there was never any such proposal, at any stage of consideration, in the Egyptian parliament. Ms. Tallawy issued a statement today that says she's concerned about legislation that may harm the position of women in Egypt, but that there was never any "sex after death law" under consideration, let alone one she complained about. Arabiya followed up as well, quoting Parliament Secretary Sami Mahran as saying no such piece of legislation ever existed.

This is hardly surprising. Anyone who knew Egypt didn't believe it in the first place, since sex with the dead is a laughably extreme position that no Egyptian Islamist group has ever espoused but is exactly the kind of overheated scare-mongering that can be potentially useful for opponents of Islamist politicians as Egypt's presidential campaign heats up.

In the presidential campaign, former Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa (who served as Mubarak's foreign minister for a decade) is the old establishment's preferred candidate. His main rivals are former Muslim Brotherhood executive Abdul Moneim Aboul Fotouh and current Brotherhood member, Mohammed Morsi.

Ahram's reporting should be seen within its traditional framework – serving the interests of those in power. That was Mr. Mubarak for decades. Now, it's the Supreme Council for the Armed Forces (SCAF), the military junta that has run Egypt since Mubarak's ouster last February.

Ahram under Mubarak was much like Pravda in the old Soviet Union. Consider the former president's September 2010 visit to Washington for Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. A photographer captured Mubarak, President Obama, Jordanian King Abdullah, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walking the red carpet together. Mubarak trailed the whole group, just behind Mr. Netanyahu.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2012/0430/Ahead-of-elections-Egypt-s-state-propaganda-machine-rolls-on

@vedaxcool, this was never refuted. I saw this news week before last and followed up the response. It was never refuted!

@Lagosshia, I thought Shiites in Iran says its OK to marry young pubescent girls. Its not only Wahabbis/Sunnis that come out with such. You want to deny it I'll bring proof.

Islam (all sects are quite capable making fun of themselves)

proo212:
@Lagosshia, I thought Shiites in Iran says its OK to marry young pubescent girls. Its not only Wahabbis/Sunnis that come out with such. You want to deny it I'll bring proof.

Islam (all sects are quite capable making fun of themselves)

please what does marriage got to do with sodomy?

a girl that reaches physical maturity and mental maturity can get married.the age can differ from one female to the other.presently in Iran the age of consent for girls is 16.

LagosShia:

please what does marriage got to do with sodomy?

a girl that reaches physical maturity and mental maturity can get married.the age can differ from one female to the other.presently in Iran the age of consent for girls is 16.

16? That is pedophilia.

vedaxcool: The behavior of shias towards farbricating the truth is not new even the nasibi al kufr told a lie while fasting today so to the shias lying is a religious duty, but I wonder that everybody who responded believed such fallacy without asking for evidence or even a link is very strange and shows the underlying fanaticism towards believing anything that tickles ur fancy! Again such lies have been told before.

abeg shut-up.

is this the first time this ridiculous things are being turned into fatwas by Wahhabis aka Salafists? what about sleeping with a dead woman? and tomatoes are christian? what about the infamous Wahhabi treat: Adult Breastfeeding?

what is the lie in what was posted? u nor dey shame? you are just spamming the thread with nonsense.your spamming posts should be hiden.you are as usual going wild and crazy when the truth is shown to you.

the source of the fatwa has been given in the video.instead of copying an article from Sunni apologists denying the fatwa with empty words,you or they should have brought a statement from the Sunni website or the scholar himself who issued the fatwa,denying such fatwa.but nothing.puffffffffffffff~!!!!! you want to make people doubt.

Logicbwoy:


16? That is pedophilia.

the age of consent in Nigeria is 13.and you can tell us about the UK,Germany,Japan and first world countries too.

LagosShia:

the age of consent in Nigeria is 13.and you can tell us about the UK,Germany,Japan and first world countries too.

lol.....its 16 to 17 in the UK.....not much different.


This is wrong!

Logicbwoy:


lol.....its 16 to 17 in the UK.....not much different.


This is wrong!

you should go a step further.research what was the age of consent in the USA and european countries in the early 1900s up to 1930 and before the end of world war 2.

@Lagosshia, if I was the one that brought the story of adult breastfeeding, sleeping with a dead woman or Christian tomatoes, you would say I'm insulting Islam. Thank God you're the one that brought it, so we can do firm that it is true if it came from a Muslim..

By the way the ruling from your Ayatollah for marriage is age 10. Did your Ayatollah Khomeininot marry a 10 year old girl when he was 28? Abi you want to deny this one too?

proo212: @Lagosshia, if I was the one that brought the story of adult breastfeeding, sleeping with a dead woman or Christian tomatoes, you would say I'm insulting Islam. Thank God you're the one that brought it, so we can do firm that it is true if it came from a Muslim..

but those are not part of Islam.they are part of wahhabism.

By the way the ruling from your Ayatollah for marriage is age 10. Did your Ayatollah Khomeininot marry a 10 year old girl when he was 28? Abi you want to deny this one too?

i have explained that in Islam if a girl has attained physical maturity (like menstruation) and also mental maturity (psychlogical),then she is good to marry.and i also said that each girl differs from another.therefore it is best,a maximum age that makes all maturity certain is set as minimum for marriage.i stated also that presently the limit or the age of consent in Iran is 16 for girls.

my grandfather was 47 and my grandmother was 13,when they got married.she bore him more than a dozen kids.

Mary was 12 to 14 and Joseph was 90 when she was betrothed.

secularly there is no yardstick to measure or tell why a girl should be married at 10,14,16 or 18 years old.this age issue in the most civilized countries of the world has being unstable over the years.it has increased over time,but yet still we can only cite the advancement of time as reason for that.and the age of consent in a country in the west may be 16,but girls less than 16 still have sex and do what they should not and no one forces them.unfortunately,people like you may see nothing wrong with that.

Ayatollah Khomeini is not "my ayatollah".he is one of many prominent Shia scholars.i do not have a monopoly over him.also,Ayatollah Khomeini got married to his wife,the daughter of a cleric,Khadija Saqafi at age 16.she was not ten.

So a girl of 10 is mature in Islam? No wonder Yerima went to Egypt to get a child bride. Go and give your 10 year old physically and mentally mature daughter in marriage and come and give me the proof...

i have explained that in Islam if a girl has attained physical maturity (like menstruation) and also mental maturity (psychlogical),then she is good to marry.and i also said that each girl differs from another.therefore it is best,a maximum age that makes all maturity certain is set as minimum for marriage.i stated also that presently the limit or the age of consent in Iran is 16 for girls.

my grandfather was 47 and my grandmother was 13,when they got married.she bore him more than a dozen kids.

Mary was 12 to 14 and Joseph was 90 when she was betrothed. Give us proof that Mary was 12-14 and Joseph was 90. You've said this before but you have not given evidence/proof of this!!!

secularly there is no yardstick to measure or tell why a girl should be married at 10,14,16 or 18 years old.this age issue in the most civilized countries of the world has being unstable over the years.it has increased over time,but yet still we can only cite the advancement of time as reason for that.and the age of consent in a country in the west may be 16,but girls less than 16 still Be Intimate and do what they should not and no one forces them.unfortunately,people like you may see nothing wrong with that.

Ayatollah Khomeini is not "my ayatollah".he is one of many prominent Shia scholars.i do not have a monopoly over him.also,Ayatollah Khomeini got married to his wife,the daughter of a cleric,Khadija Saqafi at age 16.she was not ten.

He is not your Ayatollah but you are the same person insulting the wahabbis. Now the shiites are exposed suddenly he is not your Ayatollah. She was definitely 10!!! Stop lying! If she was 16 which still smells of paedophilia bring proof.

proo212: So a girl of 10 is mature in Islam? No wonder Yerima went to Egypt to get a child bride. Go and give your 10 year old physically and mentally mature daughter in marriage and come and give me the proof...

Yerima is not the standard or yardstick.Islam is.you should stop citing people that exploit principles to back their twisted ways.also,take note that what yerima did is not illegal based on Nigerian law.the age of consent in Nigeria is 13 and yerima's wife is 13.simple.whether she as an individual was not fit for marriage and is somehow not mature is another topic.

and why are you bent on derailing this thread? because the sodomy fatwa is a wahhabi product,you just feel like finding what to argue about and attack islam? your christianity is fake and insane.how many times should i tell you that? now you can hug a transformer and die,if you like. and why did you refuse to talk about the age of Mary when she was betrothed to 90 year old Joseph,and the time she conceived?

you see the sawdust in your brother's eye while you forget the plank in your own.

note that in the early 1900s,a girl of 10 was mature in america and europe for marriage,a time when christian values were more active than now.

He is not your Ayatollah but you are the same person insulting the wahabbis. Now the shiites are exposed suddenly he is not your Ayatollah. She was definitely 10!!! Stop lying! If she was 16 which still smells of paedophilia bring proof.

i am not insulting the wahhabis.i presented proof and evidence from what they say to back my claims.

Ayatollah Khomeini's wife was 16 when he married her and he was in his late twenties.please provide your proof if you are not convinced and i will provide mine too.

HOW OLD WAS MARY WHEN SHE CONCEIVED MIRACULOUSLY?

Mary was 12 or 13 years old! so says the Catholic Encyclopaedia and the Oxford Dictionary Bible.

source: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm

furthermore,Mary (at a tender age) was engaged to Joseph who was at that time 90 years old!!!!

Regarding the Marriage of Mary to Joseph, Catholic Encyclopaedia(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm), says:


"When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother" ). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse [b]Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, [/b]went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place."

Note: That article on Catholic Encyclopaedia obtains its information from early Christian writing .

Please give me proof from the bible and not catholic encyclopedia..Where does it say in the bible that Mary was 12-13 and Joseph was 90?

You know you cannot abi this is the corrupted part

LagosShia: HOW OLD WAS MARY WHEN SHE CONCEIVED MIRACULOUSLY?

Mary was 12 or 13 years old! so says the Catholic Encyclopaedia and the Oxford Dictionary Bible.

source: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm

Note: That article on Catholic Encyclopaedia obtains its information from early Christian writing .

Please LagosShia, stop twisting the facts of the write up. You take the writings in the catholic Encyclopaedia and quote what fits your agenda without looking at the entire passage. For your information the catholic encylopedia was quoting heretical assumptions and presenting them - and the encyclopaedia said so. it never stated them as facts

For the benefit of readers here is the full text (Note the bolded)

It will not be without interest to recall here, [size=15pt]unreliable though they are[/size], the lengthy stories concerning St. Joseph's marriage contained in the [size=15pt]apocryphal writings[/size]. When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother". A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age. Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place. These dreams, as St. Jerome styles them, from which many a Christian artist has drawn his inspiration (see, for instance, Raphael's "Espousals of the Virgin", [size=15pt]are void of authority;[/size] they nevertheless acquired in the course of ages some popularity; in them some ecclesiastical writers sought the answer to the well-known difficulty arising from the mention in the Gospel of "the Lord's brothers"; from them also popular credulity has, contrary to all probability, as well as to the tradition witnessed by old works of art, retained the belief that St. Joseph was an old man at the time of marriage with the Mother of God.

So its obvious the encyclopaedia was on an academic enquiry and considered inputs from all sources.

@ tiarabubub and proo212

the fact remains that even though the writing is considered "apocrypha" as many other "gospels" that did not find their way into the new testament canon are also "apocrypha" because they do not agree with what the early church fathers agreed on,the point is it is found in early christian records.i will keep quoting that and i will insist that Mary was 12-14 year old and Joseph was 90 year old.not necessarily everything the church deems "unreliable" for their own reasons is actually "unreliable".

now if i may take this a step further,why does the church see this record as "unreliable"? on what basis?

if you want us to believe either that this record is "unreliable" or "apocrypha",then you have to tell us why and prove to us how old Mary (as) was actually when she got engaged to Joseph (based on the bible).also tell us how old Joseph was.you got the burden of proof on you.you should tell us where in the bible their ages are stated that makes this record i have presented "unreliable";which is early christian writing written by christians that is being rejected by the church and you two are shying away from and finding excuses to cover yourselves and take shade.if you have what you consider reliable showing Mary was actually not 12-14 years old and Joseph was not 90,then present me your "reliable record".you do not have any record to prove their ages,but you still consider what exists containing a vital details "unreliable".the more i talk with christians and debate them,and listen to them the more i am convinced christianity is a 419 religion.

proo212: @vedaxcool, this was never refuted. I saw this news week before last and followed up the response. It was never refuted!

Now it has been refuted, the haste people like you rush to believe very unreasonable stories remains quite funny and strikes at the heart of being uncritical relative to religious fanaticism!

in any case you age issue i dealth with here
https://www.nairaland.com/976885/how-react-when-non-muslim-criticizes/1#11282729

again here we find the lagosshia making a big joke of himself here with regards to the issue

https://www.nairaland.com/976885/how-react-when-non-muslim-criticizes/1#11285131

https://www.nairaland.com/976885/how-react-when-non-muslim-criticizes/2#11301001

in the said threads above i showed how khomini rushed to revert the age of marriage to 9 before returning it to 16!

vedaxcool:

Now it has been refuted, the haste people like you rush to believe very unreasonable stories remains quite funny and strikes at the heart of being uncritical relative to religious fanaticism!

do you really know what is the meaning of "refute"?

a fatwa was read from a Sunni website reportedly issued by a wahhabi cleric.the video exposing the fatwa has been posted in this thread.

you went and scavenged online for a "denial" from a third party Sunni apologist denying the fatwa.why should i believe him when he has no connection to it and did not issue it?

now,we both are reporting what we found online.you are reporting the denial and we are reporting from those who discovered the wahhabi sodomy fatwa.you have no merit of truth over us.we both are reporting.let us examine the facts.

now,you are asking people not to rush and believe what you call every "unreasonable story".you should put that to test for yourself.the third party that is denying the wahhabi sodomy fatwa is only blowing hot air and grammar.nothing more.to clarify this matter so you too do not rush to believe every unreasonable story,bring us a denial from the Sunni website the fatwa is reportedly posted or from the wahhabi cleric who is reported to have issued the fatwa.that is the only way to make us accept that the fatwa was never issued.any other third party writing articles and blowing hot air has no merit of truth.if both the website and the wahhabi cleric are silent on the issue,then it means they are not denying the story.

and you ignored the fact that your wahhabi clerics have issued other ridiculous fatwas:sleeping with a dead wife,tomatoes are christian,adult breastfeeding,e.t.c.it is not something new.and many more will be issued in future.

this is the misguidance that befall those who have abandoned those the Prophet (sa) called "the ark of salvation".when you abandon the Ahlul-Bayt (as),whom the Prophet (sa) described as "one of the two weighty things"-the other being the Quran-Muslims should abide by (as stated in the Hadith of Two Weighty Things),you will fall into ridicule and misguidance.when you leave Imam Ali (as) and follow Umar,this is what happens.and the same Umar you follow said:"if not for (the knowledge of Ali),Umar would have perished".

he Israel-linked Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) perpetuates the debunked “sodomy for jihad” hoax.

MEMRI, an outfit that disseminates highly selective and often distorted translations from Arabic-language media, today published a video titled “Shiite Report: Wahhabi Fatwa Allows Sodomy for Jihad Purposes.” The video published by MEMRI is an edited and shortened version of the one used by Raymond Ibrahim last week.

In an accompanying article, Ibrahim — a fellow of the far-right, Islamophobic David Horowitz Freedom Center — claimed based on the video, that a “fatwa” by a Muslim cleric allowed “jihadis” to engage in anal sex for the purpose of preparing themselves to insert explosives in their rectums.

But the “fatwa” was in fact nothing more than a dirty joke found on an Internet forum, and the “cleric” who issued it does not exist.

As previously revealed by The Electronic Intifada, the video comes from a Shia Muslim TV station called Fadak TV, where the presenter is using this supposed “fatwa” as a way to denigrate Sunni Muslims.
MEMRI

MEMRI’s co-founders include Yigal Carmon, former colonel in the Israeli military intelligence service.

As far back as 2002, The Guardian’s Brian Whitaker wrote about MEMRI:

… several things make me uneasy whenever I’m asked to look at a story circulated by Memri. First of all, it’s a rather mysterious organisation. Its website does not give the names of any people to contact, not even an office address.

The reason for this secrecy, according to a former employee, is that “they don’t want suicide bombers walking through the door on Monday morning” (Washington Times, June 20).

This strikes me as a somewhat over-the-top precaution for an institute that simply wants to break down east-west language barriers.

The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease.


Hoaxers focus exclusively on sectarian video and neglect primary source

Raymond Ibrahim’s original post on The Gatestone Institute is where this hoax originates. After exposing the hoax last week, I wrote to the Gatestone Institute’s editors by email and received a response from Nina Rosenwald. As Max Blumenthal recently revealed in an expose in The Nation, Rosenwald is the financier of some of the most extreme Islamophobic organizations.

On 14 July just before 10 a.m. local time, I wrote:

The article by Raymond Ibrahim posted here http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3158/islam-sodomy is a hoax. The author misunderstands and misrepresents the video. He does not seek out the original material that the person in the video is reading. He does not realize that “Abu al-Dema al-Qasab” is not a real name but rather a transliteration of the Arabic words for “Bloody Butcher.”

The Advocate, Gay Star News and The Electronic Intifada have all published evidence that the fatwa does not exist. It was originally a joke, and Raymond Ibrahim doesn’t understand that. The alleged “fatwa” is actually an internet forum post from 2009. It’s Sunni Muslims trolling other Sunni Muslims. The man in the video is TV host Abdallah al-Khallaf on Shia satellite channel. He reads the post as if it’s real, and he uses it to incite sectarian disgust at Wahhabis.

In effect, this is just a disgusting attempt to smear Muslims, and it is a homophobic lie. It should be completely retracted. The Gatestone Institute should apologize for publishing it. There is no basis to anything Raymond Ibrahim claims in the post.

She responded:

Have forwarded your note to Mr. Ibrahim, who is, of course fluent in Arabic. . If. What you are saying is true, our very deepest apologies and of course we shall pull the article. Our intention is not to be unfair to any group, but only to make known what is true and verafiable . If his information is not, have asked him please to be MUCH more careful in the future. Many thanks for bring this to our attention!

Less than an hour after my original message, I replied to Rosenwald:

The Advocate already confronted Mr. Ibrahim with the evidence, and he stands by it. See the link I shared in my original message.

However, he has not actually responded to the specific claims:

[b]Abu al-Dema al-Qasab is not a real person and not a real name.
The representation of the video he makes is false.
The original internet forum post is followed by several replies where Arabic speakers say essentially “LOL” which indicate that they found the “fatwa” to be a hilarious joke.
The fatwa does not exist.[/[/b]i]

You should instead ask some other person who is literate in Arabic to evaluate whether Mr. Ibrahim’s report is true. He is not in a position since he continues to defend the hoax as real.

The next day, she sent me a copy of Raymond Ibrahim’s latest post on Robert Spencer’s JihadWatch where he says:

[i] EI’s “intention” in writing this article is simply to save face, since, as a pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli website, it does not wish to see the recruitment of suicide bombers diminished by this scandal.

Ibrahim does not deal with the primary source material at all, and never explains why he misrepresented the video in the first place. He simply re-asserts that the “fatwa” is real.
Sunnis trolling sunnis, or Arabs tell dirty jokes

The original source for this hoax is a joke from the Lions of the Sunnah forums and is an inside joke among Sunni members of this Sunni internet forum.

The “Sheikh Bloody Butcher” joke appears on other Arabic-language internet forums, including on alhak.org where the thread was locked and prefixed with a moderators note.

تم إغلاق الموضوع
نرجو عدم الاعتماد على الإشاعات والنقل غير الموثق…

Topic is locked
Please do not rely on rumors and spread that which is unconfirmed.

“Sheikh Bloody Butcher” (الشيخ أبو الدماء القصاب) is mentioned on the internet only in connection with this joke. Apparently, every Muslim writing in Arabic on the internet is a cleric or mufti, and every dirty joke is a fatwa.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/benjamin-doherty/israel-intel-linked-memri-perpetuates-sodomy-jihad-hoax

Vedaxcool,shame on you!!! this is what blindness,sectarianism and hatread of wahhabism have misled you to do.

in your face Vedaxcool! you are now proven to be the liar.

here is the fatwa copied exactly as it was posted from the website of a Sunni forum (known as "Muntadayat Usud al-Sunnah,which mean "forum of the Sunni lions" ).the website with the fatwa posted on it appear in this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXLBs7-Xpzs

so Mr.Vedaxcool,the blind wahhabi wannabe,the shameless Sunni,you can now shut-up.now it is no longer a matter of us reporting what was said to be a fatwa issued.now we are showing you the fatwa from the Sunni forum as it was posted and issued by the wahhabi cleric.

from now on,you are a liar and you should either accept that or apologize.

i went to research to make sure i find the fatwa as it was posted in arabic.and there you go.enjoy!