سؤال,"اصالت وجود خدا را توضیح بدهید" - Bahram Moshiri

سؤال,"اصالت وجود خدا را توضیح بدهید" - Bahram Moshiri

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Bahram
• Moshiri
• Iran
• irani
• history
• eslam
• Islam
• Islamic
• Ali
• hossein
• Hussein
• religion
• Persian
• Persia
• Farsi
• Dari
• music
• Karbala
• shah
• mullah
• imam
• pars
• TV
• parstv
• fouladvand
• mosadegh
• azadi
• social
• science
• humanities
• news
• grassroots
• outreach
• documentary
• analysis
• political
• video
• blog
• community
• freedom
• democracy
• fallacy
• akhoond
• akund
• akond
• King
• Kings
• Monarch
• anti
• estebdad
• pure
• language
• khomeini

[albundy0007]

درود بر استاد گرامی مشیری.

[dolatabadi2]

man tamam sokhanane in mard bozorg ra mo be mo ghsh kardeham ta beha harfe na rabt nashenideam drood bar to.

[223344mm]

u r great man i just love u man

[artagar]

@Mrknightrider777

I honestly can't explain it any better. Lets leave here as food for our thoughts. good luck and take care...

[Mrknightrider777]

@artagar Dear , please enlighthen me about the wrongness of my analogy, please articulate on this.thanks

[artagar]

@Mrknightrider777

I do understand you are offering the concept of God, which is a very old solution to a very old problem. But my point is that your solution is flawed because you must break the causality rule in order to introduce the concept of God, and you are offering the problem itself, the causality rule and question of universe beginning, as a proof to your God solution. Please ponder on you proof of God, it basically is the problem itself!

[artagar]

@Mrknightrider777

My dear, you have explained well and I understand the problem, which is more than 1000 years old, back to Aristotle. We don't know the answer beginning of the universe without breaking or making an exception to the causality rule.

[Mrknightrider777]

@artagar Dear atgar, by the same token , if this universe came to existance (it is moved like the object in my example)==> therfore it has a begining that is the cause without being an effect , now some say that nature is this some say an inteligent design creat the universe , i stop here and see if you agree then we go furthur.

[Mrknightrider777]

@artagar i oppoligize for misunderstanding, in any rate, as i explained befor i hpe it was clear i am not good at analogy but i try, look if i am asked to move an object and i need some one help to move it and this goes all the way to infinity , this object will not move , now if this object is already move it has to start from some one who does not need any help , in the other hand this chain of cause and effect should be stped at a cause who is not effect of any cause.

[artagar]

@Mrknightrider777

My friend, I am very unbiased. Starting a sentence saying don't be unbiased, or emotional or close minded is a fallacy on its own. It is called Ad Hominem fallacy. Just make your argument.

Anyway, in an nut shell what you are claiming is that the cause and effect rule does not apply to the "cause of causes", right?

If YES Then : the cause and effect is not a rule can not be used in your argument

If NO Then : You need to explain the cause for "cause of causes"

Do you agree?

[Mrknightrider777]

@artagar dear I did explained it before, try to look at it with unbiased glass, imagin that you ask a person to move an object if this person say that i need some else elp to move it, and this story goes from one person to another one , is there any chance that the object moves????never but since we the object is moving ==> there has to be an end this chain, that right there proves that the chain of cause and effect has an end . some call this entity at the end cause of causes.

[kasra20giv1]

مشیری خرد ورز بزرگ و گرامی

ایکاش مثل مشیری هزاران در ایران بودند