suspect in custody in Norway.

suspect in custody in Norway.

Joined: April 17th, 2006, 10:37 pm

July 23rd, 2011, 5:23 pm #1

32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian with reported Christian fundamentalist and anti-Muslim views, is suspected in both attacks. He has admitted to firing weapons on the island, according to police.

"He had this belief that it was impossible to have a multicultural Norway, and people from Muslim countries were destroying Norway," Hallzard Sandberg, foreign news correspondent for Norwegian national broadcaster NRK, told NPR's Scott Simon.

He has been preliminarily charged with acts of terrorism.


http://www.npr.org/2011/07/23/138634243 ... and-attack

Six-feet tall and blond, the man charged with mass murder in twin attacks in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, is known to have extremist right-wing sympathies. According to Norwegian police and posts he has made online, Breivik supports far-right idealogies and has called for the formation of a "cultural Euro-Tea Party" referring to the grass-roots right-wing organisation in the US supported by Sarah Palin.

http://www.channel4.com/news/oslo-attac ... ik-profile

On his Facebook profile, Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1Swy40SqE
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2007, 6:53 am

July 23rd, 2011, 7:51 pm #2

his fruits certainly are not consistent with those of Christ....so calling himself a christian is about as valid as a drunk claiming to be sober.....


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 17th, 2006, 10:37 pm

July 23rd, 2011, 8:02 pm #3

Calling oneself a Christian and behaving like a follower of Christ are two totally different things -- as we have seen over and over again.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2007, 6:53 am

July 23rd, 2011, 8:30 pm #4

So much evil in this world. MY prayers go out to the friends and families.
Quote
Like
Share

Seoc Colla
Seoc Colla

July 23rd, 2011, 9:35 pm #5

Is there really any difference, apart from scale, of an individual claiming to be a 'true' Christian - dont they all? - and a nation claiming to be Christian and both engage in terrorist acts inflicting suffering on those who have done no wrong to them?

Is this phenomena normal? Or moral? Or sane?
Quote
Share

Tim
Tim

July 24th, 2011, 4:00 am #6

32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian with reported Christian fundamentalist and anti-Muslim views, is suspected in both attacks. He has admitted to firing weapons on the island, according to police.

"He had this belief that it was impossible to have a multicultural Norway, and people from Muslim countries were destroying Norway," Hallzard Sandberg, foreign news correspondent for Norwegian national broadcaster NRK, told NPR's Scott Simon.

He has been preliminarily charged with acts of terrorism.


http://www.npr.org/2011/07/23/138634243 ... and-attack

Six-feet tall and blond, the man charged with mass murder in twin attacks in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, is known to have extremist right-wing sympathies. According to Norwegian police and posts he has made online, Breivik supports far-right idealogies and has called for the formation of a "cultural Euro-Tea Party" referring to the grass-roots right-wing organisation in the US supported by Sarah Palin.

http://www.channel4.com/news/oslo-attac ... ik-profile

On his Facebook profile, Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1Swy40SqE
See the whole report
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43854355/ns ... ws-europe/

Norwegian police searched for more victims and a possible second gunman on Saturday after a suspected right-wing zealot killed at least 92 people in a shooting spree and bomb attack that have traumatized a once-placid country.

Quote
Share

Joined: April 17th, 2006, 10:37 pm

July 24th, 2011, 7:26 am #7

Is there really any difference, apart from scale, of an individual claiming to be a 'true' Christian - dont they all? - and a nation claiming to be Christian and both engage in terrorist acts inflicting suffering on those who have done no wrong to them?

Is this phenomena normal? Or moral? Or sane?
Contrary to what many claim, a nation cannot be "Christian". Especially not a nation that allows freedom of religion and was founded under the principle that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Being a Christian involves an individual's personal belief and commitment to the teachings of Jesus Christ, and choosing to follow him. Even if there was a state-established religion, that wouldn't mean that each individual citizen truly would truly believe or follow the teachings of that religion. A person's faith in any religion at all is between them and God, as they perceive God.

It could be observed that America was founded on many Christian principles (our laws are very similar to the Judeo-Christian moral code and ethics), but also individual liberties and freedom to choose how to worship, or to not worship at all.

I would totally agree with you that it is morally wrong for America, or any country, to engage in acts that inflict suffering on those who have done no wrong to them. And I would agree that if a lawmaker or politician, as an individual, claims to be a Christian but supports war, and violence, and greed, that is also morally wrong. But there are times when a military response is just, or necessary, or for the greater good -- and it's not always clear or cut and dry when it is the best or the only solution.
Quote
Like
Share

Seoc Colla
Seoc Colla

July 24th, 2011, 9:11 am #8

Hi Kate, I would agree with you re a 'nation' being condemned to one belief, when there would be multiple viewpoints. As you say religion involves the minds of individuals.

May I disagree with you over notions of 'founding' of anywhere, especially when an evolved system of beliefs was already long present in the case of Northern America prior to the arrival of the uninvited?
Quote
Share

Joined: April 17th, 2006, 10:37 pm

July 24th, 2011, 7:09 pm #9

The native people of North America did just fine before the European settlers came. They actually had many different belief systems, customs, languages, and societies. Some were more agrarian, others were hunters and nomads. They adapted to all of the climates and locations in the land -- deserts, forests, plains, coastal areas. Some were more peaceful, and willing to trade with other tribes, or leave other tribes alone. Others were more warlike, and violent toward other tribes -- certainly not an idyllic or utopian society. But apparently it worked for thousands of years.

The vast majority of the European settlers who came to the new world were unfair to and clearly wronged the native people here -- stole their goods, their lands, and committed violence against them. Not every native tribe the Europeans encountered here were peaceful and welcoming, and some committed violence against the settlers -- even the most peaceful settlers.

But what the Europeans did here was not unique at all. This is the way mankind has been -- all mankind, toward all mankind -- since the dawn of time. The Saxons invaded the Celts in Britain, as did the Romans. The Roman empire spread throughout the ancient world, occupying other countries. The Normans invaded England in 1066. The Spanish and the English warred over control of the high seas for centuries. And if you look at the Jews in the Old Testament -- claiming that God told them to wipe out other people, enslave them, loot and rape, steal their lands and goods, slaughter their children and keep their virginal women as slaves -- then any people who wanted to conquer any other people could find plenty of Biblical examples to support their actions.

But it is in no way limited to Judaism, Christianity, or teachings and examples from the Bible. Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Thutmose III, Darius I, Attila the Hun, Cheng, Charlemagne, Julius Caesar, Hitler...this is the way it has been throughout history. Strong nations invading and taking over other nations they perceive as "weaker", taking their goods, their lands, their resources, smothering their culture and trying to assimilate them. Until the "weaker" nations band together, someone fights back, or the invading empire spreads itself too thin and eventually collapses.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 8th, 2003, 1:16 am

July 24th, 2011, 9:18 pm #10

We shouldn't focus on race or religious affiliation as the cause of problems but rather, go down a layer and look at what the systems of belief are teaching.

People hate Muslims for example and tend to stereotype Muslims as some kind of Arabic, turban-wearing, dark-skinned maniacs. But what about white Muslims like Kevin Barrett?http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/Barrett_11.html That throws a wrench into the gears of stereotyping.

I don't like any kind of religious indoctrination at all ... be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish or whatever. There are always some good values taught in those belief systems to be sure but where coercive pressure is needed, to force compliance (or else) ... all religious beliefs become repressive and ugly.

Expose the follies of wrong-headed belief but don't think for a moment that all problems will be gone if/when the believers of these various systems are eliminated!~

It's like computers and operating systems. The same computer can run evil Linux or good MS Windows or even Mac. You don't fix anything by shooting a computer running Linux.

-Vince
Quote
Like
Share