Remember when Anders Breivik, the man responsible for the shootings in Norway on July 22, wrote in his online manifesto –
“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.”
– while also stressing his general reverence for the faith and describing himself as a Christian on his Facebook page? Well, apparently you’re wrong – this man was not a Christian and the only reason why the media is labeling Breivik as one is because the left is part of a grant conspiracy trying to bring down the faith. At least that’s one theory.
To [Bill] O’Reilly, though, it was “impossible” that Breivik is a Christian.
“No one believing in Jesus commits mass murder,” he said. “The man might have called himself a Christian on the net, but he is certainly not of that faith…we can find no evidence, none, that this killer practiced Christianity in any way” (Italics mine).
He said that the reason the media was calling Breivik a Christian was because “the left wants you to believe that fundamentalists Christians are a threat just like crazy jihadists are.” O’Reilly called this notion “dishonest and insane,” saying that no government was backing Breivik’s ideology.
You’re right, Bill, no Christian has ever done anything wrong; it’s only the Muslims that are threats so it is OK to label their terrorists as so. Never mind the fact that there are those within Islam making the exact same argument you are – (to the effect of) “Islam is a peaceful faith and anyone who understands the Koran cannot truly justify mass murder.” The only problem with this fact is that every religious text that claims to be “clear” and “static” in its message usually isn’t; it’s a great Rorschach test that allows one to read what they want to read, to justify whatever it is they want to justify.
The logic that says
(a) Christians are good;
(b) Breivik was bad;
QED Breivik was not a Christian
is fitting for a grade-schooler, but at the end of the day: Breivik was a Christian. If you want to argue that he was a bad Christian (that is does not conform to your brand of Christianity), you are more than welcome to; but to argue that he wasn’t is just intellectually dishonest.