Commentary

Is Anders Breivik a Christian? Does he even believe in God?

11 Comments

I also found this article posted on Evolution News.

Excerpt:

To be sure, Breivik identifies himself as “100% Christian” in his manifesto (p. 1403), and he certainly talks incessantly about defending “Christian” civilization. But he also makes clear that his Christianity is a simply pose adopted for political reasons. Answering why he chose to align himself with a group supposedly espousing “Christian values,” he states: “My choice was based purely [on] pragmatism.” (p. 1380) He goes on to explain that “Christianity” has far more “mass appeal” than nationalism, white supremacy, or a revival of paganism, and so it is a more effective “banner” under which to build his movement. (p. 1381) In sum, Breivik views religion like Machiavelli viewed religion–as a political tool. It’s worth noting that Machiavelli’s The Princeis listed by Breivik as one of his favorite books. (p. 1407)

As for his own religious beliefs and practices, Breivik frankly admits: “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.” (p. 1344, emphasis added) Indeed, Breivik acknowledges that he used to believe that “Religion is a crutch for weak people. What is the point in believing in a higher power if you have confidence in yourself!? Pathetic.” He continues: “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[or] example during illness, death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I’ll say directly that this is my agenda as well.” (p. 1344, emphasis added) In other words, at best he views his embrace of religion as a psychological crutch to give him strength for his horrific activities. Although he adds that he has not yet actually prayed to God for strength, he expects that he may do so when he goes on his murderous rampage: “If praying will act as an additional mental boost/soothing it is the pragmatical thing to do. I guess I will find out… If there is a God I will be allowed to enter heaven as all other martyrs for the Church in the past.” (p. 1345) Note the “if” in his statement about whether God exists. Breivik himself doesn’t even appear to believe in God. He frequently identifies himself as a “cultural Christian,” a term which he defines at one point as the same thing as a “Christian atheist.” (p. 1360)

Unsurprisingly, Breivik’s idea of “cultural Christianity” has little to do with Christianity as most people would understand that term. For example, Breivik makes clear that to join his movement for cultural Christianity “[i]t is not required that you have a personal relationship with God or Jesus.” (p. 1361) Indeed, Breivik would like to expand “Christianity” to include those who worship the Norse pagan god Odin. Breivik calls for the Christian church to be “re-create[d]… as a nationalistic Church which will tolerate and allow (to a very large degree) native cultures/heritage/thought systems such as Odinism.” (p. 1361) And despite using the adjective “cultural,” Breivik’s “cultural Christianity” doesn’t leave much room for Christians to actually influence society apart from social rituals. Indeed, Breivik emphasizes that he wants a secular European state where “[t]he Church and church leaders will not be allowed to influence non-cultural political matters in any way. This includes science, research and development and all non-cultural areas which will benefit Europe in the future. This will also include all areas relating to procreation/birth/fertility policies and related issues of scientific importance (reprogenetics).” (p. 1137, emphasis added)

As can be seen, Breivik harbors a special concern that Christians not be able to influence issues related to science and pubic policy “in any way.” Why?

Because he sees biological science–not traditional religion–as the ultimate savior of society. In his view, advances in biology will makes possible a vigorous new form of Social Darwinism that will save the Nordic race through positive eugenics.

I’m a fairly serious evangelical Christian, and I disagree with everything this madman believes. I wonder why the media was so anxious to paint him as some sort of authentic Christian, when he isn’t one? Authentic Christians take seriously Jesus’ command to “love your enemies”, but I guess that’s not something that people in the media would know about. There is a double standard in the secular left media. They certainly were not willing to label Major Nidal Malik Hasan as an authentic Muslim, even though he was shouting “Allahu Akbar!” as he shot down American troops.

I wonder what God thinks about people in the mainstream media who slam Christians by distorting facts? I’m guessing that he doesn’t like them. I’m guessing that he doesn’t like the way they gloss over the persecution of Christians, either. But that’s a decision they seem willing to make. Just because a mouse is in the cookie jar, it doesn’t make that mouse a cookie.

And one last point. I take it personally when this nut runs around smearing the word knight with his crazy rantings. Last week, I had the pleasure of ordering a lovely bouquet of white roses for a young lady I admire very much. I cleaned up my sports car and put the flowers carefully into the trunk, then drove over there at top speed to present the flowers to her with some other gifts. I wanted to encourage her for doing the many good things that she does. The word “knight” refers to someone who acts chivalrously, gently, mercifully and gallantly. Knights protect and nurture innocent people.

Related posts

11 thoughts on “Is Anders Breivik a Christian? Does he even believe in God?”

  1. Bill O’Reilly just posted his thoughts on this.

    Excerpt:

    “why are the New York Times and some other liberal media playing the “Christian extremist” card?

    Two reasons. First, some on the left want to make an equivalency argument between Muslim terrorism and other kinds of violent acts. The Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was often branded “a right wing terrorist” in the media. Terrorism is terrorism, the analysis goes; it’s not fair to constantly emphasize Muslim terrorism without acknowledging the others. Besides, bad men like George W. Bush overhype the Muslim threat and use it to do evil things like invade Iraq.

    The second reason is purely political. The left well understands that Christian opposition to things like abortion, gay marriage, and drug legalization makes those liberal causes more difficult to achieve. Thus, anything that diminishes Christianity is fair game to be promoted. Every newsworthy sin committed by a Christian is highlighted with a sneering reference to hypocrisy. Any whiff of Christian intolerance is celebrated in the press.”

    Just to note as you did, but in case people have missed it: The killer is not attached to any church, has no history of Christian activity, has openly criticized the protestant philosophy, and has committed acts counter to all Christian teaching. He cannot defend what he did using the Bible. He has given no evidence of being a Christian or in Christian jargon: you will know a tree by it’s fruit and he his tree hasn’t bore Christian fruit.

    Like

    Reply

  2. Thanks for this post.

    I’ve got an atheist, Darwinist friend with whom I debate fairly often. He disagrees completely with me on the subject of God (and a good many other topics too). But he also told me a couple of times that he was a “cultural Christian” in order to convince me that we still had much in common. He’s not violent and insane like Breivik, but he has much more in common with Breivik’s ideology than I have as a conservative, evangelical Christian.

    Breivik is misusing the terms “Christian” (and “knight”) when he applies them to himself, as you rightly point out.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Not just flowers, but white roses. Still closed up. And with a supporting cast of ferns, and other gorgeous smaller white flowers. I really recommend to other knights to get roses that are not yet open, because they last longer. Don’t forget about the vase, either. Most women don’t have vases because they aren’t getting all the flowers they need, which is stupid because how do you expect them to function without flowers? It makes no sense. And lastly, ride like the wind to deliver them – as fast as Cyrano de Bergerac rode through enemy lines at the siege of Arras to deliver his messages to Roxeanne. (twice a day)

      And I do smite her enemies as well, and help her to be good at smiting them when I am not there to argue with them myself. This can be done by editing her writings, encouraging her to defeat lies, and loading her up with books, debates and lectures. Encouraging women to learn is very important, because then they are much better at smiting liars. And then if you eventually get married and have children, they produce William Lane Craigs and Michele Bachmanns. I was just talking to one mother on the weekend who was incredibly intense, focused and aggressively about her role as the nurturer of future world-changers. Some women take their roles very seriously, and they need lots of support from men to excel at it. It’s like an engine – spend the money and get the good Mobil 1 full synthetic oil and a factory filter, and you will get peak performance.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Wintery, no woman who’s not married to you, not your mother or your grandma, should get flowers.

        A little tip from an older, wiser man certain to die before you: even they don’t really like flowers that much.

        Like

        Reply

        1. As someone who has given away dozens of bouquets of white roses to Christian women, I am very surprised to learn this. I have given white roses to women who kept them in their offices all week, showing them off to their jealous co-workers and explaining why they were chosen to receive them. One woman who got some kept them in her office all week, then decided to bring them home on a Friday. She got off her train a stop early, kicked off her shoes, and walked home barefoot on the grass, cradling the white roses like a baby.

          Maybe you are just giving them to the wrong women – the bad ones don’t understand them or appreciate them because they don’t need comforting for doing the right thing – which is a very lonely thing for a good woman to do these days. You shouldn’t underestimate the need for Christian men to use white roses as an encouragement to Christian women. They need it just like a man needs to hear words of encouragement.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Interesting conversation. I told my wife about this and she said,

            “Tell him how much I love them!! They are a beautiful way to say “I’m thinking of you.” I even love the smell! And they look great around the house. As long as they are living you can put them anywhere for decoration.”

            There are days I buy my wife flowers to let her know I was thinking about her and I almost always buy her a dozen roses for special occasions like getaways, her birthday, and our anniversary. Throughout the year I like to buy her flowers just because and she really does love them. I think most women do.

            I don’t always buy her roses, I mix it up and get her different kinds of flowers.

            Anyway, my two cents. :)

            Like

          2. H’m.
            I can’t explain your experiences, but to each his own, I suppose.

            What I can tell you with absolute fact: rushing headlong to deliver flowers to someone not your wife isn’t chivalrous, it’s being a delivery boy.

            Like

  6. Your claim that he is not a christian is based on YOUR interpretation of the bible, obviously, his interpretation of the bible is different than yours. Ironically enough though, many of the things he railed against in his manifesto echo many of the things you claim on your blog, the only difference being he believed violence would acheive his christian goals while you believe just the opposite. Like I’ve said to you plenty of times, you take a very different approach than most (very dedicated) christians I’ve run across, which has admittedly changed my opinion of (some) christians (for the better).

    All that being said, I believe Breivik is just crazy and being someone that dislikes religion even I don’t believe he did it because he was christian but because he obviously had some type of mental defect.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to jerry Cancel reply