(Insert Title Here)
§outh§tar said:
I only noted that you were being pompous about the whole thing, as though you are somehow above him.
I'd call it an aspect of humanity.
I mean, nobody's immune to it. Let's take a look at you, for instance:
What hypocrisy! And to think this is the basis of a crushed "friendship".. 
Just a Question
In both cases, §outh§tar, we're showing a certain amount of moral revulsion at a certain idea or concept we've encountered.
Terry Nichols, in my opinion, made an insincere speech that has the effect of mocking God, human suffering, and the value of life:
• • •
•
With respect to the court and all who are present: First of all, I would like to say that my heart truly goes out to all the victims, survivors and anyone who has been affected by the Oklahoma City bombing. - Nichols' heart goes out to people who have been through a traumatic event.
•
I've had much sorrow and shed many tears for those who have experienced pain and suffering, as well as the loss of their loved ones. - Nichols has experienced sorrow for people who have been through a traumatic event.
•
Words cannot adequately express the sorrow I have had over the years for the grief that so many have endured and continue to suffer. I am truly sorry for what occurred. - Words cannot express Nichols' regret for what has occurred (e.g. a traumatic event).
(Note that Terry Nichols does not send his heart out for the victims of his actions; has not shed tears for inflicting pain and suffering; does not apologize for his role in what has occurred.)
•
I do pray that for many, that this day will be the beginning of their long-awaited healing process. - Nichols prays that people might heal. (What does that healing include?)
•
And I pray that all who hold any hatred, bitterness and unforgiveness (sic) toward me, that they will find in their hearts to forgive me, as others have done, for this is the first stage toward true healing. - That healing starts with forgiving him for what has occurred (not, by the limits of his own rhetoric, for what he has done.)
•
We cannot change the past, but we each can change how we think. And we do have the power within each one of us to choose and to use our circumstances to make us, to make us either bitter and resentful people, or better and loving people. - Nichols notes that we cannot change the past, and reminds his victims that they have the power to make themselves better people.
•
And though it's difficult at first, I do pray that each would choose to allow this painful struggle to make us all better, loving people. - Nichols prays that his victims will become better people.
•
I also pray that everyone in this nation will find it in their hearts to truly turn to God and diligently make him an important part of every area of their lives; whether that be at home, with family members, with friends at work, and even in the courtrooms across America. - Nichols invites the victims to convert to his faith.
•
It's Christianity that this great nation was founded upon, and only in Christianity does one find the true freedom and liberty we all seek. Let's not lose that Godly heritage. - Nichols asserts the power of Christianity in America.
•
We must once again get back to this foundational truth and put God back into all aspects of our lives, both physically, excuse me, both publicly and privately by openly recognizing and acknowledging his authority and his sovereignty over all things, including ourselves, and to do so with reverential fear. - Nichols calls for the nation to give itself over to God.
•
By the way, for those who wish to ridicule or criticize what I say here, let me say that no, I have not gotten religion, but rather, I have discovered genuine truth, and I've found a real and personal relationship with God through our living risen lord and savior, Jesus Christ. For it is only in Jesus Christ do we truly find the forgiveness of sins, genuine reconciliation with God, and true salvation and eternal life with our Lord. - Nichols seeks to preempt any ridicule or criticism of his speech.
•
Yes, only with and through faith in Jesus Christ alone can we be saved. And the only place where real truth, absolute truth can be found is in God's word, the Holy Bible. - Nichols cites controversial (erroneous) doctrine to reinforce his appeal to faith.
•
I also wish to say that my views were never the same as Timothy McVeigh's. They may have had - we may have had some similar - similarities, but they were not the same. And today, my views and beliefs are far different, as the result of finding the real truth of life in this world, which only the inerrant word of scripture reveals. - Nichols attempts to distance himself from his cohort both in the past and present.
•
When God, when the God of scripture is not the center of one's life, one's mind, emotions and actions can easily be manipulated, which in turn can result in harm and destruction to self and others. - Nichols
seems to be making excuses for himself, although we must consider the possibility that he's actually reprimanding or correcting the victims. (See next point.)
•
Thus I pray for everyone to acknowledge God, make his, make his truths and ways the center of your life, accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior, and especially that men will become the spiritual leaders of the family, the fathers of integrity, as God intended man to become. - Nichols prays that the victims will accept Jesus Christ, implying in accord with the prior paragraph that the
victims (as compared to Nichols himself) need correction.
•
One last thing, many people have come, have come up with various excuses and reasons to justify the jurors' deadlock in the sentencing phase of this trial, which the state was seeking the death penalty against me . . . And I am sure many will disagree with me, but the truth is, the reason death was not given is for the simple and abundantly clear fact that God is in control. His hand has been guiding this trial from day one. There is no other explanation . . . And it was God who, through the holy spirit, worked in the hearts of those jurors who refused to vote for death. I commend those jurors for their faith and unwavering stand for God. - Nichols claims that God is on his side, protecting him from the death penalty. Perhaps he was making a statement against capital punishment, but that's not evident in the context of his remarks.
•
Praise and glory be to God Almighty. Give thanks always to our lord and savior, Jesus Christ. - "Yes, Mr. Nichols. Whatever you say."
• • •
So ... what's missing? An acknowledgment of personal responsibility for the suffering he's so sorry for, and also an apology for that personal responsibility.
Who knows? Maybe Nichols is entirely innocent, had nothing to do with the bombing, and is just too polite to say so at the time.
But that lack of real compassion, that refusal to acknowledge responsibility for the suffering caused by his actions--that's what motivates the "pompous" tone.
Nichols turned to Christ in the manner of so many convicted criminals:
after the fact of his crime. Perhaps the dead folks in Oklahoma City were just God's way of bringing one prodigal son back to the flock?
So if we look back to your first post in this topic--
Wow, tiassa, you really do know what's best for them
--I find it strange that you consider the statement of an obvious fact so "pompous".
Quite simply, if you are convicted of such crimes as to receive 161 life sentences, it is in your best interest to make a point of telling victims their business, refusing to apologize, and claiming God as your ally.
And you know? I don't feel particularly pompous about it. I certainly could have brought out the usual brand of invective I reserve for such occasions. To the other, calling him the shit on my shoe might be the better route to go, since "unrepentant" and "insincere" in the face of having helped kill a large number of people just doesn't seem to convey the offense fostered by Nichols' outrageous courtroom speech.
Where is confession? Where is repentance? There is none, only a celebration of newfound faith and advice to the victims to carry on, carry on. Does nothing really matter?
And yet you get yourself into a self-righteous snit over ... what? Somebody whose atheism causes them to doubt the character of another who has given themselves over to religion? A human issue, indeed. Perhaps a fault, but we don't know much about the content of the conversation that caused the problem. But more than a tit-for-tat comparison, I'm curious as to your opinion:
What's the difference between my self-righteousness and yours?
PavlosMarcos and the friend have the rest of their lives to either work it out or turn their backs forever. Because of Terry Nichols, there are 161 people who
do not have the rest of their lives to come to terms with their issues, and he just told thousands more of his victims--e.g. the families of the dead--to forgive him, get on with life, and be better people than they are.
I see a functional difference at the very least; a situational difference at the heart of it.
I'd like you to see this:
Fair 'nuff. Though at the outset I wonder why. Do you point me to the statement, the editor's note, or the Biblical references? Or perhaps all three?
I'm simply unsure of where to start responding to it in order to fulfill your needs.
I don't understand the question.
It was merely a comparative question about the nature of repentance. Will you repent of your sins or do as Terry Nichols did and claim it as your right?
The purpose is to remind of the doctrinal idea that merely claiming conversion and asking forgiveness does not in any way absolve a person. If Nichols truly repents of the hurt he caused people, then God will judge him accordingly. And that's God's business, not mine. In the meantime, however, how can he ask forgiveness when he refuses to acknowledge his sins?
Nichols was not asking to be released, but that the 'victims' find it in their hearts to forgive.
I believe that to be an inaccurate statement. See the dissection of Nichols' statement above.
Surely, if you can be insisting that this is not the right thing to do, then why on earth should Nichols have forgiven whoever he killed?
The answer is either "sarcasm" or "What ... are you talking about?" Er ... let me look through here ....
Hmph. I'm going to go with the latter; it sounds like something I'd write to make a point, but in double-checking the two topics I've made on Nichols' statement, I seem to have missed where I made such an attempt.
There's a roundabout argument that involves a longer answer, but I don't think it applies to your point. Of course, I don't understand what your point is in this instance, so ... maybe.
If your child asks for a toy, you do not give them a fish.
Well, her mother won't let her eat fish. But her grandmother and her daddy ... in small doses. It took me a long time to get used to fish.
However, to respond more substantially:
And yet when one asks for forgiveness, you get puffed up as if you know what's best.
In the case of a child and a parent, it's a different relationship than that between murderer and surviving victims.
Let's take two examples:
•
Child: "I'm sorry, Daddy. I didn't mean to disobey." (Do you know how you disobeyed?) "I shouldn't have _______." (Alright. Everything's going to be fine. Do you know
why you shouldn't have done it?) "Because people might get hurt."
•
Markhasev: "I am guilty, and I want to do the right thing ... More than anything, I want to apologize to the victim's family. It is my duty as a Christian, and it's the least I can do, after the great wickedness for which I am responsible . . . This is not about me, but about those whose lives I've marred . . . My motive is to at least try to mend the things which I've destroyed." (It's nice to hear that, sir. I'll leave that one to the surviving victims to decide.)
Do you see how both the theoretical child and the convicted Markhasev
both acknowledge their guilt? This is what Terry Nichols refused to do. He has further aggravated the losses suffered by the surviving victims in order to celebrate his salvation in Jesus Christ and to pray that the victims become better people.
Compare the theoretical child above with the one below:
•
Child: "I'm sorry you're upset, Daddy. I pray that you will become a better person."
When my daughter is older, she will have the leeway to say something along those lines if she deems it appropriate. But it probably won't be a good thing to say if she's just burned down the house in order to prove that she, at, oh, say, six years old, can make decisions on her own.
Unfortunately, you are mistaken. I was apologizing for my tone, not what I am saying.
I suppose I was a bit annoyed at the "smears of self-righteousness" comment; it appears I did lose focus in that sense, as it seemed to drain the vitality and sincerity out of the apology. I admit it is a statistically unusual literary device that leads me to perceive a more definitive weight in a term like "see" or a phrase like, "All I see are ...," so ... er ... yeah.
I claim the right to be disgusted by the conduct of another living human being--e.g. Terry Nichols--just as I claim the right to appreciate the decision of Mr. Markhasev. And frankly, I think pointing out the obvious is one of the
nicer ways I could go about it.
Served up "a round of hatred"???
Yes. In order to explain, however, we must account for the apparent fact--
By asking the 'victims' to forgive?
--that we have
very different perceptions of his speech in court.
Perhaps you would rather the 'victims' not forgive because he doesn't deserve forgiveness.
The surviving victims will forgive or not in their own time. It's their own business until one of them happens to ask me my advice on the subject. Quite simply, it is not the business of one who has offended to tell his victims how to feel about it.
So you keep saying.
____________________
• Associated Press. "Text of Terry Nichols' statement." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, August 9, 2004. See http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Nichols Sentence Text
• Robinson, Bryan. "Convicted Killer of Ennis Cosby Confesses." Lifegoeson.net (ABC News), February 9, 2001. See http://www.lifegoeson.net/InTruth/killer.htm
