Edison on God.

[Nosuperstition]

Nature is what we know. We do not know the gods of religions. And nature is not kind, or merciful, or loving. If God made me—the fabled God of the three qualities of which I spoke: mercy, kindness, love—He also made the fish I catch and eat. And where do His mercy, kindness, and love for that fish come in? No; nature made us—nature did it all—not the gods of the religions

https://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081107074639AAO9mjQ

Now that when viewed along with all the raw scenes of eat and be eaten shown in discovery,National Geographic and animal planets was an eye-opener to me.What is the counter argument of theists on these profound words of Thomas Alva Edison,a genius with around a 1000 patents?

[Garudaman]

that is, in the form of giving the opportunity for fish to feel the joy of giving!

[Nosuperstition]

that is, in the form of giving the opportunity for fish to feel the joy of giving!

Then why does the fish try its level best to escape the clutches of the butcher when it is brought to the fish market.It must voluntarily accept its duty and its fate , isn't it.Or is it the case that just as human beings need to be coerced with religion like sheep ,the fish too must be made to oblige to its mandatory obligation?

[Garudaman]

it indeed evolved to be able to try to escape, but it wasn't quite evolved to successfully escape! then why it evolved so? it's because it evolved to give what it loved!

QS. 3:92. Never will you attain the righteousness until you spend from what you love. And whatever you spend - indeed, Allah is Knowing of it.

or maybe you can ask to Mr. Edison, why did he say that God made ​​it, for him catch & eat!

[Nosuperstition]

it indeed evolved to be able to try to escape, but it wasn't quite evolved to successfully escape! then why it evolved so? it's because it evolved to give what it loved!

QS. 3:92. Never will you attain the righteousness until you spend from what you love. And whatever you spend - indeed, Allah is Knowing of it.

or maybe you can ask to Mr. Edison, why did he say that God made ​​it, for him catch & eat!

O.K,I will tell you of one peculiar phenomenon/practice of self sacrifice or human sacrifice observed amongst Hindus even upto the beginnings or end of Vijayanagar Empire.There used to exist a tradition where a pious or chaste woman would offer herself to Lord Shiva and dance unto death so that Shiva might bless the village or that geographical area with abundant rain in times of famine.You can also watch it in the video given below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qKuwq0f4VE

So would you consider that O.K.Also would you consider Suttee ,the practice of a widow immolating herself upon the pyre of her husband or widow sacrifice O.K?If so why did the Muslim sultans try their level best to suppress these traditions?

Sacrifice of Jephtah in the Bible is another case in point.If God wants so,you must even offer your daughter as a burnt thanksgiving sacrifice.Still that did not prevent the British from suppressing Suttee by making a huge issue out of it.

In these traditions,the sacrifice must be voluntary and these occurred in small numbers.But sacrifice of fish for human is not voluntary.So stop saying that God made it just for the sake of humans.It too feels the same pain as does a human while taking up the so called opportunity of serving the human being as food.

[Nosuperstition]

or maybe you can ask to Mr. Edison, why did he say that God made ​​it, for him catch & eat!

He said that he has to eat fish to obtain the protein needed for his body.He atleast empathised with its suffering to have arrived at such a conclusion,shame on you , you do not even understand such an empathy.

[Nosuperstition]

The British and Muslims made a huge issue of Suttee because that would lend credibility to their invasion of new lands which is Imperialism or Colonialism or whatever.This tactic too is not something they innovated of their own.Rome made a big issue about prevalence of human sacrifice amongst Celts,massacred and maimed en masse on a large scale and then annexed them to its Empire.

[Garudaman]

So would you consider that O.K.Also would you consider Suttee, the practice of a widow immolating herself upon the pyre of her husband or widow sacrifice O.K?If so why did the Muslim sultans try their level best to suppress these traditions?

Islam only allows the sacrifice of the lives of themselves or others for the right reasons, that is because of permission/command of God (such as the command to fight for the truth), & from the point of view of Islam that tradition is never permitted/ordered by God!

But sacrifice of fish for human is not voluntary.

if that were true, why didn't they evolve into creatures that can't be captured?



you think the plant on that picture, don't sacrifice some (spiked) part of itself as food, voluntarily?

[Garudaman]

He said that he has to eat fish to obtain the protein needed for his body.He atleast empathised with its suffering to have arrived at such a conclusion,shame on you , you do not even understand such an empathy.

Mr. Edison complain if (merciful) God exists why did God create foods that can suffer when humans eat, right?

[Nosuperstition]

Islam only allows the sacrifice of the lives of themselves or others for the right reasons, that is because of permission/command of God (such as the command to fight for the truth), & from the point of view of Islam that tradition is never permitted/ordered by God!

And do you consider Imperial/Colonial objectives as right reasons?And I suppose circumcision is not a sacrifice on part of muslims to Allah?What makes you think Allah accepts the foreskin of human penis which is part body sacrificial offering while rejecting total human sacrifice?

[Garudaman]

And do you consider Imperial/Colonial objectives as right reasons?

colonial objective?

And I suppose circumcision is not a sacrifice on part of muslims to Allah? What makes you think Allah accepts the foreskin of human penis which is part body sacrificial offering while rejecting total human sacrifice?

who says Islam rejects total human sacrifice? you think the war can't lead to total sacrifice?

[Nosuperstition]

colonial objective?

The Turks,Turanians,Iranians,Afghans,Arabs and Mongols came to India as invaders and settled as the nobility.Moors and Africans were imported as slaves.First Turkic and then Persian were the court languages of many of these colonisers.Now what do you call all this ?integration perhaps?

[Nosuperstition]

As was their practice, before the beginning of hostilities, the Hindu kings also sent a messenger to Masud that this land being theirs, his troops should peacefully vacate it (as was done once again unsuccessfully by the Government of India before the inception of the 1999 Kargil war when Pakistan occupied Indian territory at Kargil Drass and Mushkoh sectors in Kashmir). But Masud sent a reply that all land belonged to Khuda (the Persianized version of Allah) and he could settle wherever he pleased. And that it was his holy duty to convert to Islam all those who did not recognize his Khuda and accept Islam.

http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html

Nice excuse for colonisation,all land belongs to Allah,we will invade your lands as they are rightfully ours.All providence is Allah's hence we are in no way indebted to you even if we live in your lands.We will follow the laws of Ummah and not the laws of the land.

[Nosuperstition]

/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=1803&p=212927#p212927

Shiva does not eat meat but does accept sacrifices made in his name.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=15608

This is the link that shows that atleast a few million Hindus got butchered over a time span of hundreds of years of muslim rule in the Indian sub-continent.