Sample clip of my debate with an
atheist on the issue of morality.
Find the whole debate at this link
IF YOU ENCOUNTER DEAD LINKS, ETC. JUST LET ME KNOW VIA THE CONTACT PAGE.
The Oklahoma City bombing and the atheist and agnostic connection
Dan Barker once stated, “Timothy McVeigh, a God believing Catholic, blew up that Federal building…why is no one calling the Oklahoma City bombing suspects ‘Christian terrorists’?”
I responded to this in my verbosely entitled essay Was Timothy McVeigh a God Believing Catholic and a "Christian Terrorists"? - Part 1 of Dan Barker and the Alien Rape Voyeurs
The bottom line is that Timothy McVeigh was an agnostic and even if he had been a Catholic, he did not yell out something to the likes of “YHVH akbar!” (aside: What “Allahu Akbar” Does Not Mean)—he did not do it in the name of, because he was, a Catholic.
But Dan Barker asked not simply about him but referred to, in the plural, “suspects…terrorists.”
What about Terry Nichols? Was he “a God believing Catholic” or a God believing anything?
Terry Nichols was Timothy McVeigh's co-conspirator and assisted in preparing the bomb. Terry Nichols wrote a letter to his oldest son, Josh Nichols, when Josh was sentenced for driving a stolen car and assaulting two police officers.
Nichols stated that “he was forced by bomber Timothy McVeigh into participating” and also stated that “he was lost in life in the years leading up to the bombing.”1
When one is in this lost state of mind one can be easily manipulated & guided down many a wrong paths & beliefs. Today I can speak of this as being true because I have personally experienced such.
Another bit of information that was revealed is that he “was an atheist before the bombing but has found God since his arrest,” stating,
And though I wish the bombing never occurred and that I had been with my family all along, I am still thankful to God for having these past 11 years of isolation to come to the knowledge of the truth and accept Jesus Christ as my Lord & Savior.
He recognized that his actions “resulted in the death of hundreds of innocent men, women, and children, and the devastation of my family members” and that they died “horrific deaths.”
So, Timothy McVeigh, an agnostic, and Terry Nichols, an atheist, blew up that Federal building; why is no one calling the Oklahoma City bombing suspects “secular terrorists”? or, “atheist/agnostic terrorists”?
If they had claimed to have been Christians they could not have rightly been called “Christian” since their actions directly violated Christian principles, values, morals, ethics, etc.
Since they were atheist and agnostic it could be said that they were secular/atheist/agnostic terrorists because beyond an epistemic, subjective, preference based tentative concept of principles, values, morals, ethics, etc. there are no ontological, objective, absolute principles, values, morals, ethics, etc. against which their actions could be measured.
Consider my debate with an atheist on the issue of morality for examples of this fact. The whole debate is found here but meanwhile, here is a taste:
Does this mean that atheism logically leads to such malicious misanthropy? It most certainly does not have to. Yet, it can and who will stop it? The atheist ethicists can shake their impotent fist all that they want. But not only are their protestations impotent, they cannot offer transcendent accountability in the form of justice. And in not being able to offer transcendent justice, they are themselves unjust and therefore not ethical (find fuller explanation of this point at this link and also see The Collateral Worldview).
Yet, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols are not to be labeled as secular/atheist/agnostic terrorists because their stated motivations were political. Personages such as Dan Barker should not only check their facts and stop attempting to gain cheap popularity by such fallacious rhetoric.
I also wonder how it sounds to some to state that after murdering hundreds of innocent men, women and children Terry Nichols is thankful to God for his time in prison since he has come to the knowledge of the truth and accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior.
If he is delusional then his delusion serves him well.
If he is correct then he did not only get justice but grace. That is to say that Jesus took the punishment for his sins.
But what kind of God would take someone who murdered hundreds of innocent men, women and children and usher them into heaven?
Perhaps the sort of God that deserves to come to earth, take human form and see how He likes it.
Perhaps the sort of God who would be mocked, besmirched, condemned, beaten and murdered.
Perhaps the sort of God we should like to image when in moments of clarity we consider our own lives and deeds. Certainly, when compare ourselves to Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols we appear saintly. Yet, when we compare ourselves to saint we know we are sinners.
Perhaps it is the sort of God who loved the world so much that He gave His only begotten son so that though He is all the more mocked for having done so knew what we need and thus offer that to whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
It may be republished in part or in its entirety on websites, blogs, or any
print media for whatever purpose (in agreement or in order to criticize it) only as
long as the following conditions are met:
Click on image above to see articles about Aleister Crowley and the West Memphis Three (WM3) murders.
Through the educational system, children are being indoctrinated into secular philosophies and many churches have few young people. One of the most important Christian movements in recent times is the 4./14 movement which focuses on evangelizing kids between the ages of 4 to 14 years old. 71% of Christians decide to follow Jesus Christ by the time they are 15 years old. Help reach children with the gospel: Christian children's tracts