Breivik: Neither Jesus nor Robert Spencer inspired his bloodlust

The Cinch Review ^ | 07/25/2011 | Cinch Review

[Merciful_Friend]

It is something which adds bitter insult to grievous injury, when a brutal killer is rewarded after the fact of his crimes by having his twisted personal manifesto widely publicized and analyzed, before the eulogies for the victims have even been heard. Often when it happens the killer himself is dead, but not so in the case of Anders Behring Breivik, who will apparently have the opportunity to enjoy his notoriety for many years to come, since Norway does not practice capital punishment Inevitably his 1518 pages of writing, titled "A European Declaration of Independence," will be pored over in an attempt to explain his demonic acts.

Since I already wrote something two days ago regarding the common description of Breivik in the media as a "fundamentalist Christian," a follow-up on that point based on his writings seems called for, at least in my own mind. There's no possibility of my reading his entire opus, but I thought a quick probe of his "Christianity" might be possible by simply doing a word search for the name Jesus. Unsurprisingly, the references I found this way betrayed no particular faith and even less any sensitivity to Christian teaching. He seems to stitch in cold references to Christianity merely as part of his process of documenting whatever it is he thinks he is documenting. On page 1307, he explicitly states that he has no "personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God" but instead believes in Christianity "as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform." I speculate that he may find that this position leaves something to be desired when he meets his Maker. But I know of no kind of "fundamentalist Christian" (a term which in itself is poorly used far more than it is ever accurately used) who would say such a

[don-o]

I have not even wanted to look very closely at this horrible story. But, your essay tells me a lot of what I rather suspected.

“By their fruits....”

[Mrs. Don-o]

This auhor says the bloodlust came first, followed by the incredibly elaborate intellectual/political rationalization. If I understand his thesis correctly, then Breivik could have actually chosen any rationale at all --- say, Animal Rights, or Technoracy, or Spanish Carlism, or Steampunk, or Trotskyism, or Lutheranism, or Space Colonization, or Tibetian Buddhism or Wicca --- as a mask for what was a far more visceral drive.

But I wonder if that's true?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Mine at 3.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Oops. Mine at 3.

[Merciful_Friend]

It’s not really possible to know for sure, now, or perhaps ever. But if you accept that bloodlust was the main thing required for his acts, then it follows that the rationale could have been different, had something else seemed more attractive to him..

[don-o]

We musta been reading at the exact same time.

I have really avoided even thinking about this very much. The implications for the necessary, vital and vigorous resistance to jihad is daunting and discouraging.

All we can do, is do as the writer does - forcefully denounce it

All I can even offer is to insist that if he is indeed a Christian, his soul is lost unless he repents of his evil deeds. As a Christian, I am bound to pray for the salvation of all men - even and especially the ones who seem to me most evil and most beyond redemption.

[humblegunner]

(Excerpt) Read more at cinchreview.com ...

That source isn't on the excerpt list.

Why are you trying to direct traffic to this blog?

Are you a scumsucking blogpimp?

[humblegunner]

Animal Rights, or Technoracy, or Spanish Carlism, or Steampunk, or Trotskyism, or Lutheranism, or Space Colonization, or Tibetian Buddhism or Wicca

Or worse, he could be pimping blogs on any of those topics.

Blogpimping can lead to serious crimes if left unaddressed.

[Admin Moderator]

You were warned on Sunday to use the Abuse button like everybody else.

[humblegunner]

When I see abuse I shall surely do so.

[Clint N. Suhks]

LMAO

http://www.freerepublic.com/~humblegunner/

[humblegunner]

You appear to be easily amused.

[papertyger]

This auhor says the bloodlust came first, followed by the incredibly elaborate intellectual/ political rationalization.

Nonsense. The author is trying to rationalize his own intellectual dishonesty.

The unfortunate truth is the killer writes better in english as a second language than 95% of native english speakers.

The guy is a "Bond villian." Deal with it. Trying to pretend he's something he's not only degrades the authors credibility.

Anyone who presumes to evaluate the murderer without reading his self confessed raison d'etre is worse than a fool.

[Mrs. Don-o]

There seems to be an immediate reflex of jumping to psychological and sociological explanations for horrific behavior. "What's wrong with his brain chemistry?" "What was wrong with his early childhood?" "What is wrong with our society?"

The category of "Evil" is something that gets short shrift.

I'll admit I don't know how to grasp it.

[papertyger]

Well put. Much of our population can not deal with the fact there are whole societies that celebrate exactly this type of behavior.

We call them muslims.

[Mrs. Don-o]

That's the irony of it. They call Breivik "a Christian fanatic" and yet the only religion he ever considered worthy of emulation was Islam. And to be even more accurate, there was only one aspect of Islam that Breivik actually liked, and that was the part about murdering those who don't think like you do.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

[TheOldLady]

Did ya go and get yerself banned again? Day yum.

[humblegunner]

Every twenty minutes, it seems.

[TheOldLady]

Try keepin’ the shiny side up, huh.