Have you ever seen so very many people so very happy about terrorism? With Anders Behring Breivik’s bombing and shootings rampage which left 92 dead in Norway's capital and a nearby island, champagne bottles are being popped opened and vociferously verbose references to “Christian terrorism” are being promulgated.
Finally, we can forget, at least for precious little time, about Islamic terrorism—which we desperately do not want to term “Islamic”—and concoct, invent, infer, assert, presuppose the real danger, evil and terror in the world: Christians.
Yes, the bodies of the deceased had not yet stiffened when they began to be used as much welcomed platforms upon which to launch any and every wild speculation no matter how lacking in facts and heavy in fiction.
Consider history as recent as since 9/11. Certain segments of society have been begging us to not consider Muslim terrorists to be Muslim terrorists. What about Osama Bin Laden? No, of course he was not a Muslim…until, apparently, such time as US tax dollar went towards providing him a Muslim funeral. Also, no, no, no, Communists were not atheist. Yet, what happens when someone like Timothy McVeigh, Anders Behring Breivik or Adolf Hitler come to mind? Oh, then headlines are promulgated to the effect that not only where they Christians but that they specifically committed terrorism in strict accord to the Bible, the New Testament itself, Jesus’ teaching and Christian tradition.
The issue is that according to Islam’s “doctrine of abrogation” one could be a Muslim terrorist:
Timothy McVeigh was an agnostic:
The Oklahoma City bombing and the atheist and agnostic connection
Communists were atheists:
Adolf Hitler was not a Christian:
Anders Behring Breivik wanted to bring revolution to Norwegian society. He is said to have authored a manifesto—titled, “2083 - A European Declaration of Independence” and written under the name AndrewBreivik—in which he expresses anti Muslim immigration to Europe sentiments as well as vowing revenge upon indigenous Europeans for betraying their heritage, launched attacks on Marxism and describes his initiation as a Knight Templar.
Jesus, His apostles and disciples lived under oppressive Gentile-Pagan rule and never turned towards violent revolution. Christianity is not a label and not something that one can claim beyond all evidence. Jesus stated that His followers would be known by the fruit which they produce. The fruit of Anders Behring Breivik did not grow on Jesus’ tree.
Here is the breakdown:
When a Muslim(s) acts in a violent manner, they may be violating modern day, first world country Western Muslim re-interpretations of Islam but are acting in accord to the Islamic doctrine of abrogation.
When an atheist(s) acts in a violent manner, they are violating nothing at all.
When a misnomered “Christian(s)” acts in a violent manner (outside self-defense or a “just war”), they are violating the very principles upon which the concept of being a Christian are based in the first place.
Yes, Christianity is the only faith which is still politically correct to besmirch, openly, often and loudly, but the facts are still the facts.
So, was Anders Behring Breivik a Christian? He wrote the following in 2083:
A majority of so called agnostics and atheists in Europe are cultural conservative Christians without even knowing it. So what is the difference between cultural Christians and religious Christians?
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.
What this means is that he is a Christian in exactly the same way that Richard Dawkins is a Christian. This is because Dawkins states virtually the same thing and calls himself a “cultural Christian.” And, in fact, Breivik wrote of people being “Christian, a Christian agnostic or a Christian atheist (cultural Christian).” Can we thus, blame Dawkins for Breivik?
But now, ask yourself if a Christian would write something like this, which Anders Breivik also wrote:
I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person as that would be a lie. 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 f example during illness, death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I'll say directly that this is my agenda as well.
Comments