What is your problem with Islam? Think about it

[Mystic]

You are wrong about English. People make general statements all the time. That is why you need lawyers for laws and interpretation for clarification.

[paulpablo]

You are wrong about English. People make general statements all the time. That is why you need lawyers for laws and interpretation for clarification.

I didn't say people don't make general statements all the time.  I said the word "All" means without exception.

If I say I forgive sins without exception.  I don't forgive that sin.  It's a contradiction because the word "All" means without exception and yet in the next sentence I'm saying there is an exception.  There can't be an exception and be no exceptions.

[Mystic]

Anyways, the two statements HAVE NOTHING to do with exception. They are two different angles.

And whether this generation is aware or not, same words can mean different things from different angles and context and holistic understanding is always needed in that regard.

---

You are wrong about English. People make general statements all the time. That is why you need lawyers for laws and interpretation for clarification.

I didn't say people don't make general statements all the time.  I said the word "All" means without exception.

If I say I forgive sins without exception.  I don't forgive that sin.  It's a contradiction because the word "All" means without exception and yet in the next sentence I'm saying there is an exception.  There can't be an exception and be no exceptions.

In Quran, sometimes "all things" are used without including God and some times, it includes God.  Language is meant to convey, not to dissect by a sharp knife.

Logical rules of Plato weren't known by most people speaking.

And a lot of so called fallacies are not even fallacies, but, just over-dissecting of language.

This generation will be lost on how to approach ancient texts at this rate.  Even if this is true of language today, which it's not, you have no proof that it's true in all generations.

---

I gave the example of angle statements that contradiction is shown to convey, "You did not throw when you threw but God threw."

And again, "he forgives all sins" is from the Angle, all sins are possibly forgiven if the right steps are taken.

The angle "He doesn't forgive the association" means if not repented for and not abandoned and right steps are not taken.

[paulpablo]

Anyways, the two statements HAVE NOTHING to do with exception. They are two different angles.

And whether this generation is aware or not,  same words can mean different things from different angles and context and holistic understanding is always needed in that regard.

If a statement contains the word "all" it has something to do with exception in the sense that it negates any possibility of exceptions relating to the statement. 

If I make one statement that contradicts the other by one saying there's an exception and the other saying there's no exceptions, that's not a different angle.  Why would god write a book containing points of view from different angles anyway?  It's just a contradiction.  Speaking from someone reading it in English that is.

---

Anyways, the two statements HAVE NOTHING to do with exception. They are two different angles.

And whether this generation is aware or not,  same words can mean different things from different angles and context and holistic understanding is always needed in that regard.

---

I didn't say people don't make general statements all the time.  I said the word "All" means without exception.

If I say I forgive sins without exception.  I don't forgive that sin.  It's a contradiction because the word "All" means without exception and yet in the next sentence I'm saying there is an exception.  There can't be an exception and be no exceptions.

In Quran, sometimes "all things" are used without including God and some times, it includes God.  Language is meant to convey, not to dissect by a sharp knife.

Logical rules of Plato weren't known by most people speaking.

And a lot of so called fallacies are not even fallacies, but, just over-dissecting of language.

This generation will be lost on how to approach ancient texts at this rate.  Even if this is true of language today, which it's not, you have no proof that it's true in all generations.

---

I gave the example of angle statements that contradiction is shown to convey, "You did not throw when you threw but God threw."

And again, "he forgives all sins" is from the Angle, all sins are possibly forgiven if the right steps are taken.

The angle "He doesn't forgive the association" means if not repented for and not abandoned and right steps are not taken.

"He doesn't forgive the association"  Means the action of association is not forgiven.  Not that it is forgiven in some circumstances. Again just speaking as someone reading that statement in English.

[Mystic]

It depends on the Angle and context.

For example "God created all things" a person might argue, did he create himself?

But that person is an idiot. Language wasn't spoken to suit the desires of people seeking faults like this generation.

---

Anyways, the two statements HAVE NOTHING to do with exception. They are two different angles.

And whether this generation is aware or not,  same words can mean different things from different angles and context and holistic understanding is always needed in that regard.

If a statement contains the word "all" it has something to do with exception in the sense that it negates any possibility of exceptions relating to the statement. 

If I make one statement that contradicts the other by one saying there's an exception and the other saying there's no exceptions, that's not a different angle.  Why would god write a book containing points of view from different angles anyway?  It's just a contradiction.  Speaking from someone reading it in English that is.

---

Anyways, the two statements HAVE NOTHING to do with exception. They are two different angles.

And whether this generation is aware or not,  same words can mean different things from different angles and context and holistic understanding is always needed in that regard.

---

In Quran, sometimes "all things" are used without including God and some times, it includes God.  Language is meant to convey, not to dissect by a sharp knife.

Logical rules of Plato weren't known by most people speaking.

And a lot of so called fallacies are not even fallacies, but, just over-dissecting of language.

This generation will be lost on how to approach ancient texts at this rate.  Even if this is true of language today, which it's not, you have no proof that it's true in all generations.

---

I gave the example of angle statements that contradiction is shown to convey, "You did not throw when you threw but God threw."

And again, "he forgives all sins" is from the Angle, all sins are possibly forgiven if the right steps are taken.

The angle "He doesn't forgive the association" means if not repented for and not abandoned and right steps are not taken.

"He doesn't forgive the association"  Means the action of association is not forgiven.  Not that it is forgiven in some circumstances.  Again just speaking as someone reading that statement in English.

I would speak to a person who studied linguistics or studies law, and they will tell you all about exceptions and exceptions to exceptions....

I am going to leave it at that.

I speak English too. You are talking none-sense.

And again, this is nothing to do with exceptions, but different angles.. "he forgiven not the association" means the type of association they were doing, if they leave it and repent from it, they are no longer associating and will be forgiven like so many other verses clarify.

Honestly, when Atheists claim they honestly asses divine books, this is one reason I Can't take their claims seriously.

[Angrboda]

I would study linguistics and norms of language before being hasty.

---

And actually a better translation is "God doesn't forgive the association..." and it refers particularly the shirk being done there, because it was with clear proof.

And so many verse shows the condemnation comes with clear proof.

I don't really care what this generation thinks of language, they know nothing of language but what Iblis' forces teach them.

It seems and is true from what I've heard that one must have an understanding of Arabic to have a true understanding of the Quran. I'm ignorant of Arabic, so I cannot have a true understanding of God. If I can't have a true understanding of God, I can't reject God as God. It would be as if I thought God was Howdy Doodie, and I rejected the existence of a living Howdy Doodie. I am not in any sense rejecting God by doing so.

Will God punish me for being ignorant of Him?

[Mystic]

He won't Jo. That is why I always say I won't judge you guys as disbelievers, and there is no reason for you to study Arabic, if there is no reason for you to believe Islam is true.

That is why the two weighty trusts, Quran and the family of Mohammad, were so important, because without the people given the divine book and entrusted the family of the reminder, to be sincere and hold on to the two trusts, then everything would fall apart.

The proof to the world, would not be a proof.

That is why I always say I withhold judgment from all non-Muslims being disbelievers.

The Quran also shows that in the past "no one differed regarding it except those who it was revealed to" meaning all the trouble from outsiders like Muslims try to make it is not the trouble, it's within and it's us who have the bulk of Iblis' forcers and deceivers tricking us.

We are the greatest enemies to Islam, but like to call outsiders who are the victims of our crime against representing the revelation, as disbelievers, while if anyone is disbelievers with clear proofs, it's us who carry the message, but throw it behind our backs like we know nothing, and hide the truth all for the sake of following idols after it's clear warnings to disbelieve in them and their false claim to authority.

[Angrboda]

[....]

Mystic, you still have me on ignore, so I am unable to reply to your request by PM. I hope neither you nor the mods will mind if I then reply in this thread.

I would like to have a debate....

Sorry, but I must decline. First, I simply do not know enough about the subject to be any kind of an advocate for its contrary. Second, I really am not interested in taking on something so major as a one on one debate at this time. I just got done with a very stressful argument with Huggy, and it left me exhausted.

But thank you for thinking of me as a potentially worthy opponent. I appreciate the compliment.

[Mystic]

You can do research. It's to show dynamic approach to learning. I will get you off ignore.

[paulpablo]

It depends on the Angle and context.

For example "God created all things" a person might argue, did he create himself?

But that person is an idiot. Language wasn't spoken to suit the desires of people seeking faults like this generation.

---

If a statement contains the word "all" it has something to do with exception in the sense that it negates any possibility of exceptions relating to the statement. 

If I make one statement that contradicts the other by one saying there's an exception and the other saying there's no exceptions, that's not a different angle.  Why would god write a book containing points of view from different angles anyway?  It's just a contradiction.  Speaking from someone reading it in English that is.

---

"He doesn't forgive the association"  Means the action of association is not forgiven.  Not that it is forgiven in some circumstances.  Again just speaking as someone reading that statement in English.

I would speak to a person who studied linguistics or studies law, and they will tell you all about exceptions and exceptions to exceptions....

I am going to leave it at that.

I speak English too. You are talking none-sense.

And again, this is nothing to do with exceptions, but different angles.. "he forgiven not the association" means the type of association they were doing, if they leave it and repent from it, they are no longer associating and will be forgiven like so many other verses clarify.

Honestly, when Atheists claim they honestly asses divine books, this is one reason I Can't take their claims seriously.

It's nonsense, not none-sense.  And "He forgiven not the association" is nonsense.  I mean that statement literally doesn't make sense so I don't even know where to begin talking to you about it. 

I haven't claimed to "asses" any divine books.