The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
A father killed his wife and four daughters in their sleep because he could not bear them adopting a more westernised lifestyle, an inquest heard yesterday.
Mohammed Riaz, 49, found it abhorrent that his eldest daughter wanted to be a fashion designer, and that she and her sisters were likely to reject the Muslim tradition of arranged marriages.
On Hallowe'en last year he sprayed petrol throughout their terraced home in Accrington, Lancs, and set it alight.
... continued
Mohammed Riaz, 49, found it abhorrent that his eldest daughter wanted to be a fashion designer, and that she and her sisters were likely to reject the Muslim tradition of arranged marriages.
On Hallowe'en last year he sprayed petrol throughout their terraced home in Accrington, Lancs, and set it alight.
... continued
Page:
I doubt I would ever follow a religion unless someone could give me some proof that religion was 'right'... But even then, it would be me following it because I 'have' to (in that, if it was definitely the 'right' religion, I would have to follow it to avoid nastiness in the afterlife).
But I suppose when no-one can know (beyond their own faith) that they're religion is 'right', they want to be able to say they belong to x or y religion so they feel they are going to heaven, but at the same time if they are not able to accept parts of the faith (for example, someone coming back to life) they might 'interperet' religious texts in a different way. Again, it comes down to motivation...
When you say you trust the Bible and its accuracy... Well that means you must trust everyone who ever had a hand in translating it, compiling it, blahdeblah to not 'twist' it at all. It may not even be consciously, but if someone translating the Bible interprets something one way, that may lead to a slightly different translation than if it had been interpreted another way... If these small incremental changes build up, then you can end up with something different to the original... (rather like an 'evolution' of the Bible).
Kinda reminds me (however inapropriately) of a sex education talk. People saying, no matter how much you trust your partner, you can't necessarily trust the people they've slept with... So always use protection! All it takes is for one of their partners to have caught something and you could get it!
I guess it's like that. Believing and trusting in 'the word of God' is all well and good, but to believe the Bible in it's current form, you must also trust all those who had a hand in compiling/translating/yaddayadda. If you do, that's fair enough, and a decision for you to make, but isn't one of the main points of the Bible that all humans are fallible?
[EDIT] - Not saying Judy is 'right' in her interpretation, and I guess if you choose to accept that 'some' of the Bible is true you are accepting that no-one tampered (purposefully or not) with at least that section you believe to be true... So even if your justification for ignoring other parts is that they could have been edited/mis-translated/whatever, the choice as to what parts to believe and what not to is entirely arbitrary unless you have some sort of evidence to back up that one part has not been tampered with (or conversely, that another part HAS been tampered with). If no such evidence exists to either point to areas that are definitively true or possibly untrue, then I suppose to be consistent you either have to believe it all or none.
But I suppose when no-one can know (beyond their own faith) that they're religion is 'right', they want to be able to say they belong to x or y religion so they feel they are going to heaven, but at the same time if they are not able to accept parts of the faith (for example, someone coming back to life) they might 'interperet' religious texts in a different way. Again, it comes down to motivation...
When you say you trust the Bible and its accuracy... Well that means you must trust everyone who ever had a hand in translating it, compiling it, blahdeblah to not 'twist' it at all. It may not even be consciously, but if someone translating the Bible interprets something one way, that may lead to a slightly different translation than if it had been interpreted another way... If these small incremental changes build up, then you can end up with something different to the original... (rather like an 'evolution' of the Bible).
Kinda reminds me (however inapropriately) of a sex education talk. People saying, no matter how much you trust your partner, you can't necessarily trust the people they've slept with... So always use protection! All it takes is for one of their partners to have caught something and you could get it!
I guess it's like that. Believing and trusting in 'the word of God' is all well and good, but to believe the Bible in it's current form, you must also trust all those who had a hand in compiling/translating/yaddayadda. If you do, that's fair enough, and a decision for you to make, but isn't one of the main points of the Bible that all humans are fallible?
[EDIT] - Not saying Judy is 'right' in her interpretation, and I guess if you choose to accept that 'some' of the Bible is true you are accepting that no-one tampered (purposefully or not) with at least that section you believe to be true... So even if your justification for ignoring other parts is that they could have been edited/mis-translated/whatever, the choice as to what parts to believe and what not to is entirely arbitrary unless you have some sort of evidence to back up that one part has not been tampered with (or conversely, that another part HAS been tampered with). If no such evidence exists to either point to areas that are definitively true or possibly untrue, then I suppose to be consistent you either have to believe it all or none.
The sermon in church today comes to mind when you said about humans possible making mistakes etc.
It was about Abraham and how he continually messed up and did things wrong even though he was a righteous man. God still made sure that thing went according to his divine plan even when Abraham did something stupid that would potentially ruin it.
When God has a plan, it will work out fine. I dont trust the people who wrote/translated/printed the bible as such. I trust God. I trust that God has allowed the bible to be translated accurately.
It was about Abraham and how he continually messed up and did things wrong even though he was a righteous man. God still made sure that thing went according to his divine plan even when Abraham did something stupid that would potentially ruin it.
When God has a plan, it will work out fine. I dont trust the people who wrote/translated/printed the bible as such. I trust God. I trust that God has allowed the bible to be translated accurately.
XD
You are such a lemming.
You are such a lemming.
Mohammed Riaz, dear oh dear, just shows how a one-dimensional belief in invisible truth can evilize the mind.
Evilize. Put it in the dictionary!
I can understand how from his perspective he perceived western culture to be saturated with Satan, but you know, murder is wrong, Mohammed. You're gonna burn baby.
Evilize. Put it in the dictionary!
I can understand how from his perspective he perceived western culture to be saturated with Satan, but you know, murder is wrong, Mohammed. You're gonna burn baby.
Page: