no, an example would be two differing arguments on shariah. Most of what you have written are questions
I'll sum up all of your comments with one sentence. You believe that the sharia is one thing, whereas other Muslims clearly don't. You dismiss entire sects of Islam, entire countries and entire legal systems. It's estimated that roughly 170m are Shia Muslims, yet you don't believe that they're Muslims at all. After all of that, you claim that it's not open to interpretation! Let me guess, these people don't really disagree with you, they just don't want to admit that you're right? Is that it?
I take it you are going to avoid point by point when it suits and you have no comeback and resort to assertions etc OK let me break it down for you If a man has a sex change, changes his name to shirley, has implants etc would you have a sexual relationship with him?
Let me get this straight. Shia and Sunni are a bit like the Muslim version of Protestant and Catholic? So a Sunni person saying that Shias are not really Muslims is like an RC saying Proddies aren't real Christians?
No. I answer you point by point and you either claim not to understand the simplest of concepts or say that I'm wrong without explaining why. Sorry Shirley, but I'm going to have to reject your sexual advances. It's very flattering and all, but I, er... I'm really married to the church. You're attempting to say that just because someone says that they're something, it doesn't mean that they are. Unfortunately, ancient manuscripts written in a dead language are open to interpretation, so we don't know which of you used to be called Dave. I'm sure that Allah will jump in and clear it up any minute now, though.
Not shariah. There are three sources for that as explained Quran, Sunnah and Sahabah and it hasnt changed in 1400 years Of course you can provide examples of these differences in shariah I have asked you enough times, yet strangely you avoid, all th etime accusing me of avoiding
I always do. You just choose to feign confusion. See this entire thread and the one about the drunken assault for recent examples of what I've said. Not at all. I was skipping to the part where you got to the point, as evidenced by your next question. That's your interpretation of it. Others claim to be operating under Sharia, so they obviously disagree with you, don't they? I've given you multiple examples of this, including entire countries and religions, yet you still seem to be claiming the same thing.
Then you are obviously a Sunni then. Can you explain why Shias are still considered Islamic if they think Allah is wrong? Sorry in advance, if the question is to simple for you.
But there are other fundamental differences between Protestants and Catholicism which are as divisive as that between Sunnis and Shias imo. For example,the position of the Pope, the idolatry in RC, the idea of purgatory, the importance of Mary, the inclusion of various books etc etc
you have named iran and saudi arabia, but you have yet to provide wht they interpret shariah as being
I am not sunni in the sense it implied today, as in a sect The whole point is that shias are not Islamic according to shariah. What they call themselves doesnt make them so and why would it be a problem if its a simple question?
Believing that I meant that you'd personally put Sharia into place in the UK. TFWNN: You Have no idea what I would implement. PNP: You'd implement Sharia. It's irrelevant and I've already dealt with what you were trying to get to, so can we drop your dubious sexual fantasy? I've answered it repeatedly. What legal systems do the Saudis and Iranian claim to be using? What do they claim to be the basis of their laws?
Because you never answer anything in a manner that I can understand. I am not as well read in the Koran as you and also the bible. I have responded to some of your on going debate with PNP, and my input is too simple and not probably worthy of response. It was not a slight at you, merely me being short of understanding.
I dont want to get into the whole christianity and its sects bit tbh, as I believe that they are all incorrect due to the changes made over time I can comment on the shia/sunni thing though Basically to break it down there are a lot more sects in Islam than shia/sunni. These sects have certain differences that in the scheme of things dont impact on major elements of the religion. an example would be those people who follow 1 school of thought (there are four) and dont pay much attention to the other 3. Now that is wrong as the four schools are meant as guidance and you should follow the strongest in any given situation and not 1 exclusively. However this doesnt take you outside the folds of Islam because the issues are minor. So in the case of prayer where to put your hands or the timing of a particular prayer can be different yet thaey all follow the fact that you must pray 5 times a day Then you have the likes of the Ismaili muslims, who have muslim in their title yet have their 'own' quran and prayer methods etc. They are not muslim as you cannot change the quran and you cannot pray 2 times a day. The shia (apart from 1 group) fall into that category. But the issue here isnt even that in depth or complicated. By this mean Shariah. The countries PNP speaks of (and all the so called islamic countries) dont even pass the first hurdle. It is quite specific in Islam that to judge by anything other than what Allah has revealed is 'unIslamic' and you only have to look at the first couple of paragraphs to any constitution and that is that
