A Right-Wing, Christian Fundamentalist?
26th July, 2011 - Posted by Wolf Paul - 1 Comment
I find it very disturbing that news reports characterize the perpetrator of the Oslo bombing and the Utöya mass shooting as a “right-wing Christian fundamentalist”.
I realize that he identifies himself as a Christian, but he also identifies himself as a righteous person concerned for the fate of his country and all of Europe, a “Knight Templar” with a legitimate mission, and nobody buys that — so why buy the “Christian” self-identification?
Christians are called to love those of other faiths or none, as well as those they disagree with politically or in any other way, and to present the gospel of Jesus Christ to them in a winsome manner — not to kill them. While the Bible does not seem to completely outlaw the death penalty it makes very clear that it is not within the authority of random individuals to “wield the sword” but that this is a prerogative of the government.
Thus, anyone who takes the law into his own hands and decides to kill those he disagrees with or considers in some way culpable, and especially of course anyone who kills innocent bystanders in order to punish those considered culpable, is anything but Christian. This applies to those who assassinate abortionists or beat up homosexuals as well as to the Oslo murderer.
I am not aware of any bona-fide Christian church encouraging this sort of violence, and those self-identified “Christians” like Anders Behring Breivik and Timothy McVeigh who bombed Oklahoma City were not in submission to a legitimate Christian church when they committed their crimes. Even the hateful “Westboro Baptist Church” limits itself to demonstrating and stops short of actual violence.
Much is being made today of the idea that we must not tar all of Islam and all Moslems with the terrorist brush because of the acts of a few extremists; should this not also apply to Christians, and even “fundamentalist Christians”? If we are quick to stress that 9/11 does not represent Islam, we need to point out equally that Oslo and Utöya does not represent Christianity, even fundamentalist Christianity.
There is another important distinction that needs to be made, which unfortunately is frequently ignored in today’s news reporting and commentary:
Disagreeing with something or someone, even considering their behavior sinful, is, in itself, neither “phobia” nor “hate”, not does it encourage the sort of violence we have seen last week in Oslo. It is not legitimate to pin the responsibility for the deeds of, in this case, Anders Behring Breivik, on all those who think that Islam is a false religion, or even all those who are opposed to the immigration of Moslems to Europe. It is possible to disagree with something or oppose it without violence; the violent reaction is evidence of a sick mind, and we cannot all mute our convictions for fear that some mentally unstable person would react to them in an inappropriate manner.
Considering abortion the morally inadmissible killing of a human being is not the same as encouraging the killing of abortionists; considering homosexuality disordered and contrary to God’s plan for humans is not the same as inciting violence against homosexuals; insisting that Islam is not the true religion is not the same as bombing a mosque; etc, etc. — just as writing a book called “The God Delusion” is not the same as persecuting Christians, and holding that smoking is unhealthy not just for the smoker but for those around him is not the same as encouraging the killing of smokers.
Posted on: 26th July, 2011
Filed under: Blog English, Politics, Society
Jonnie
December 23rd, 2011 at 02:30
Your’s is the intelligent aprpcoah to this issue.
Leave a reply