It seemed like the template was already set to roll by the time the smoke cleared in Norway and Anders Behring Breivik (above) was taken into custody. A 'right-wing Christian fundamentalist' we were told by the left-wing media. However, new evidence is beginning to emerge and the explanation offered earlier might not be that simple...
"A review of Anders Behring Breivik's 1,500-page manifesto shows the media's quick characterization of the Norwegian terrorist as a "Christian" may be as incorrect as it was to call Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh one.
Breivik was arrested over the weekend, charged with a pair of brutal attacks in and near Oslo, Norway, including a bombing in the capital city that killed 7 and a shooting spree at a youth political retreat on the island of Utoya that killed more than 80 victims.
Piecing together Breivik's various posts on the Internet, many media reports have characterized the terrorist – who says he was upset over the multiculturalist policies stemming from Norway's Labour Party – as a "right-wing, Christian fundamentalist."
Yet, while McVeigh rejected God altogether, Breivik writes in his manifesto that he is not religious, has doubts about God's existence, does not pray, but does assert the primacy of Europe's "Christian culture" as well as his own pagan Nordic culture.
Breivik instead hails Charles Darwin, whose evolutionary theories stand in contrast to the claims of the Bible, and affirms: "As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings. Europe has always been the cradle of science, and it must always continue to be that way. Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I'm not an excessively religious man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a monocultural Christian Europe."
The terrorist also candidly admits he finds no support within either the Catholic or Protestant churches for his violent ideas."
Breivik was arrested over the weekend, charged with a pair of brutal attacks in and near Oslo, Norway, including a bombing in the capital city that killed 7 and a shooting spree at a youth political retreat on the island of Utoya that killed more than 80 victims.
Piecing together Breivik's various posts on the Internet, many media reports have characterized the terrorist – who says he was upset over the multiculturalist policies stemming from Norway's Labour Party – as a "right-wing, Christian fundamentalist."
Yet, while McVeigh rejected God altogether, Breivik writes in his manifesto that he is not religious, has doubts about God's existence, does not pray, but does assert the primacy of Europe's "Christian culture" as well as his own pagan Nordic culture.
Breivik instead hails Charles Darwin, whose evolutionary theories stand in contrast to the claims of the Bible, and affirms: "As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings. Europe has always been the cradle of science, and it must always continue to be that way. Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I'm not an excessively religious man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a monocultural Christian Europe."
The terrorist also candidly admits he finds no support within either the Catholic or Protestant churches for his violent ideas."
Lets monitor this situation closely in order to see if ABCBS/NBCNN even bother to mention this at all.
17 comments:
I just love how people rush around with "facts" early in a case. There was a shooting in our mall a few years back, my wife and I were in a restaurant, hearing people on cell phones. Multiple shooters, several dead, yada yada yada. I determined to wait for the official report. Yep, big difference, only one shooter &c.
Here, we have "right winger", "Fundamentalist Christian" and so on. Pejorative, emotion-laden words. How many Fundamentalist Christians shoot people? WHAT IS a "Fundamentalist", really? Did he attend church in the first place? What church? Big difference between the real definition, the pejorative and what it may mean in a very secular nation like Norway! Big difference between "religion" and following what the Bible teaches.
And "Conservative"? Different meanings in Europe than in the USA. IF he is one at all.
Aside from that, the "reports" about his Facebook page are sketchy at best. The Norwegian version went down, the English version went up that looks faked and so on.
If it does turn out that he was Darwinian (which I suspect is true), that philosophy will be more in keeping with his actions than the "Fundamentalist" accusation.
As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings. —Anders Behring Breivik
Reading the Bible Promotes Science — JD Curtis
"I'm pretty sure I will pray to God as I'm rushing through my city, guns blazing, with 100 armed system protectors pursuing me with the intention to stop and/or kill … It is likely that I will pray to God for strength at one point during that operation, as I think most people in that situation would.
I am pursuing religion for this very reason and everyone else should as well, providing it will give you a mental boost. There is no shame in praying minutes before your death. I highly recommend that you, prior to the operation, visit a Church and perform the Eucharist (Holy Communion/The Lord's Supper ). As we know, this ritual represents the final meal that Jesus Christ shared with his disciples before his arrest and eventual crucifixion. You should also solve any issues you might have with God and ask for forgiveness for past sins. Finally, ask him to prepare for the arrival of a martyr for the Church. A hardened atheist may think this is silly, but believe me when I say; you will be extremely glad you did as soon as you realise you may actually die after the initiation of your operation.
Sure, many deny God now. But when they're looking death in the face, when they're sick or in an accident or staring down the barrel of a gun, they'll change their mind. They'll beg for God then. There are no atheists in foxholes."
—Anders Behring Breivik
I imagine that he was "culturally Christian" GS. But if the following quote from him is really from Breivik, then it helps to explain alot...
"
"I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie," he says. "I've always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment. In the past, I remember I used to think: 'Religion is a crutch for weak people. What is the point in believing in a higher power if you have confidence in yourself!? Pathetic.' Perhaps this is true for many cases. Religion is a crutch for many weak people, and many embrace religion for self-serving reasons as a source for drawing mental strength (to feed their weak emotional state [for] example during illness, death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I'll say directly that this is my agenda as well. However, I have not yet felt the need to ask God for strength, yet."
Theist? Yes. Christian? No.
BTW, Vox Day is linking to noted atheist Sam Harris who is saying that he doesnt find Breivik to be particularly Christian.
Idiot atheist gs strikes again.
“If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian
Well, I don't think he's particularly "Christian" either, except in the more militant cultural sense, Knights Templar and all.
The real significance, of course, is his decidedly Rightward political leaning, targeting liberals. Of course, "leftists will always be infinitely more dangerous than Conservatives."
Right? Always and Infinitely.
"Because it is obvious that Christians can commit murder, assault, etc. They do so every day. Because, as Christian orthodoxy tells us, we are all sinners. To say that no Christian can ever commit murder is a sophist's piffle. Did Scott Roeder stop being a Christian when he assassinated a man repeatedly demonized by Bill O'Reilly, George Tiller? Do the countless criminals who have gone to church or believe in Jesus immediately not count as Christians the minute they commit the crime? Of course not. What O'Reilly is saying is complete heresy in terms of the most basic Christian orthodoxy.
Mass murder? Of course, deluded Christians, infused with a sense of holy righteousness, can do such things. History is proof of that, from the Crusades to the Inquisition. We know also, for example, that countless Catholic priests raped and abused countless children in past decades and today. When they did so, did they instantly become non-Christians? O'Reilly's formulation is entirely that of a propagandist: circular, self-justifying nonsense." (Link)
Sophist's piffle. Circular, self-justifying nonsense. Trees for lunch.
Why is the distinction between a cultural and a religious phenomenon so abundantly clear when wingers are fleeing from ideological association with mass murderers, but can scarcely be detected when the topic is civil marriage?
One wonders…
"Does he go to church? Does he believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ? Is he a biblical literalist? I have no idea. There's plenty about him that would lead a devout Christian to consider Breivik "not a 'real' Christian." Here's the thing about that: The same is true of all self-proclaimed Muslims who commit acts of terrorism." Link
Everyone, please! Has no one noticed that Breivik is constantly contradicting himself, and that perhaps he is neither Christian nor atheist, but simply a bat-sh*t crazy weirdo with a split personality disorder? Whatever 'religion' or ideology he adhered to, the fact remains that he is completely INSANE.
"However, if one uses West’s method, which is to just trawl through the 1500-page screed and unthinkingly assume that whatever references Brevik makes to X mean that we can blame X for his murders, well then, there’s a lot more in there about Christianity and the Bible justifying violence, and explicitly so, than there is about Darwin. That is undoubtedly why Norwegian officials initially used the words “Christian fundamentalist” rather than Darwinist, and why much of the press quoted those officials." link
"
True, in one lone entry on Breivik's gaseous 1,500-page manifesto, "2083: A European Declaration of Independence," he calls himself "Christian." But unfortunately he also uses a great number of other words to describe himself, and these other words make clear that he does not mean "Christian" as most Americans understand the term. (Incidentally, he also cites the New York Times more than a half-dozen times.)
Had anyone at the Times actually read Breivik's manifesto, they would have seen that he uses the word "Christian" as a handy moniker to mean "European, non-Islamic" – not a religious Christian or even a vague monotheist. In fact, at several points in his manifesto, Breivik stresses that he has a beef with Christians for their soft-heartedness. (I suppose that's why the Times is never worried about a "Christian backlash.") Link
If you have a copy of his manifesto read from page 1327: "3.149 The Bible and self-defence".
Breivik explicitly denies that he is a “religious Christian.” He admits that he does not possess what most evangelicals consider essential to faith: a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, which means a life of devotion, a life of seeking Christ and seeking to be like Christ, a life that honors what God revealed in and through Christ and accepts and celebrates the grace of God and forgiveness of sin that were made available to any person who would trust in them. Rather, Breivik possesses the husk without the kernel, the cultural residue of faith and piety without the faith and piety that gave them life and direction. He is not even sure that God exists, but chooses to believe in God and the afterlife (if this is any kind of belief at all) in order to give himself courage in the face of the dangers of his terrorist act.
What exactly, then, is Breivik’s “Christianity”? He cares not for Christ or Christianity, but for Christendom. Rod Dreher gave perhaps the best definition I’ve seen so far. Breivik, he says, “sees the faith much as the Nazi leadership did: as a European tribal religion that can be instrumentalized to provide the basis for an ethno-cultural war against the Other.” The Nazis were not fond of what Breivik calls “religious Christianity.” Hitler, rightly, did not believe that “a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” would suit his purposes. Personal devotion, a living and breathing relationship with a God who is Love and a Son of God who teaches the love of enemies, does not “instrumentalize” well into the wholesale slaughter of Jews, gypsies, political prisoners and Christian resisters. Neither does it instrumentalize into the murder of 85 innocent children.
One of the most revealing portions of the manifesto comes when Breivik’s imagined interlocutor asks him what a person must believe in order to take up arms alongside his reconstituted Knights Templar. You must be, he says, “a practising Christian, a Christian agnostic or a Christian atheist (cultural Christian).” Since he has already identified himself as a cultural Christian and not a Christian atheist, it may be inferred (though this is not entirely clear) that he is a “Christian agnostic.” Link to full article
I forgot to enclose the above in quotes but the source is cited at the bottom
This is the best, most accurate analysis of this horrible event IMO. Link
Post a Comment