To all Bahai's, Muslims, Christians, Jews etc...

[General Parsaian]

ببین ژنرال

نه اون موقعی که به قول خودت اتییست و خدا نشناس بودی می***فهمیدی چکار میکنی*** - نه حالا که مثلا خدا شناس دین دار شدی پدر جان.

برای رسیدن به عرفان و معرفت قبل از هر چیز باید خرافات و مقدسات را بریزی دور......بهشت و جهنم، آدم و حوّا، هابیل و قبیل،.....همه رو بریز دور. دوم باید قبول کنی*** در کائنات بسیار است ورای علم امروز بشر....یعنی بیخودی نه چیزی را قبول کن نه چیزی را منکر شو. سوم، به دنبال ارتباط بین تمام جاندران از انسان گرفته تا حیوان و نبات بگرد.....آان وقت است که شاید بفهمی که "ما از خدا هستیم" یعنی*** چه. آن وقت است که به حرف زرتشت در مورد خرد جمعی پی*** می***بری. اونجاست که برای رسیدن به حقیقت احتیاج به هیچ چیز جز شعور و منطق نیست.​

دوست عزیز
حالا ما نفهم جنابعالی علامه دهر و عارف شرق و غرب قبول
ولی دوست عزیز برای اینکه چیزی را نفی کرد حالا دین باشد یا هر مکتب دیگری
برای اینکه به قول شما خرافات بهشت و جهنم و ادم و حوا بقیه را نفی کرد باید بر جایی استوار بود
بر مکتبی ما فوق ان چیزی که نفی میکنی البته در اینجا چون شما ادعای عرفان میکنید باید با مکتبی عرفانی انرا رد کنید نه مثل دیگران که نمی دانم با فیزیک متافیزیک را رد میکنند
همینطوری که نمی شود کسی بیاید بگوید این را نفی کنید ان را نفی کنید این غلط است و ان غلط
بعد می فرمایید نه چیزی را بیخودی قبول کن نه منکر ان شو
خوب دوست عزیز شما به چه حسابی کل ادیان را منکر شدی؟
دلیلت چیست؟
خود شما و در مکتب های عرفانی که علم هم دستش کوتاه است و نمی تواند کاری کند
همینطوری خوابیدی و بیدار شدی و جرقه ای زد و علامه شدی؟
این است که میگویم از روی نفس حرف میزنی
بعد بیا این ارتباط بین موجودات را برای بنده نفهم توضیح بده که منظور چیست؟ تا ببینم تفکر جنابعالی از کجا اب میخورد از مکاتب هند و چین یا چیز جدیدی است و ما نمی دانیم و جنابعالی به ان دانش دست یافته ای
بیا این جمله ات را توضیح بده لطفا
همچنین خرد جمعی
ایا خرد جمعی می تواند حقیقت محض را کشف کند یا حتی راه را بیابد ؟
اگر فکر میکنید اینطور است برایتان دها مثال از خرد جمعی و بزنم تا ببینید در اشتباه هستید و اصلا معنای خرد جمعی را درک نکرده اید
الان از شما خواهش میکنم بیایید این دو مطلب را برای بنده شرح دهید با همان پارسی شیرین که نوشته اید
لطف کنید در مورد ارتباط مخلوقات و رابطه ان در طریقت حق
و خرد جمعی توضیح دهید


متشکرم

 

[General Parsaian]

Behrou jan, I am not able to agree to something that insults my very existence the way that religion and its teachings do. If you can then you are a much better person than me. I urge you to listen to this clip from Christopher Hitchens. I let the master speak for me.
Please listen to the end.

[video=youtube;7nIRJVmZ4K8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nIRJVmZ4K8&feature=g-vrec[/video]

جناب
اگر این استاد شماست
پس وای بحال جنابعالی
ایشان جریان قدرت خدا بر بروی حرکات و رفتار موجودات را به شکلی عکسی در نظر میگیرد و بعد می گوید چه کسی حاضر است اینطور مثل یک کشور دیکتاتور کعه مثال کره ش را می زند زندگی کند
درست مثل اینکه خدا در جایی امده و یک عده را دیده و گفته من می خواهم بر شما خدایی کنم
اینگونه برخورد کردن با موضوع ارتباط خدا و مخلوقات کاملا اشتباه است و اصلا معنایی ندارد
و فکر نکنم که کریستوفر هیچز نمی داند که اصل این مطلب به اینکونه که او می خواهد وانمود کند نیست
البته که می داند نظر ادیان چیست ولی با نشان دادن موضوع به شکلی که من گفتم یعنی ارتباط یک حاکم با محکوم می خواهد نظر خود را بقبولاند!!!!!!!!!!!!ا
همچنین در مورد اینکه می گوید ما احتیاج به دستور از بالا یا قدرت مافوق نداریم که چه بکنیم و چه نکنیم و انسان در کل می داند چه کند و چه نکند را باید در انتهای حیات شخص خود ایشان دید

 

[General Parsaian]

من هم به شما توصیه میکنم بیشتر قرآن بخوانید.

شما به فکر رفتن به بهشت باش،

جناب
نه بخدا جدی میگم
چون شما میگید بشر خودش می داند که مثلا کشتن بد است و نمیدانم چه بد است
در صورتی که ویل دورانت غیر از این را میگوید
در صورتی که در مقطعی از زمان مثلا کشتن نوزاد از طرف مادرش یک افتخار بوده است
در صورتی که مثلا در زمانی پاره کردن شکم زنی حامله و در اوردن بچه او و خوردن بچه اش یک افتخار برای ان زن و خانواده اش محسوب می شده
در صورتی که یک زمانی غارت کردن دهکده ای دیگر و کشتن و بغارت بردن ان یک اقتخار بوده است و دزدی نه تنها بد نبوده بلکه قابل تحسین بوده
در صورتی که یک زمانی یک مکانی کشتن پدر و اویختن کله انها برای شخص یک افتخار محسوب میشده
در صورتی که در زمانهایی کشتن افرادی ضعیف یا پیر و خوردن انها بسیار هم تحسین امیز بوده
بازم بگم
بگم
یا باز میایی و میگویی بشر از اول می دانسته و نمی دانم چرت و پرت


بله جانم

 

[masoudA]

Gp

ژنرال جون

من نه علامه هستم و نه*** ادعاشو دارم.......من فقط معتقدم تو کم داری...اونم به این خاطر میگم که مطالعه نداری...

ما رو بی*** خیال - برای اینکه به خودت اقلا ثابت بشه شما چند کتاب در مورد عرفان یا از عرفانی***ست***ها خوانده اید؟ صفر

چند کتاب در مورد زرتشت خوانده اید؟ - هیچ

بدی کار آنجاست که تا دلت بخواد در مورد حدیث خوندی.......همانطور که قبلاً عرض کردم شما همه چیز را راجع به هیچ می***دانی​

​

.​

 

[alila]

I wish if GP could explain how islam can justify an old man pooping on ur dick !!

Where were u general ?u were truly missed here..

 

[Behrooz_C]

در صورتی که در مقطعی از زمان مثلا کشتن نوزاد از طرف مادرش یک افتخار بوده است
در صورتی که مثلا در زمانی پاره کردن شکم زنی حامله و در اوردن بچه او و خوردن بچه اش یک افتخار برای ان زن و خانواده اش محسوب می شده
در صورتی که یک زمانی غارت کردن دهکده ای دیگر و کشتن و بغارت بردن ان یک اقتخار بوده است و دزدی نه تنها بد نبوده بلکه قابل تحسین بوده
در صورتی که یک زمانی یک مکانی کشتن پدر و اویختن کله انها برای شخص یک افتخار محسوب میشده
در صورتی که در زمانهایی کشتن افرادی ضعیف یا پیر و خوردن انها بسیار هم تحسین امیز بوده
بازم بگم
بگم

باز پریدی بدون فکر حرف زدی.
این مثال هایی که میزنی درست، ولی در همین قرن بیست یکم در بعضی کشور های اسلامی جنایتی اتفاق میوفته که دسته کمی از این مثال هایی که آوردی نداره؟
بگم؟ بازم بگم؟
واقعن اگر همین ویل دورانت امروز زنده بود در مورد جنایات مسلمانان امسال خمینی و طالبان چه میگفت؟

مگر همون پیغمبر کثیف اسلام نبود که دینش رو به زور خون و شمشیر گسترش داد. کم خون ریزی کرد؟ طرفدارانش امروز کم خون ریزی میکنند؟
برو جانم برو باز هم تر زدی و جواب منطقی نداری که بدی

 

[ashtar]

You lost yourself there kid.

"kid"?!
What are you a freshman in high school?
Actually, I hope you are just a freshman in high school because otherwise it will be really pathetic and sad for a grown or even half-educated person using such lingo especially in the middle of a civil discussion.

 

[ashtar]

Behrou jan, I am not able to agree to something that insults my very existence the way that religion and its teachings do. If you can then you are a much better person than me. I urge you to listen to this clip from Christopher Hitchens. I let the master speak for me.
Please listen to the end.

[video=youtube;7nIRJVmZ4K8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nIRJVmZ4K8&feature=g-vrec[/video]

I love how this guy gives the example of North Korea and ridicules them not realizing that N. Korea is a non-religious and atheist state and then almost in the same breath he claims that humans are capable of managing their own ethics and set moral standards and then blames religions for enslaving and holding back humans! LOL

 

[keyvan_pars]

[video=youtube;lw0fIP5fWZ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw0fIP5fWZ4[/video]

 

[Behrooz_C]

"kid"?!
What are you a freshman in high school?
Actually, I hope you are just a freshman in high school because otherwise it will be really pathetic and sad for a grown or even half-educated person using such lingo especially in the middle of a civil discussion.

Well, I realised from your line of argument that you can't possibly be more than just a kid, at least not in mental age or in terms of your level of education

 

[Bi-honar]

Behrou jan, I am not able to agree to something that insults my very existence the way that religion and its teachings do.

Behrooz jaan, I think that this is the fallacy in your argument - everything I have seen in this thread is based on non-believers insulting the very existence of the believers, not the other way around. Ashtar is not insulting your existence and for all intents and purposes Timsar may insult people's intelligence, but I have never seen him insult their existence. On the other hand, every few weeks or months, there's a thread like this that I find completely insulting to religous people on this board (which are by no means limited to Ashtar and Timsar) and serves absolutely no purpose other than to sow divisions in society (I'm calling ISP the society here). My wife's mom is a devout Catholic - she is the most caring and accepting person I have met - other than my wife of course who is not at all religous but very spiritual. On the other hand, I find my brother extremely selfish and self-centered - he is an Atheist. I'm using these examples to show that your generalization of religion and Ahteism does not hold true and I don't have to look beyond this forum or my immediate family to come to that conclusion - and I'm sure you and everyone else can find similar examples in your immediate family or surroundings with just the least bit of objectivity.

No I'm not happy because you didn't answer the question.

Ashtar jaan, there was a question that you din't answer either. What are your thoughts about Khomeini et al. as related to religion? I think this is the place where a lot of the disconnect happens in Iranian society.

You didn't because you simply can't. In fact, no one on this board will be up to the challenge.

Not so fast my friend. Your question/argument is not the smoking gun you were hoping for! To answer your question, the only code of morality that I would need as an Atheist or non-religous person, not to cheat on my wife when I think I can get away with it, not to steal if I know I won’t be caught, not to kill someone and take their stuff when I can get away with, not lie to save my own skin, or not to take advantage of someone who is weak, desperate or in need, is a simple one liner... "don't do to others, what you don't want done onto you" or any other wording of it you're comfortable with that is entrenched in every religion and philosophical moral code.

Unfortunately, the adulterations in the Abrahamic faiths, have actually nullified that message in its purest form and made it okay to do those things. For example, you don't need to cheat on your wife, you can simply take another one in Islam and that's supposedly a sanctioned act - the humiliation or emotional harm to your wife would be no less either way. Another example, it's okay to lie as long as it serves some higher purpose (dorooghe maslehati) - don't forget that every lie serves some higher purpose for the liar, so lying becomes sanctioned. It's also okay to kill certain people (infidels) and to take advantage of the weak (women in particular). Unfortunately, these are the aduletrations that have made it very easy over the centuries to kill people, rape women, steal and pillage entire societies in the name of religion and that's why we see threads like this popping up every few weeks or months.

--------------------------

My belief is that over time, we Iranians need to reconcile on some moral and ethical issues and stop following or choosing leaders that do not work within that ethical groundwork. For example, we need to focus on people that believe in not cheating and stealing and killing, regardless of whether they are Muslim, Jewish, Bahai, Agnostic, Atheist, etc... and stop following people that do these things and justify doing these things because they start their sentences with Besmellah or call themselves the pious religous authority on this earth. My hope is that one day, the more moderate Muslims people, many of which we have on this boeard can work together with secularists and people of all faiths to produce a blue print for Iran that does not consits of killing, imprisoning or even ridiculing everyone who does not agree with them. After a decade on this board, I'm still chasing that illusive moment where I can see this done, at least on a small scale on a forum like this, so that I can finally hope for a brighter future for all of us and our country. I can understand why Soroosh has thrown in the towel. I can understand why there's anger on both sides and I can understand that there seems to be little hope at the moment. But is it so damn hard for less than a few dozen people to at least try and reach some common ground on some issues without ridculing or alienating the other half of Iranian society? This is not a rhetorical question and I pose it for both sides.

 

[keyvan_pars]

Behrooz jaan, I think that this is the fallacy in your argument - everything I have seen in this thread is based on non-believers insulting the very existence of the believers, not the other way around. Ashtar is not insulting your existence and for all intents and purposes .

they don't need to do anything to insult humanity; their existence is an insult to whatever is decent in this world.

Their whole philosophy is a stain on humanity and morality. there is absolutely nothing philosophical and spiritual about any abrahamic religion. Their followers of all these religions have proved this point over and over again not over months or days or decades but over CENTURIES.

This is a cancer that has enslaved humanity and the human mind for the last 2000 years and us humans (from all continents and creeds) need to collectively reach the level of consciousness to flush this turd down the toilet of history.

 

[Behrooz_C]

Behrooz jaan, I think that this is the fallacy in your argument - everything I have seen in this thread is based on non-believers insulting the very existence of the believers, not the other way around. Ashtar is not insulting your existence and for all intents and purposes Timsar may insult people's intelligence, but I have never seen him insult their existence. On the other hand, every few weeks or months, there's a thread like this that I find completely insulting to religous people on this board (which are by no means limited to Ashtar and Timsar) and serves absolutely no purpose other than to sow divisions in society (I'm calling ISP the society here). My wife's mom is a devout Catholic - she is the most caring and accepting person I have met - other than my wife of course who is not at all religous but very spiritual. On the other hand, I find my brother extremely selfish and self-centered - he is an Atheist. I'm using these examples to show that your generalization of religion and Ahteism does not hold true and I don't have to look beyond this forum or my immediate family to come to that conclusion - and I'm sure you and everyone else can find similar examples in your immediate family or surroundings with just the least bit of objectivity.

Behrou jan, I don't mean to insult religious people, or anyone with any level of faith. That's their business. However, I still have the right to express my views on the matter and I don't see why this should be insulting to people of faith. They can express their opinion about mine as they please.

Yes religion and its teachings demean, condescend and insult me as a human being. I think religion is slavery. I won't submit to it. I maintain that many people who have grown up with religious teaching commit the most horrific crimes. The fallacy in my view is spouted by religious people.

I too have religious people in my immediate family and there is no chance in hell of having any level of discussion with them about the issue, it's what they say or there is no discussion. As for ashtar and GP, I really don't care much for their type, but not because of their religious faith, but because they want to engage in discussion and yet evade answering questions everytime they come unstuck, which is often.

 

[Kaz]

But religion is great Behrooz jan...we should all be subject to its morality...no one should get to choose for themselves

 

[General Parsaian]

Gp

ژنرال جون

من نه علامه هستم و نه*** ادعاشو دارم.......من فقط معتقدم تو کم داری...اونم به این خاطر میگم که مطالعه نداری...

ما رو بی*** خیال - برای اینکه به خودت اقلا ثابت بشه شما چند کتاب در مورد عرفان یا از عرفانی***ست***ها خوانده اید؟ صفر

چند کتاب در مورد زرتشت خوانده اید؟ - هیچ

بدی کار آنجاست که تا دلت بخواد در مورد حدیث خوندی.......همانطور که قبلاً عرض کردم شما همه چیز را راجع به هیچ می***دانی​

​

.​

جناب مسعود
شما می ایید و می گویید برای رسیدن به عرفان باید اله کردو بله کرد
و در مورد خرد جمعی و چگونگی پی برد به ان و فهم ارتباط و هارمونی طبیعت حرف می زنی من را نصیحت میکنی که بروم این چیزها را بخوانم
ووقتی بنده میگویم شما بیا دو جمله برای ما بیسوات در این مورد توضیح بده می ایی و میگویی
من ادعاشو ندارم ؟
پس داشتی ادعای دختر بازی یا مچ اندختن میکردی مثلا ؟
که وقتی از تو در مورد عرفان می پرسم میگی ادعاشو ندارم!!!ا
این همه ادعا میکنی که بنده بجز حدیث و قران چیزی نخوندم و هیچی سرم نمیشه
بعد می ایی و میگی من ادعاشو ندارم


عجب

 

[General Parsaian]

بعضی ها خیلی ادعاشون میشه
حتی دیدم خیلی ها مریض هستند می روند تو مطب دکتر
مریضه رو میکنه به دکتر میگه اقا برای من فلان دوا را تجویز کن و فلان شربت رو تجویز
کن و فلان دوای عطاری رو بخورم خیلی خوبه
خلاصه مریضه جوری تو مطب دکتر حرف میزنه که هرکی نفهمه فکر میکنه پرفسور و متخصص امده عیادت نه یک مریض که از بیبی خدا بیامرزش چند تا تجویز عطاری یاد گرفته
فکر میکنه علامه دهره
این جریانات از مطب دکتر گرفته تا بحث روزانه در بین ایرانی جماعت زیاد دیده می شود

 

[ashtar]

Ashtar jaan, there was a question that you din't answer either. What are your thoughts about Khomeini et al. as related to religion? I think this is the place where a lot of the disconnect happens in Iranian society.

1st, of all thank you for your civil and unbiased remarks.

As far as Khomeini or any other self or public proclaimed religious leader is concerned I think my personal views about them is irrelevant to this general discussion. But as a general point, one can not simply dismiss the concept of religion or god based on the actions or personal interpretations of that individual leader. Khomeini for example, had his own interpretations of Islam many of which were not and still are not shared by majority of Muslims, namely Sunnis and in fact many Shiites, worldwide. Many Iranians however, at least at the time, found his interpretations appealing and did not find his words, and actions contradictory to their own moral principals. If today I come here and say that my interpretation of Ferdosi's Shahnameh is that Iranians should go and beat up foreigners and some Iranians including some who actually never read Shahnameh go out and beat up some foreigners then would you blame me, Shahnameh, or Ferdosi? Or is it not reasonable to blame those who committed the beating and then to a lesser degree and at most perhaps criticize my interpretation of Shahnameh?

Now, a religious person or someone who believes in God has the option and luxury of questioning God's wisdom and wonder why God would allow a misinterpretation of its religion. But an atheist neither has such option nor luxury of blaming or questioning God because by definition he/she doesn't believe in the existence of a God and thus he/she has to accept and admit that whatever "wrong" or "evil" has been committed must have been because of the direct decisions and actions of the individuals. And to try to blame the writings of a book for the actions of individuals is as ridiculous and superstitious as claiming that there is a thing called the devil or "sheytan" who is responsible for people committing immoral and unethical acts.

Not so fast my friend. Your question/argument is not the smoking gun you were hoping for! To answer your question, the only code of morality that I would need as an Atheist or non-religous person, not to cheat on my wife when I think I can get away with it, not to steal if I know I won’t be caught, not to kill someone and take their stuff when I can get away with, not lie to save my own skin, or not to take advantage of someone who is weak, desperate or in need, is a simple one liner... "don't do to others, what you don't want done onto you" or any other wording of it you're comfortable with that is entrenched in every religion and philosophical moral code.

But why should I not do to others what I don't want done to me? Religion says you shouldn't do it because God says so. But atheists assert that just because somebody says so doesn't mean that intelligent people should follow it like a bunch of slaves or sheep. To them I say that sounds very reasonable. Now explain to me why I should not do to others what I don't want done to me. I don't like to be taken advantage of in a business deal and to lose money but if I can take advantage of others and make more money myself legally (or illegally without getting caught) and thus be able to buy more stuff to satisfy my own ego and ensure my own survival and pleasure at the expense of some dumb-witted loser why shouldn't I? If I were an orphan I wouldn't want being taken advantage of or made fun of but hey I'm not an orphan so if I can get a laugh that would elevate my mood at the expense of an orphan or if I can make more money at the expense of an orphan why shouldn't I? Jus because you say "don't do to others, what you don't want done onto you" is not going to cut it here. Remember we are not supposed to act like slaves and sheep and just do things because we are told to do so. We need a good reason.

 

[BijanD]

But why should I not do to others what I don't want done to me? Religion says you shouldn't do it because God says so. But atheists assert that just because somebody says so doesn't mean that intelligent people should follow it like a bunch of slaves or sheep.

how do you know this? god told you? you must be very humble to claim this. There is nothing wrong if you say I don't know why somethings are the way they are. and with you, I don't mean anything personal rather the people who argue this.

as for why atheists, religious or any other human beings who don't cheat or steal, there are many great evolutionary theories out there that are explained mathematically. Evolutionary game theory being one of them. This theory is not perfect but it's in the right direction of finding out why and is better than "somebody" telling me.

 

[ashtar]

how do you know this? god told you? you must be very humble to claim this. There is nothing wrong if you say I don't know why somethings are the way they are. and with you, I don't mean anything personal rather the people who argue this.

What?!!!
No god didn't tell me. Instead of highlighting part of the sentence read the whole thing. I said RELIGION SAYS God says so, that is religion claims God has ordered certain moral behaviors.

as for why atheists, religious or any other human beings who don't cheat or steal, there are many great evolutionary theories out there that are explained mathematically. Evolutionary game theory being one of them. This theory is not perfect but is better than "somebody" telling me.

Again, read the prior posts before jumping the gun. I'm not asking why an atheist or anyone else holds certain moral beliefs. I'm asking in the absence of a higher authority like god ordering certain moral behaviors how can an atheist convince others to follow the same moral values? Evolutionary theory may explain why certain people may or may not believe certain things but doesn't explain why people should try to be ethical and follow the same moral values that you believe.

 

[BijanD]

What?!!!
No god didn't tell me. Instead of highlighting part of the sentence read the whole thing. I said RELIGION SAYS God says so, that is religion claims God has ordered certain moral behaviors.

.[/COLOR][/SIZE]

again, how does religion claim to know what god says and then have people follow it?

Evolutionary theory may explain why certain people may or may not believe certain things but doesn't explain why people should try to be ethical and follow the same moral values that you believe.

not evolutionary theory but in specific evolutionary game theory explains exactly that. why are we nice to each other? why do we follow same moral values?