This IS a crucial issue. It is important that Islam-ignorant non-Muslims understand that people like your friend do NOT represent the REAL Islam
The question in fact, originally was your nonsensical statement above claiming that you have knowledge and understanding of something called "REAL ISLAM".
You are not in a position to do this. Whether most Muslims are this or that, is again not your position to do so. You simply don't know the answer to what Muslims are. Only a bigot is desperate to try and lump a large group together, and condemn people who don't fit your profile, who call themselves Muslim. In other words, you exhibit all the characteristics of an extremist/fundamentalist.
I beg to differ. Would you also like to claim that the method of Islamic prayer is not specified in the hadith and biographies? Remember, you have already made reference to the hadith in support of your "points" (whatever those are) so any efforts to go all "Koran only" on me now will be a bit late and will smack of desperation on your part.
You can beg to your hearts content, methodology of salah, as performed by Muslims today, is not in the Qur'an. That is why there are variations. But no variations really on the obligation to pray. That was the point about consensus, as opposed to disputed. For you there is no such thing as dispute in Islam, which is why you're failing here. You don't want debate, you thought you'd come here on an ex-Muslim forum, and find the equivalent of a self-hating Jew, Muslim version. Sorry dude, not me.
My motives, real or imagined, is not the issue. The issue is whether or not "most Muslims" (as Hassan and others would have us believe) are "non-literalist" - which you have above conceded is NOT the case. Indeed, it does logically follow that if "most Muslims" do NOT consciously "interpret" the Qur'an in a "nice" "non-literal" way then that necessarily carries with it certain ramifications. If you haven't got the guts to face up to these ramifications then that is YOUR problem.
The question is wrong because you assume your understanding of the text and it's application is sound, and therefore the literalist and metaphorical categories emerge, whoever deviates from YOU is not a real Muslim. Your initial assumption of knowing is what needs to be questioned here, not your resultant conclusions.
I notice how you keep switching between statements:
"Most Muslims are literalists."
"Most Muslims are literalist, when it comes to prayer."
If you can't appreciate that people can be both at the same time, then you're a weak mind.
For example, Buddhists are rational when it comes to gods, irrational when it comes to reincarnation.
Therefore Buddhists are irrational. <<<<You.
Therefore Buddhists can be both rational and irrational. <<<<Me.
Not very complicated.
Your motives are in fact everything. They're poison quite frankly. David knows more than you about that girl, only a fundamentalist considers it his business to question people they don't know and have no business making judgements about.
As opposed to what? "Non-literalist" Muslims which you have above conceded do NOT comprise the "vast majority" of "Muslims WHEN IT COMES TO SALAH."?
I've added in the last part, didn't you learn to finish sentences at school?
The issue of whether or not "most Muslims" are "non-literalist" WHEN IT COMES SALAH IS simple. You, for whatever reason, seek to complicate it. Why?
It's not complicated now that I've finished your sentence, again.
Actually PH, the verse you invoked rendered into English as "do not kill yourself" is a red herring because it appears it would in fact be understood in the original Arabic as in the square-brackets in the version you provided above and elaborated on in the link that I provided, which you do not appear to have read ie:
Depression wasn't a red herring? You just threw it in there to complicate what is in fact a simple issue, taking your own life is a major sin. Why complicate matters? It's a sin in Judaism, and in Christianity, and is highly not recommended to do (ensure your own death) virtually anywhere...but Muslims must be different. It's not me complicating anything, it's you, douchebag.
So far from being a command that would, as you allege, preclude Muslims engaging in suicide bombings it is in fact properly understood as a command not to KILL OTHER MUSLIMS. That would perhaps explain why those who "kill and are killed in the way of Allah" by flying jetliners into skyscrapers are not in the slightest bit deterred by this verse.
Sounds like something altruistic, which is what religion's primary function is. Humans lived for tens of thousands of years in small groups, knew everyone, cared about everyone, because we knew them personally. In order to facilitate an organized society, myths like complete strangers being your brothers and sisters, being the offspring of one God, or being descended from one of 12 sons of Abraham, are used to create affinity between people you will never meet.
I'm writing a few pieces on the evolution of religion in civilization. They after all began at the same time. Both civilization, and religion are myths.
Today, I need no reason other than empathy to feel that all of humanity is linked together.
Well..having a billion computers all linked up in a web, might have helped.
Topic: The heart of the EDL army is online, not on the streets