well, as an ethereal being, im not sure there is a tangible phallus with which to employ that particular activity...

Sure, I've come across this argument before.

But I'm not really sure what it means.

I have never come across any logical test in the theology of any religion that provides a criterium for two gods being identical.

On the contrary, montheistic religions say that there is only one god and no other. Claiming two gods are identical is thus a logical non-starter.

So in fact saying our god is the same as yours is a demeaning thing to say, as that only works if it is meant to imply,

1) there is only one god
2) your god says some things that are different or contradictory to what ours says
3) so either your god does not exist, or he is actually our god but you've misunderstood him.

But if God cannot wank, how can he be all-powerful?

Yes, actually.

Which is what makes the whole situation even more bizarre.

Tom

This.

Tom

Islamic Radicals base their whole lives around their interpretation of the Koran, to say they are not "real" Muslims and have "nothing to do with Islam" is not only bizarre, it's damaging.

The first step to solving a problem, is admitting that there is one. I can understand peaceful Muslims wanting to distance themselves form the Radicals like IS, but in fact by doing so, they are saying "it's not my problem" when in fact it is, because they are clearly an extension of the religion, and the solution needs to come from within the religion itself.

It's sad that peaceful Muslims, like I assume Mr.Vertigo is, don't want to confront or accept that

Does your advantage extends to google ? because Google sources disagree with your claim. Namely: it's enough to say the shahada with intention to become a Muslim.

Perhpas this is one of your jokes ?

Ask Salman Rushdie. if you can find him.

To be fair, there are many Muslims out there who do confront and denounce ISIS.

Sadly there are others who continue to fumble for excuses.

Should Muslims always have to say sorry after a terror attack?

Professor Lynn Davies
In the aftermath of a suspected Islamist extremist attack in Westminster, it is now conventional for Muslims to have to stand up in front of the media to roundly condemn the actions. Even though it will never be clear (and with all suspects now released by the police) whether Khalid Masood acted in the name of Islam or was just a violent individual who happened to have converted to Islam, Muslims are prevailed upon to publicly distance themselves from him and his actions. Yet when the Far Right nationalist Thomas Mair murdered the MP Jo Cox in 2016, I do not have to stand up and say ‘As a white British person, I absolutely stand against such behaviour’. I can simply condemn, as a human being. While Anders Breivik wanted to preserve a Christian Europe, Christians did not feel they had to say ‘As a Christian I am horrified by this and want to stress this is not true Christianity’.

But does the very act of identifying oneself in openers such as ‘As a Muslim, I condemn…’ insidiously act to bracket all Muslims even more closely with political Islam? Is it seen as an example of Gertrude’s response to Hamlet, ‘The lady doth protest too much, methinks’?’ The aim of such parading of ‘moderate’ Muslims is understandable, i.e. that it should act as a brake on the Islamophobia that becomes heightened when Islamist terrorism happens. Yet I am not sure it achieves such aims. If I said ‘We Brexit campaigners condemn Thomas Mair’, there is a hint of some sort of potential alliance, however small. People would wonder what the connection was.

There is enough guilt by association occurring anyway. As soon as there is an extremist or terrorist incident related to Islamism, the media swiftly rush to pinpoint backgrounds and geographies. With Khalid Masood having once lived in Birmingham, those parts of the city he might have touched upon are viewed with renewed fingers of suspicion. Cities such as Birmingham are unfairly labeled as “hotbeds” and often residents suffer not only stigmatisation but also increased fear of retaliation from far right extremist groups. The community becomes blamed for nurturing him and asked to provide some insight about why this could have occurred.

Yet in the inevitable search for blame for extremism, is there the same level of scrutiny for far right groups? Do we blame the individual or the community/society for producing them? A report from the right wing Henry Jackson Society pinpointed five Birmingham wards as being particular ‘hotbeds’ – the whole gamut of inner city deprivation as well as identity and religion being thrown at such wards to explain their fertilisation potential as if they were a tomato “Growbag”.

The media have not woken up to their responsibility and need for balance here. The day after the Westminster killings, the Times front page headline screamed ‘Killer was Muslim convert’. Well, that explains that then. It is as if the whole complex background of Khalid Masood could be ignored in favour of his religious identity. It would be far more productive for community cohesion to cite the religion second, not first – if at all. First let us say these characters are nutters, or violent criminals, and second – if not third or indeed last – that they are Muslims/Christians/Hindus or whatever. We know that many foreign fighters are not really driven by religious ideology, and that this can be a secondary justification for liking violence or is related to the need for status, adventure or some sort of mission. In understanding trajectories into extremism, the identification of active membership of a group such as Al-Muhajiroun or National Action is one thing; homing in on a singular religious identity as causal is quite another.

As an atheist, I am not going to apologise for the mass killings by Stalin or Mao. Muslims should not have to say sorry for their faith as if its appropriation explained everything. Instead, the media and educational programmes on preventing violent extremism should stress the enormous complexity of backgrounds and journeys into and out of violence, and not join in the rush to find singular scapegoats.

True. But I see the very common "theme" from the Left and many Muslims in this thread, and EU at large, is to distance themselves and deny the problem..."it's only a few nutjobs"..."they aren't real Muslims"...etc...this is in fact very damaging because it is saying there is no problem. It's actually enabling the problem to continue. The problem needs to be confronted directly and honestly, in particular by Muslims themselves. The West can only swat at the flies, but the source of the problem...the ideology...can only be changed by Muslims (the "real" and "fake" ones)

In terms of total numbers, as many as 97% of those killed by ISIS are Muslim. When a ISIS bomber detonates himself in Istanbul (a 99% Muslim country) his targets are clearly going to be Muslim?

So if Muslims could stop this ISIS slaughter by having a 'frank dialogue' with them, don't you think they'd have tried that already?

There is no claim of two gods being identical. There is only one god; and it's the same god that Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in. Allah is Arabic for God.

Point 2 + 3 are the basis of different religion. Believing god says different things. The details are what separate religions.

Obviously, the only thing muslims need to do is go on the global muslim whatsapp group and tell them to pack it in.

Nah, they shouldn't have to say sorry. I don't think most people care for these public apologies.

There is a huge difference between taking responsibility where appropriate and apologizing afterwards.

This is what i meant in my previous comment. I do see evidence of Muslims confronting people within their own community. That takes a lot of courage.

You and google want to teach me and tell me what shahada means???

"Allah is great" is not the shahada my dear and does not make you muslim as stated by other ignorant posters....... the shahada has 2 parts:
- there is no other god than God , and Muhammad is his prophet.

I see that we have a bunch of people in this thread who construct their opinion and prejudice based on false, unverified information. Accusing ALL muslims of all potential problems just by reading 20minutes or Reader's digest and quoting Kuran without context and basic understanding like most ISIS djihadist.

__________________
Resist, support, donate: ACLU
They tried to bury us, they did not know that we are seeds (Mexican proverb)

The key word here is Abrahamic. All 3 Abrahamic religions have a common deity, the difference is in the prophets. For instance the holy book of Judaism is the Tanakh which is the basis of the Old Testament. The most important prophets in Judaism are the likes of Moses, Adam, Abraham and so on, all are also important prophets in Christianity and Islam(although in Islam the names are slightly changed, for instance Abraham is Ibrahim, Moses is Musa and the like)

Same with the New Testament (or the Injil in Islam although it's not a 100% equivalent) which has some very important Islamic prophets such as Yahya (John the Baptist) and Isa (Jesus Christ)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophe...ngers_in_Islam

__________________
We fought them until Hell froze over. And then played hockey on the ice.

Can you explain why so many people, every day, around the world, are killing in the name of Islam? I don't feel that discussing a way to end violence and death to be a watse of time.

BEcause, of course, the answer to that question and others of its ilk, which has plagued humanity for thousands of years, is going to be found on a small internet forum in Switzerland.

The top 5 sites said it, most of thewm by Muslim, so I found it reliable.

Provide a serious source with better information on how to become a Muslim.

Who are these "Bunch" blaming all Muslims for all potential problems ? again - a few quotes will do.