The strident denials of the Norwegian gunman's Christianity have come from multiple sources and are now diffused over the Internet. The standard retort to a mention of his religious affiliation is, "he cannot be a Christian as he acted in a manner so unlike Christ himself," or "he disobeyed Christ's teachings on violence; therefore, he cannot be a Christian." A curious debate this stance does engender in regards to religious identity, particularly after a gruesome act of terrorism. Subject to scrutiny is, of course, the religious identity of the killer and an understandable desire to find out if any corollary can be drawn between his religious faith and irrational actions. In the case of the Norwegian mass murderer, one indeed does have historical precedents concerning those who killed with the aim of furthering Christianity; however, it is effectively shown that Christ himself did not condone such depredation and that miscreants who carried out such deeds did so in violation of Christ's teachings.
The same standard is not applied in regards to Islam and acts of violence. The Islamist is not seen as an apostate by the Christian West even if he violates the strictures of the Holy Koran. One needs to look no further than the perpetrators of the 9/11 atrocities. Mohammed Attah and his cohorts violated one of the fundamental principles of their faith: engaging in suicide. Islam explicitly condemns the taking of one's own life, yet the terrorists undertook this very act in defiance of scripture.
Despite prohibitions on suicide as well as alcohol consumption (the 9/11 hijackers are known to have patronized a strip bar shortly before carrying out their acts of mass murder), few are willing to put forth that Attah and his murderous colleagues be referred to as apostates from Islam; yet, this is what is being demanded in regards to the religious affiliation of the Norwegian shooter. No one denies that the 9/11 hijackers considered themselves holy warriors acting in the name of Allah, but it is a fact that their negation of one of the fundamentals shared with the other Abrahamic faiths put them at variance with true Islam. The sources for the unbridled brutality of the Norwegian murderer appear to be maniacal anger towards proponents of liberal immigration laws and multiculturalism, not a call to Holy War on the part of Christians. However, one puzzle remains: why is it unacceptable for the Scandinavian terrorist to be categorized as Christian owing to the defiance of New Testament Scripture but it is acceptable to categorize suicide bombers in the Middle East and elsewhere as Muslims in good standing despite flagrant disregard for the essentials of the faith?
An act of aggression carried out by a person who professes to act in accordance with Christian doctrine excludes him from the categorization of "Christian," yet his Muslim counterpart who engages in self immolation is, by societal standards, a true adherent to the Muslim faith. The double standard is glaringly obvious and worthy of reflection, a task often neglected by the multitude, to our detriment.
The same standard is not applied in regards to Islam and acts of violence. The Islamist is not seen as an apostate by the Christian West even if he violates the strictures of the Holy Koran. One needs to look no further than the perpetrators of the 9/11 atrocities. Mohammed Attah and his cohorts violated one of the fundamental principles of their faith: engaging in suicide. Islam explicitly condemns the taking of one's own life, yet the terrorists undertook this very act in defiance of scripture.
Despite prohibitions on suicide as well as alcohol consumption (the 9/11 hijackers are known to have patronized a strip bar shortly before carrying out their acts of mass murder), few are willing to put forth that Attah and his murderous colleagues be referred to as apostates from Islam; yet, this is what is being demanded in regards to the religious affiliation of the Norwegian shooter. No one denies that the 9/11 hijackers considered themselves holy warriors acting in the name of Allah, but it is a fact that their negation of one of the fundamentals shared with the other Abrahamic faiths put them at variance with true Islam. The sources for the unbridled brutality of the Norwegian murderer appear to be maniacal anger towards proponents of liberal immigration laws and multiculturalism, not a call to Holy War on the part of Christians. However, one puzzle remains: why is it unacceptable for the Scandinavian terrorist to be categorized as Christian owing to the defiance of New Testament Scripture but it is acceptable to categorize suicide bombers in the Middle East and elsewhere as Muslims in good standing despite flagrant disregard for the essentials of the faith?
An act of aggression carried out by a person who professes to act in accordance with Christian doctrine excludes him from the categorization of "Christian," yet his Muslim counterpart who engages in self immolation is, by societal standards, a true adherent to the Muslim faith. The double standard is glaringly obvious and worthy of reflection, a task often neglected by the multitude, to our detriment.
No comments:
Post a Comment