[tater]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well done, and who says it has to be interpreted in a literal senselike errrrr.....fundamentalists?

All major denominations of Islam, that's who. I'm open to the suggestion that some new, "Reformed" version might be possible, but that's what it would take. Again, point me at some substantial, and for our purposes, growing, denomination of Islam that holds the words of god as delivered to the prophet to be "just so" stories.

No the fruitcakes are the ones that take a literal interpretation.
The basic doctrine is simple, its the differences what come after that which makes the fruitcakes.

The basic doctrine is pretty awful, frankly. I have to admit, I am a religious fundamentalist atheist. If the words people use to worship god are arbitrary, and open to wide latitude, then they have zero authority. Hence, I reject that religion. So if the bible says the earth was created in 6 days, and it was longer (cooling alone would take way longer than that) then the entire religion is wrong. Look, if you can't get the creation story spot-on, then what possible reason is there to believe that the guy you claim is god is god? Also, Theology is the claim to know the MIND of god, again, any inconsistencies show that god is inconsistent, which makes him sorta un-godlike.

In the real world, all the major factions are in fact fundies in Islam. If they think the words delivered to the prophet was direct commo with god, then there is no latitude there.

Actually it is one of the common things argued and has been for centuries, recently back again as a few people from some branches of one major sect that never accepted the later lesser version started teaching it.
which just shows how interpretations are always changing.

Not apostasy. Again, what major sect rejects death as the ideal penalty? If it's gone back and forth, elaborate.

Oh dear, you had to go and trash yourself didn't you.
So from which legal code or piece of scripture can you make such a nonsensical statement?
Remember rape is a specific term and so is child.

Children cannot consent, so any consummation of a marriage with a child is rape. Moh was a child rapist. Assuming he even existed, lol (huge assumption, actually).

They are all debated, some are deemed important and some unimportant, some are even deemed to be of doubtful provenance. If they were pretty much accepted by allMuslims they wouldn't be debated and wouldn't have been being debated since they were written would they.

Again, the major sects have accepted many as uncontroversial. Some oddball someplace saying that one isn't good doesn't matter in the grand scheme. As I said above, Muslims are not monolithic in belief, but the doctrine of a given sect basically is.

Some new sect of Islam will get treated by the others the same way they like to treat each other now. You know, like how well the Sunni and Shia get along.