 |
|
|
|
|
July 25th, 2011
11:13 AM ET
Is 'Christian fundamentalist' label correct for Norway terror suspect?By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor (CNN) - Given initial suspicions that Friday's bombing and mass shooting in Norway were carried out by Islamic militants linked to al Qaeda, the way police ended up describing the suspect behind the attacks came as a big surprise even to many security experts: The alleged attacker was called a "Christian fundamentalist." But experts on European politics and religion say that the Christian fundamentalist label could overstate the extent to which the suspect, Anders Behring Breivik - who has told authorities that he carried out the attacks - was motivated by religion, and the extent to which he is tied to a broader religious movement. "It is true that he sees himself as a crusader and some sort of Templar knight," said Marcus Buck, a political science professor at Norway's University of Tromso, referring to an online manifesto that Breivik appears to have authored and which draws inspiration from medieval Christian crusaders. My Take: Norway attacks shows terrorism isn't just Islamic "But he doesn't seem to have any insight into Christian theology or any ideas of how the Christian faith should play any role in Norwegian or European society," Buck wrote in an email message. "His links to Christianity are much more based on being against Islam and what he perceives of as 'cultural Marxism.'" From what the 1,500-page manifesto says, Breivik appears to have been motivated more by an extreme loathing of European multiculturalism that has accompanied rapid immigration from the developing world, and of the European Union's growing powers, than by Christianity. "My impression is that Christianity is used more as a vehicle to unjustly assign some religious moral weight," to his political views, said Anders Romarheim, a fellow at the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies. "It is a signifier of Western culture and values, which is what they pretend to defend." "I would say they are more anti-Islam than pro-Christian," Romarheim said in reference to what appear to be Breivik's views. The manifesto is religion-obsessed in that it rants for long stretches against Muslims and their growing presence in Europe. Who is Anders Behring Breivik? It calls for a European civil war to overthrow governments, end multiculturalism and execute "cultural Marxists." The manifesto includes a link to a video asserting that the majority of Europe's population will be Muslim by 2050 "unless we manage to defeat the ruling Multiculturalist Alliance." The author of the document identifies himself as Breivik, but CNN could not independently verify that he wrote the document, and Norwegian authorities would not confirm that the man in their custody wrote the manifesto, saying it was part of their investigation Opposition to booming Muslim immigration to Europe, exacerbated by high birth rates in the Muslim community, has become a mainstay of Europe's burgeoning far-right, helping right-wing parties gain seats in parliaments across the continent. But those right-wing movements are mostly secular. Europe's hard right does not have deep ties to Christianity in the way that the United States' conservative movement is entwined with evangelical Christianity and other theologically conservative religious movements. A far-right comeback in Europe Recently adopted European laws aimed at curbing Islam's public visibility, including France's new burqa ban and Switzerland ban on minarets - towers that a part of mosques - were secular causes, not ones championed by Christian interests. Many Christian groups oppose such bans. "The bulk of the anti-Muslim sentiment is not against Muslims as such, but is a secular rejection of how some Muslims allegedly want to place Islam at the center of society," Buck said. "It is more anti-religious than anti-Muslim." Breivik's apparent manifesto, by contrast, cites biblical verses to justify violence for political ends. "Clearly, this is not a pacifist God we serve," it says. "It's God who teaches our hands to war and our fingers to fight. Over and over again throughout the Old Testament, His people are commanded to fight with the best weapons available to them at that time." "The biggest threat to Europe is the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist political doctrine of 'extreme egalitarian emotionalism,'" the manifesto goes on. "This type of political stance involves destroying Christendom, the Church, our European cultures and identities and opening up our borders to Islamic colonization." The video that's linked to in the manifesto also includes some religious language: "Celebrate us, the martyrs of the conservative revolution, for we will soon dine in the Kingdom of Heaven." Experts on religion in Europe said those faith-infused views are likely peculiar to the suspected gunman and do not appear reflect wider religious movements, even as they echoes grievances of Europe's right-wing political groups. "He was a flaky extremist who might as well have claimed to be fighting for the honor of Hogwarts as for the cause of Christ," said Philip Jenkins, a Pennsylvania State University professor who studies global religion and politics, describing the suspected Norway attacker. "He did not represent a religious movement. ... People should not follow that Christian fundamentalist red herring." At the same time, Breivik told investigators during interviews that he belongs to an international order, The Knights Templar, according to Norwegian newspaper VG, which cited unnamed sources. He described the organization as an armed Christian order, fighting to rid the West of Islamic suppression, the newspaper said. He also told investigators he had been in contact with like-minded individuals and said he counts himself as a representative of this order, it said. For many in Norway, the potential implications of the suspected killer's religion are still settling in. "This is the first time we've heard of Christianity/religion as a driving force behind right-wing extremism," Buck said. "The mainstream right-wing movements in the Nordic countries (very small and disorganized groups in Norway) would generally point to the Old Norse beliefs, if anything." "Norwegian, Nordic and European society," he said, "were totally unprepared for a violent attack from someone who calls himself Christian." soundoff (1,640 Responses)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next »
« Previous entryMy Take: Why evangelicals should stop evangelizing
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Another Timothy McVeigh !!! Hopefully this "nut job" meets the same fate. The sooner the better!!!
like most civilized nations, Norway does not have the death penality. life in prison is the best that one can hope for for this mass murderer,
like most civilized nations, Norway does not have the death penalty. life in prison is the best that one can hope for for this mass murderer,
This man does not represent Christians or Christianity in any way, shape or form.
Sad though that the Christians on this blog take the time to hate all Muslims for the acts of a few yet suddenly have an opposite opinion in this case since it is Christianity and its teachings linked to terrorism.
Hypocrites with no backbone at all and really pathetic from ppl who say their religion is the true way.
It appears he was acting in accordance with what Jesus said as another posted on here:
.
Doc Vestibule
The New Testament has several calls to violence.
As Jesus Christ Himself said:
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword"
Matthew 10:34
"I came to bring fire to the earth and how I wish it were already kindled! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division."
Luke 12:49-51
He even advises His followers to take up arms for Him.
But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough."
Luke 22:35-38
Muslims who commit violent acts do not represent Islam and I don't think they have any "insight" into Islamic theology (fourth paragraph of article). We need to stop with the double standard.
Mark 3:20-21
20 Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21 When his family[a] heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”
This passage, as have all passages in the NT, has been analyzed by many contemporary NT scholars and has been judged to be authentic.
Actually, Jesus was a bit "touched". After all he thought he spoke to Satan, thought he changed water into wine, thought he raised Lazarus from the dead etc. In today's world, said Jesus would be declared legally insane.
Or did P, M, M, L and J simply make him into a first century magic-man via their epistles and gospels of semi-fiction? Most contemporary NT experts after thorough analyses of all the scriptures go with the latter magic-man conclusion with J's gospels being mostly fiction.
Obviously, today's followers of Paul et al's "magic-man" are also a bit on the odd side believing in all the Christian mumbo jumbo about bodies resurrecting, and exorcisms, and miracles, and "magic-man atonement, and infallible, old, European, white men, and 24/7 body/blood sacrifices followed by consumption of said sacrifices. Yummy!!!!
So why do we really care what a first century CE, illiterate, long-dead, preacher/magic man would do or say?
=========================================================================================
As John Lennon once sang "imagine no religion". This world would be soooooooo much better off.
@GSA: I'd love to agree with you. But sadly I cannot. The violent history of the Crusades, to which Breivik himself refers, certainly links him with his fellow Christians. And while he may not represent the majority of Christians in his actions, there is an extremist portion of Christianity that is involved in xenophobia and violence which cannot be denied. I do agree with your assessment of the hypocrisy of Christians regarding this man. It is shameful. And my hope is that they can see their way to refrain from engaging in it when dealing with their muslim neighbours.
Hope all is well with you, GSA.
@Anti Christian Taliban – I just had to look up the quotes you mentioned to see if you were BSing or not. I do this all the time with people who try to post quotes from either the bible or the Quran so that I can be sure whether or not they're telling the truth. So far, a lot of people (you included) have been correct. And it scares me. What scares me even more is that much of the surprising quotes that I found came from the Bible (specifically from Leviticus and Deuteronomy).
the christian taliban is the ORIGINAL terrorist.....
thousands of years of pointing the finger at others has failed.
Not all Christians point the finger at the Muslim community for the crimes of a few.
jessy,
The sword referred to by Anti Christian Taliban is the sword of truth, the gospel and it is truth that cuts to the bone and divides right from wrong, beleivers from non beleivers. As to Luke on two swords this was a mock at the apostles who thought 2 swords would protect 12 apostles and if God could not protect them 2 swords sure couldnt. It furhter let them know that things would be getting much worse for them following the death
Jessy,
Jesus came and made it clear this old testament stuff you refer to must be in the right perspective. When Peter went with the sword to stop the Romans it was Jesus that stopped him, "live by the sword die by the sword". He also said you say an eye for eye I say turn the other cheek
@PulTab- Why?
And no offense to the late Lennon, but maybe he should have been sining about a world without guns.
This person represents Christianity with the same authority as you represent Christianity. In fact, his actions are more true to the way Christianity conducted itself in the past two thousand years than what you refer to Christianity. You are not unlike the "Palestinians," who proclaim that they have "always" lived in "Palestine". The reality is that their "always" is about 150 years. It is the same as YOUR Christianity, which is not even 150 years. Look back into the Middle Ages and even further into the beginning of the second millenia, and you will see the true face of Christianity. From those Christians' perspective you are not a TRUE Christian.
It does not surprise me that the likes of CNN and FOX News cronies would try and down-play the use of "Christian Fundamentalism" as a semantic error, after all it does not fit into their blinkered view of society and the world. Anders Behring Breivik is a Christian terrorist in and Osama Bin Laden was a Islamic terrorist. Both used their belief in the Christian crusades and Jihad to pursue their fundamental religious acts of terror. The right-wing press in America need to live up to the truth that while extremist islam is truly evil, so is extremist Christianity too which half the tea-part movement hang there hat.
As a muslim I am appalled at the actions of this lunatic. As for the Christians defending their religion, Welcome to the Club!
@Amir – I hope Gnostic Christians don't show the same hypocrisy. Otherwise, I'll be joining the "They-Don't-Represent-Me" club. By the way, is the membership cost free?
it is not the muslim redicals that hate our way of life it is the republican radicals that hate our way of life
CNN... right-wing? Huh?
Every 15 years or so, a radical white guy goes crazy and kills many people (and they don't hop on table tops while shooting everyone yelling "Jesus Christ all power to him"!!) Wow!, everyone always forgets that muslims kill THEIR OWN and others everyday around the world as they loudly say "Allah is the Greatest". They hide behind baby carriages, mosques, school buses, etc, EVERYDAY!!!. Truly, where is the outcry from muslims at the everyday murders around the world from there own! (Sorry, the USA can only be blamed so long for your troubles). I believe, as a christian, that anyone who kills an innocent person/child should be hunted down and brought to trial... hang Breivik now! (oops, sorry... noose mob on the loose). We christians would hunt the streets looking for such a low life! ...whether so called christian or muslim or jew. Not so with the muslim community.
A Chinese man goes into a kindergarten school (in China) and kills most of them with a knife (sorry you libs, they have great gun control in China, so they use knives instead). The point is...its a human nature thing!!!!, and right now the radical islam terrorists are the biggest problem! Get over it!
Islamic fundamentalist = expect others in your own faith to not stand up and hunt down the evil doers in your religion, followed with blaming all problems on USA instead of Fascist, Dictator, Socialist leaders! Cower in fear instead of standing up to what is right. Almost all in Islamic fundamentalist yell " allahu akbar!" when killing little children on buses.
Christian fundamentalist = ALWAYS hunt down those who kill in the name of Christianity. NEVER, I repeat NEVER, has any so called "Christian" yelled "Christ is Great!!" in killing others.
Common sense... it is long gone in media and general humanity.
Ideologs always come in all forms...we are always surprised everyday when something new happens. To compare the atrocities around the world everyday to one incident is childish and not very common sensed. You picked one "christian" compared to many muslim/Islam "radicals" (political correct)whom almost EVERYDAY blow children and innocent people during weddings and funerals, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, and yell "allahu akbar" in almost all attacks. I tell you what, let me know when the ratio of Islamic killings, while they yell "Allahu Akbar"!!!,even comes close to a 1 in 100,000 ratio of christians yelling "Christ is all Mighty!" when they kill.
Sinners sin and dogs bark....a white, fluffy dogs bark is different than the giant rotweiller's bark, but it is still a bark. Every human being is a sinner. Sins, whether they are grotesque or involve no violence are still both sins. What do the words Grace and Finished Work mean to you...look that up and leave the judging to God Himself.
I'll leave the judging to "The Flying Spaghetti Monster".
The New Testament has several calls to violence.
As Jesus Christ Himself said:
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword"
Matthew 10:34
"I came to bring fire to the earth and how I wish it were already kindled! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division."
Luke 12:49-51
He even advises His followers to take up arms for Him.
But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough."
Luke 22:35-38
This is not to say that Christianity is fundamentally a violent religion – but like with most other things, the Bible is such a mass of contradictions that one can find scripture to support just about any viewpoint.
It's commical that you would try to use half of Luke 22 to draw out your point
Luke 22:
49 When those around Him saw what was going to happen, they said to Him, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear.
51 But Jesus answered and said, “Permit even this.” And He touched his ear and healed him.
Matthew 26:
51 And suddenly, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword, struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.
52 But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish[f] by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?
You ever been crucified, very painful, still Jesus says
Luke 23:
34 Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.”
Here is a little exercise you can try compare all the times that forgiveness is mentioned compared to your two out of place quotes. If the whole bible is too much of a challange, then just the New Testament, if that is still too much for you, then just the Gospels, if that is still to overwhelming, then just the words Jesus speaks.
Read the entire Gospel
Exactly. The Bible contridicts itself when you actually read the entire thing. My point (and many others') argument against the religion.
you have to be awfully simple minded to see violence in those scriptures...
the bible says to study to show thyself approved a workman rightly dividing the word of truth..Revelation 6:9-11 shows a sharp contrast between those who won heaven and those who did not in the following verses of 14-17..you should also look at Revelation 13:9-10 and Matthew 26:52 to C ...a much more correct characteristic of Christianity and it's works..the perfect picture is that of Stephen who said as he was stoned to death , "Lord lay not this sin to their charge," upon which Saul/Paul of tarsus would appear to become the greatest Christian mind of his and our times..who understood greatly that bloodshed was not a Christian characteristic...and made it plain...
Mark 3:20-21
20 Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. 21 When his family[a] heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”
This passage as have all passages in the NT has been analyzed by many contemporary NT scholars and has been judged to be authentic.
Actually, Jesus was a bit "touched". After all he thought he spoke to Satan, thought he changed water into wine, thought he raised Lazarus from the dead etc. In today's world, said Jesus would be declared legally insane.
Or did P, M, M, L and J simply make him into a first century magic-man via their epistles and gospels of semi-fiction? Most contemporary NT experts after thorough analyses of all the scriptures go with the latter magic-man conclusion with J's gospels being mostly fiction.
Obviously, today's followers of Paul et al's "magic-man" are also a bit on the odd side believing in all the Christian mumbo jumbo about bodies resurrecting, and exorcisms, and miracles, and "magic-man atonement, and infallible, old, European, white men, and 24/7 body/blood sacrifices followed by consumption of said sacrifices. Yummy!!!!
So why do we really care what a first century CE, illiterate, long-dead, preacher man would do or say?
@Read The Entire Gospel
How about you compare how many times the New Testament calls for forgiveness versus all the calls to violence in the Old Testament.
And I note that you didn't address the quotes from Matthew in which Jesus states explicitly that he is there to cause division and war.
I have to agree with Luke on this one. If you read both Leviticus and Deuteronomy, you'll find one major contradiction as an example of many: The bible tells us to love thy neighbor and thou shall not kill. However, it later tells us to stone our children for being disobedient to the parent and even tells us to kill gays and lesbians when we see them. I don't get it. If God really did put the words into the bible (I don't believe for a second that he ever did) then why force us to adhere to a commandment if he knows we'll have to break it anyways?
@jonathan
sort of like how simple minded you have to be believe in genesis?
The guy calls himself a Christian and thinks he is a Knight Templar fighting the crusades against Islamic invaders while quoting from the Bible in biblical language. I fail to see how anyone can even try to say he isn't a Christian terrorist. Maybe he wasn't fundamentalist in the sense that we know it in the US, but he certainly thought himself Christian and thought the "Christian-ness" of his country to be at risk. (Where have we heard that before?) And then to try to distance his actions from the right-wing, xenophobic rhetoric that is taking place in Europe is ludicrous. The two are obviously connected. When you have people villifying a whole group for the sake of keeping their country pure, in Breivik's case purely "European", you have to expect that certain individuals will take it that extra mile. Prejudice kills. And white, European Christians are certainly not immune.
"The bulk of the anti-Muslim sentiment is not against Muslims as such, but is a secular rejection of how some Muslims allegedly want to place Islam at the center of society,"
Seems Christians have the same agenda "want to place Christianity at the center of society". Maybe the USA should step up and follow the standard of the European laws.
Jesus said, "Forgive your enemies...love those who persecute you... do to others as you would have them do to you...love your neighbor..." How can this man claim to be a follower of Christ?
God works in mysterious ways, how do you know that god his father didn't talk to him???????
Because much like every Christian I know, you are a cherry picker that very likely has not read the Bible in its entirety. Leviticus says to stone women to death for having short hair. Do you follow that as well?
Because the Bible and Christianity is a violent religion. If anything, this terrorist nut job is a "true" xtian. This is why humanity would be wise in shunning religion. It's time to move beyond silly and violent myths.
Rhonda your "word of god" or should I say man's own word says many things flaws and conflicting statements. You can twist it to fit whatever you wish to preach. Also please note what another posted:
.
Doc Vestibule
The New Testament has several calls to violence.
As Jesus Christ Himself said:
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword"
Matthew 10:34
"I came to bring fire to the earth and how I wish it were already kindled! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division."
Luke 12:49-51
He even advises His followers to take up arms for Him.
But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough."
Luke 22:35-38
anti christian taliban,
No calls to violence on this earth. You referred to; Matthew 10:34 on sword vs. peace and Luke 12 on division, the sword is the gospel the word the truth and that sword brings division. The division is between right and wrong, love and hate, wisdom and foolishness, life and death, goats from sheep, etc etc etc. In luke 22 the two swords being enough for 12 apostles was to let them know the silliness of thinking two swords could protect them better than God. Also it was a statement things were going to get real ruff with Christ gone and enemies would be many and cruel.
Just because a man wears a policeman's uniform does not make him a policeman.
If that is your best defense, I pitty society's judgment upon Christians in Norway.
To become a police officer, one must get official training, undergo rigorous physical and psychological training, and take a public oath before an official, governmentally sanctioned body which then grants the officer special status in society.
To become a Christian, all one needs to do is to psychically submit yourself to an incorporeal enti.ty – a totally unquantifiable act.
See the difference?
@Rhonda,
Are you referring to the reports that this gunman wore a Police uniform to gain access to the island and commit his massacre?
Thank you Rhonda for speaking some truth.
People can be n.u.t.s for many reasons. The media likes to characterize in ways that sell copy and one characterization that sells is to label someone (e.g., "Christian Fundamentalist"). It would be honest of them (though honesty is not what sells) to say insanity is just that: insane. Anyone who bl.o.w.s up buildings and k.i.l.l.s is insane .. the more incredible the act the greater the insanity. Shrinks cannot explain every irrational act. What happened in Norway or OK City or Tucson is n.u.t.s.
This man is not Christian fundamentalist, he is NUT! He is pocessed by a demon or demons. He must have been seriosaly hit in the head sometime.
Looking at what you posted, I find it interesting that you view him as a NUT. So how many demons do think might be inside him? lol
You believe in demons? I bet he does too. Hey, he's on your team, not mine.
In a population of (actually) billions there will be crazies. They ARE an anomaly .. abnormal. It is difficult to report insane people to authorities (Tucson) because the authorities do not believe it .. they suspect the one reporting. The media rarely report their story in an honest way.
Wait... Are you saying that he is 1) (nut) mentally impaired/diseased, 2) (demons) spiritually possessed, or 3) (head injury) physically damaged?
Sounds to me like you are grasping for any "unusual" reason for his actions, not rationally evaluating the evidence. Just like the Jewish community in an article the other day (http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/14/childs-grisly-murder-shocks-jewish-brooklyn-neighborhood/), are you trying to make this person as "other" as possible from you own possition?
If this man had been muslim, how many Americans would be coming forward to say that he "isn't really muslim" because of his actions?
And yet we're going to hear again and again that he isn't a "real" Christian for the same reason.
Arguing that he doesn't understand the tenets of his professed religion is a non-argument. I'd guess that a large portion of self-identified Christians have very little knowledge of the particulars of their own faith.
This man is a delusional, xenophobic Christian.
The Christian community at large simply has to deal with the bad press.
@Doc Vestibule: My thoughts exactly. If it was a muslim terrorist, all muslims need to be suspect. But since it is a Christian, suddenly he is just an anomaly. We cannot have it both ways. Either every Christian must now be suspect, or we recognize that muslim terrorists are anomalies too.
Not. Christian faith does not call on killings period. That is why we do not need to defend the actions of this guy. If one is Christian then they know Jesus said to let the weeds grow up with wheat and at the harvest God will sort out the goats from the sheep. This is because God has perfect judgement knowing all where as we have our own slant on truth
Yes, there does seem to be a double standard. I can't say how Christian this man was, but he seems just as "anti-Islam" as Al-Qaeda is "anti-West" as opposed to "pro-Islam". The evidence for this being the number of attacks on fellow Muslims.
"'I would say they are more anti-Islam than pro-Christian,' Romarheim said in reference to what appear to be Breivik's views."
Although, this does seem more in-line with Oklahoma City bombing, than 9/11, IMO.
Nonimus,
Your on track, manifesto said ""The biggest threat to Europe is the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist political doctrine of 'extreme egalitarian emotionalism,'" the manifesto goes on. "This type of political stance involves destroying Christendom, the Church, our European cultures and ident-ities and opening up our borders to Islamic colonization."
Now can everyone on this web site unite and protect our borders to the same destructive attack America faces ?
@fred: Did I read that correctly? You're not actually agreeing with Breivik and taking his murderous manifesto as advice, are you?
Frogest,
Homeland Security has labeled this type of terrorist attack as the next most likely in America. They want to pen Christian right wingers. Now, true Christians do not kill innocent people and neither do I. But, let us examine what has been under attack in this country: church, Christians , American culture. Stalin(quote against America) and this wack job (europe)were both aware that to destroy a great system one needs to take down its moral, spiritual and patriotic foundations. My thought is we (atheists, christians etc) could actually get together on one issue i.e how do we protect or boarders from outside attack.
@fred,
Wasn't Breivik a Norwegian? And didn't he attack from within the borders?
Protect our borders from outside attack; what are you talking about?
nonimus,
Inside attack vs outside attack . The church is being brought down in the case of Cahtolic church from he inside (priest scandal, pope statements, positions not in the bible) and from the outside (New York Times, CNN etc), The church as a whole from the inside when Christians do not follow what Christ said and by non beleivers from the outside. Morals from the inside being long standing culture understanding falling apart as individulals become confused and apathetic vs the outside when the Media pushes a message for its selfserving purpose. Patriotism as all republicans and democrats wrap themselves in the flag at election time.
@fred,
I was responding to your comment about "protect[ing] our borders [from] the same destructive attack America faces." How does that have anything to do with "the church" and what it faces?
@fred: Breivik was a Christian and a right-winger so you have no cause to say neither Christians nor right-wingers kill innocents. Secondly, Christianity is not under attack in this country. You might have to provide proof of this before you build on that idea to justify some kind of overt defensive posture. You cannot use the practical and appropriate criticism of the Catholic church's mishandling of the child abuse scandal as an attack from the outside of Christianity itself. Neither is American culture at risk, unless you mean from the religious and fearful who have proven time and again that they would reject separation of church and state, freedom of religion, freedom of speech to further a totalitarian agenda.
Let me say I find it extremely disturbing that you would take the words of this madman to heart. It somewhat proves an uncomfortable point for me which I am inclined to resist: that certain proclaimed Christians who speak that kind of fearful rhetoric are not exactly far from supporting or perpetrating the deeds of the Breiviks of this world. And considering the words of the Bachmanns, Santorums, Gingrichs, that's a very scary thought indeed.
Frogist,
This mad mans thoughts are not new and not christian period. Chrisitans are not to use the sword to kill or take vengence. Yes, I understand the thought process and is no different than any other group or individual that feels treatened eventually reaches. Sanity is a fine line you see it in road rage. Failure to cool off and begin to plot abortion clinic bombings etc takes it to a different level.
Would you not say that the Bible and Christians are under attack on this web site?
Nonimus,
It was in reply to the manifesto which included attacks on the church and europe not necessarily "islamic colonization" from the outside only.
@fred: Seriously, the comments section on a blog is your proof of Christianity being under attack? If that is proof then, it is also proof of Islam, women, mormons, liberals, conservatives, blacks, asians, Flying Spaghetti Monsters, and bacon being under attack! A little reasoned perspective is in order. Just because there are trolls who attack your religion on the internet does not mean that everyone is out to get you. And it certainly doesn't mean there is some worldwide conspiracy to take down an entire religion.
Also yes, if Breivik believes he is Christian and he supports his actions with quotes from the same Bible that you use, he is a Christian. He killed. There is your proof that Christians can kill innocents. It is unfortunate, but still true. The sad thing is it is right in front of your eyes but you refuse it because it does not mesh with your idea of what you WANT Christianity to be. I understand that is a painful thing. But that does not justify ignoring the facts.
My personal hope is that Christians would accept that he is a Christian, and then proclaim en masse that he is not the kind of Christian that anyone should endeavour to be. Acknowledge that their book can be interpreted in many ways, but is worth less than the paper it's printed on if the words in it are used to justify slaughter, fear, division and enmity. That means much more than the typical Christian denial machine that kicks into gear anytime there is a Dr Tiller incident, or a Tim McVeigh or Anders Behring Breivik crawls out of the woodwork. The only thing that comes out of denying this man is a Christian is to perpetuate a false stereotype that if you label what you are doing as "Christian" it must be good which only allows the same kind of depravity time and again.
Froggist
That's as silly as demanding vegans accept larry the cable guy as a vegan, and then say that we shouldn't try to be that kind of vegan. Git-R-Done!
@Scott: You're analogy does not make sense. Veganism has well defined characteristics while Christianity does not. Anyone who declares himself a Christian cannot be denied that by another Christian because the proof of their Christianity is allegedly in that ether called a soul or a heart. It is between them and their perception of god. And since another Christian can never question that god for a definitive answer, it is not up to them to judge who is and isn't Christian.
sounds like the west immediately responds that Christians and Christianity can't be terrorists that it is all loving and caring..hahaha..not in this life time.....check what happened in south America, north America to its first nations peoples in the name of "Christianity"....he sounds just as insane as any other Islamist who has turned to violence in the name of religion. And yes the old testament is very violent , but both Islam and Christianity both follow it.....there you go......The old testament "god" is no "god" of mine....
Any group – even atheists – can have someone claim to be one of them and then do something that they would say is not representative of them.
Rhonda
Atheists do now have a doctrine or creed they follow that would motivate violence. Try again.
I would think Stalinism would be considered an atheist creed.
Clear link to violence there.
Ethnic cleansing is another atheist creed,
Clear link to violence there.
Scott
I hope you are kidding.
Recognizing Satan would be believing in a deity. That's the opposite of what the definition of atheism is.
@Luke,
I think that was Stalinism, not Satanism.
@Scott,
"Stalinism refers to the policies and governmental philosophy of Joseph Stalin, leader and dictator of the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953. It also refers to the strict and authoritarian state policies of Soviet Union under successors of Stalin."(Wikipedia)
This is not an Atheist creed, just like Kenysian economics is not an Agnostic creed. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, all committed atrocities in the name of Communism, or whatever particular flavor thereof, not in the name of Atheism. There is nothing in Atheism that speaks to what "should" be done, at all, that's up to the individual and they are responsible for it.
lol – Stalinism /= Satanism
Luke
Oops. My bad. No, Stallin was motivated by polticial metrics, not non-religious ones. These motivatting factors are clearly stated in all of his writings.
I'm still waiting for Christian leaders to apologize for this attack.
After all, that's what they themselves demanded from Muslim leaders after 9/11 !
Interested that when a true Muslim tells you that terrorists like Al-Queda do not know anything about the teachings of Islam you say whatever and not believe it and say ALL muslims are terrorists....yet when a christian terrorists kills, you say he does not know anything about Jesus' teachings and muslims agree with you.
That was my first thought...you have to chuckle at some of these christians. lol
It is just as wrong to condemn all Muslims for the actions of some who claim to be their brothers as it is to condemn all Christians for the actions of this man.
Anti Christian Taliban
Chuckle? Not so much. I fear for humanity when I see exactly this sort of spin. Just read history. This exact ideology has been the cause of death of millions (tens of millions?) over the last 2000 years. Only this time, the motivated have modern weapons. Just imagine the Crusades or the Inquisition with chemical weapons, bio-weapons or nuclear devices rather than swords, axes and a mace. There, now you know how I look at religion.
Luke
Anti Christian Taliban
Chuckle? Not so much. I fear for humanity when I see exactly this sort of spin. Just read history. This exact ideology has been the cause of death of millions (tens of millions?) over the last 2000 years. Only this time, the motivated have modern weapons. Just imagine the Crusades or the Inquisition with chemical weapons, bio-weapons or nuclear devices rather than swords, axes and a mace. There, now you know how I look at religion.
------
Bosnia/Serbia comes to mind. When people start claiming the country is their god's country you know they are headed down the same road. The evangelicals (Christian Taliban) are more of a danger than any marxist at this point. I equally dislike marxists by the way. Most just do not see the signs.
Anti Christian Taliban
America certainly has a religion problem, but it does not seem to be violent at this time. Instead, the religious are using the government as a crutch in an attempt to instill ideology. They actively support school board members, doctors, politicians and anyone they can get their hands on. Violence seems concentrated to murdering doctors that provide abotions. While tragic, it could be worse. That doesn't mean we are not headed down the road of Serbia. Immagine the violence that could ensue upon the Islamic communities across the country if one powerful man rises to power.
Not surprised...whether christians want to seperate themselves from this man they are still brothers in the same religion. How long before we start seeing more of this act iv ity here (USA). They already blow up ab ortion clinics and kill doctors....how much longer before the evangelicals progress to this?
Your posts are excellent
Interesting how terrorist and mass murderer , Anders Behring Breivik him selves gives wriiten proof of his idealogical roots and inspirations in Christian right wing movement. An how far the mass media and talking heads goes to underpaly the role of christanity. This is a great crisis for modern europe and West, it has so far claime dthere can only be islamic terroism and christanity can do anything like that; this incident just blew that theory to smitterens. Now i gues , it will more spin on covering up and minimizing the links between chriatnity, and terrorist act. I guess that has already begun , this CNN article is good example of that.
The name 'Christian" refers to being a follower of the teachings of Jesus. Jesus does not instruct His followers to kill people.
Rhonda
So you freely admit that Jesus' father certainly does though, correct?
Rhonda
The name 'Christian" refers to being a follower of the teachings of Jesus. Jesus does not instruct His followers to kill people.
-----
Rhonda how do you know that god wasn't talking to him. He can still be a christian and the "father" talks to him.
I don't pretend to understand how God endorses some of the violence in the Old Testament; I suspect it has something to do with a holy God responding to an unholy world. But Jesus said He was bringing something new; "You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye,' ... but I say, Love your enemy..."
Rhonda
So your defense of Christianity is "I don't get it and I take no responsibility for my fellow Christians' actions."
Did you know that anti-semitism was official Church doctrine until 1964? Don't you think that has at least SOMETHING to do wtih violence in Europe against Jews in the 40s? Or will you say, "I don't get it and I don't think they were real followers of religion" again?
@Rhonda: Yes, it was hatred that motivated him. But that does not make him less a Christian because the only requirement of being a Christian is to think you are one. Unlike being a policeman which has verifiable requirements and doc-umentation. He declared himself a Christian and supported his position with biblical passages and reference to Christian history. Just as you do. It's just that your interpretation does not match his. Does that make him necessarily incorrect? Or you necessarily correct? No. But it does make both of your opinions valid interpretations of Christianity. It's a sad fact, but it is still true.
I'd really much prefer if Christians stopped finding excuses to ignore him as one of your own. It's much more honorable to recognze his "Christianity", explain that you disagree with his position and why. Anything else just looks like the Christian community is in denial.
Frogist,
It would be less than truthful to say anything but that he's a nut who thought that the God he may or may not believe in would reward him because he killed some innocent people, all based on nothing that Jesus taught. End of story – he's a NUT.
@Scott: Classifying him as just a nut is in itself not the whole truth. Thinking that he did these horrendous things to get rewarded by his god is also an inference I would not make. But he had affiliations and beliefs which he drew upon as justification for his actions. And true they might not have been what you consider Jesus' teachings, but like it or not, Christianity is what he referenced. I think Breivik had a disconnect with what we expect and need of our fellow human beings. Whether that came about directly because of Christianity, I don't know. Whether he was clinically or legally insane, I cannot say. What I can say is what he has said. He said he is a Christian. And you have no authority to say otherwise.
Thank you! This is a much needed remark on the "Christian fundamentalist red herring."
This man is NOT a Christian fundamentalist.
Funny...millions of muslims scream the same thing everyday..no one hears them.........
Actually he is...he is just more militant.
That's exactly what this reminds me of, calscot. It's quite unfortunate, and people should continue to work against it. However, that doesn't make it okay for people to call this man a fundamentalist Christian.
Shouldn't people resist the fundamentalism/radicalism/fanaticism in any religion.
Is King going to hold hearings on this I wonder.
That man did not know anything about following Jesus.
CONFUSED: How do you know that "god" wasn't talking to him?
Because whatever "god" was talking to him was saying the exact opposite of what Jesus taught in the Bible, which is what true Christians follow.
Wow. Just wow. And the Chrisian apologetics begin before the bodies even cool. This guy said, "I am a supporter of a monocultural Christian Europe" and "I consider myself 100-percent Christian" and yet the Christians are already denouncing him as not really a Christian. Give it rest. It's pathetic. I have breaking news for you Dan Gilgoff, the lot of you barely understand your own religion. Test after test and poll after poll displays the same result – Christians fail quizes on religion across the board. The terrorist, in fact, knew and understood religion to a much better degree than you, Dan Gilgoff. Yes, he's clearly insane. The question remains – did religion do it to him? In the end, ideology always is the culprit and in this case, he was clearly 100% motivated by religious teachings. Instead of being first out of the gate with defense of your religion, I suggest you apoligize. Shame on you.
The modern day "Christian" religion really does not resemble Jesus' teachings. You already admit to that. It seems like you are confusing the term Christian.
ace
Says a lot about religious teachers, doesn't it?
Luke, religion didn't motivate this man, hatred did. Hatred will try to justify itself in any way it can and use any emotional tools to try to bind itself to other people. The perpetrator is also clearly mentally unbalanced. His illness may have been exacerbated by the hate speech that he obsessed on.
Rhonda
........ His illness may have been exacerbated by the hate speech that he obsessed on.
---------
Thats right the magic wizard in the sky and the "word of god" had nothing to do with it. *rolling eyes*
He also was wearing a police uniform, but the police were quick to say he is not and has not been one of theirs. If Christians can't disclaim him, why should the police be able to? You should be just as suspect of their claims.
Rhonda
That's ignorant. It just begs the question, "Where did the hatred come from then?" I suspect religious teachings, just as he admitted in his manifesto and to the judge today.
anvil742
That was a disguise to gain access to the camp. Don't be so foolish. And even if he were a policeman, the act of law enforcement does not have a doctrine or ideology to follow. He would only have to protect the law. The Christian doctrine has been used here to motivate hared and unfortunately – violence.
@anvil742
Good point.
Rhonda
@anvil742
Good point.
---–
Actually it wasn't. It was weak. lol
Rhonda
Actually, it's a terrible point. He was also white. By this logic, white people should be able to disavow him has clearly "not a white man." One must look at his motivating factors. In this case, he very clearly states that Chrisianity, immigration and the islamic threat motived him. His manifesto says so. His online postings confirm it. He entered a statement to a judge today which backs up his preivous statements. Give it up.
"In the end, ideology always is the culprit and in this case, he was clearly 100% motivated by religious teachings."
His Manifesto, pg. 361: It is not required that you have a personal relationship with God or Jesus in order to fight for our Christian cultural heritage and the European way. In many ways, our modern societies and European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy” (everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want).”
and again, pg. 361: “The PCCTS, Knights Templar is therefore not a religious organisation but rather a Christian “culturalist” military order.”
Pg 1344: "I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person as that would be a lie."
His Manifesto *Supports* Environmentalism, One-Child Birth policies, & Nationalization (State Control) of Private Companies
It criticizes American Capitalism, American Imperialism, American Intervention, Right-Wing Media Monopolies & Religious Christianity.
It's a complicated world, Luke. Your eagerness to jump on your own pulpit and join the mob doesn't elevate you above the crowd – it makes you one of them. People all have failings & both sides do it, but don't fool yourself into thinking you're the more enlightened one.
Recon
We must track the stream of hatefulness and violence in order to understand. Let's pick this apart.
Could environmentalism be a root? No. To be an environmentalist does not instruct violence.
American Capitalism? No. Not here either.
Right Wing Media? hmmm...maybe a little.
State run companies? No...no creed here either.
Religious Christianity? There is a direct link here. So if he followed all of the creeds above, including Christianity, this is the only link to violence.
Yeah, it is a very complicated world. Chaos theory is facinating. But everything has a root. The cleansing of societies and fear of immigrants comes from...well...you know where.
Is not ironic that Luke is named after one of most famous Christian authors? One therefore should identify that is this modern-0day Luke is somehow connected to Christianity. I am sure he will deny it, but I think the connection has to be made. And since we can connect him to Christianity, we can also connect him to the killer. What role did Luke have in this tragedy?
Scott
My mother, incidently, did not name me after the Luke of the bible and has nothing to do with my upbringing nor my philosophies. She, in fact, was stridently opposed to faith as well.
And for shame on you for trying to connect me to the killer. I studied for my Masters in Scandinavia and have friends that have been directly impacted by this mass murderer. For Shame. What an ugly and disrepectful thing to publish. Awful vile human you are.
@ Luke
Do you really think that enviromentlist aren't violent? Ever hear of E.L.F. (Earth Liberation Front) or the dozens of other enviro wacko groups.