MSN wrong; Norsk nutjob not a real Christian

[clarinetpower]

sultanknish.blogspot.com/2011/07/debunking-6-myths-about-anders-breivik.html?m=1

[MamaJunebug]

Thank you for posting that.

As we see daily, there are many definitions of the word "Christian." Brevik has stated that "Christian" to him has cultural connotations and not much else.

Which is so dreadfully sad.

[bananacat]

So a guy claims that he is a Christian, and we're still not allowed to call him a Christian? This is really ridiculous. He's a Christian terrorist and he's separate from mainstream Christians in the same way Muslim terrorists are separate from mainstream Muslims. That doesn't mean he's not a Christian though.

[clarinetpower]

To Breivik, apparently, "Christian" means "White".

I have a friend who uses the term in the same way. She's a big fan of Glenn Beck, Pamela Gellar, etc. and will talk about how she wishes it was like "the old days" when people dressed better, went to church, took care of their neighbors, etc.

But when it comes to spouting hatred for Muslims, Mexican immigrants, and anyone who won't learn English in the US (she lives in France, and is learning French, so she's the authority), she feels free to judge away. When you point out that this is not "Christian" behavior, she insultingly calls you "pious" and says she's too old to change.

:roll:

It's kind of fun to watch her go off. :lol:

[Witsec6]

So a guy claims that he is a Christian, and we're still not allowed to call him a Christian? This is really ridiculous. He's a Christian terrorist and he's separate from mainstream Christians in the same way Muslim terrorists are separate from mainstream Muslims. That doesn't mean he's not a Christian though.

I agree. I'm not a journalist, but I think there is something in the AP stylebook about using people's self-identified titles, especially in the case of religion. So if Anders calls himself a Christian, the article should call him a Christian...

Edit: Turns out, he did not self-identify as a Christian, but rather as an "anti-jihadist": http://www.getreligion.org/2011/07/the-atlantic-has-the-terrorist-all-figured-out/

This outrage from Christians is understandable, but hypocritical if these are the same people who call "Terrorist" every time they see a brown person. I do expect more from the media, though. Given that they have rules about these things.

[maybeizfundie]

From what I have read, he is calling himself a *cultural* "Christian" and is looking for a "Christian culture" norm. In his own words, that doesn't require believing in Jesus or God.

His using "Christianity" as a convenient label for the kind of culture he wants to maintain means nothing about his religious beliefs. I don't see evidence that his acts sprang out of a devotion to Jesus. Which is what they would have to be if he were terrorizing in the name of Christ.

[deelaem]

I'm not surprised at this claim. There is probably tons of scrambling going on now with Christians to find an excuse to distance from him. Let us remember the dude is fuckin' nuts, and right now I'm sure he's all about saving his own ass.

[maybeizfundie]

The WP has a good article on this issue: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on- ... _blog.html

I don't think Christians need an "excuse" to distance from him. There is no connection between his cultural vision and the basic doctrines of the Christian faith. Not aware of any Christian groups supporting him in the first place, and what he did is not something even the most far right evangelicals have advocated, afaik. There's a lot of silly "be ready to defend yourself" stuff going around and the idea that violence will be perpetrated against Christians/conservatives and the need for self-defense, and the occasional bonkers individual, but I don't see *any* Christian group or individual with any kind of clout(religious, not cultural) support for this guy, either before or after what he did.

[Witsec1]

Yeah. And when Muslims say the terrorists aren't really Muslims, that Islam is a religion of peace, the media pundits always agree and stop blaming Islam.

I think people like Doug Phillips, et. al. are more "culturally Christian" than they are christ-like. Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Stinking Housewife - same thing. They are worried about the culture this and the culture that and political power, more than altering their personal behavior.

[maybeizfundie]

FloraPoste, I do agree about that.

IMO those people are taking a detour from faith when obsessing about culture and nationalism. Not good.

[debrand]

I agree that he should not represent Christianity but he was a Christian.

,

"I wasn’t particularly religious. Then I sort of glommed onto Christianity, and I realized I had to have a Christian identity." And by the end, he says he is religious. And, you know, as I said, he’s citing a lot of scripture, Bible verses. Bill O’Reilly says he’s not even Protestant. He agrees. He sees himself as being called back to Rome, to Catholicism. He described having high hopes for Pope Benedict early on, when Benedict said some very extreme anti-Islamic things, but he’s been disappointed. He doesn’t think Benedict is the right guy. But again and again, he says, "Look, I’m doing this for Christ." He even, at one point in the manifesto, talks about—he says, you know, "Some people have a personal relationship with Jesus. I don’t." So that’s being used to say, "Well, then, clearly he’s not a Christian." It’s worth noting that, by the end, he gets that personal relationship.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/27/n ... xenophobia