A Christian Perspective on the Murders in Norway

And lo, after I ask how long we will put up with a hostile government, it appear at first glance that at least one man has declared war against it. Anders Breivik, of Norway, has justified his murder of more than 70 people on the basis that he was fighting against his government, who sought to stop the mass import of Muslims and protect Europe from a Muslim takeover. 

These are certainly goals that I approve of, and Breivik characterises himself as a Christian martyr, the type of honourable person that there are too few of these days.However, despite applause from some circles, who view these attacks as a first stage in a new crusade for European civilisation, I cannot endorse what this vile man has done, and neither should any true Christian man or woman. 

The bombing in Oslo which ordinarily would be the macabre centre stage in these affairs does not seem to have slowed down Norway’s government, nor does it appear to have made them think twice about the Islamification of Europe. It has merely killed several people unconnected with any real threat to Norway.

I have heard supposed nationalists support Breivik’s cold blooded murder of dozens of Norweigian youths on Utoya Island on the basis that these youths were supporters of the Norwegian Labour Party, and as such were legitimate targets. 

Personally I find it hard to believe that these youths are the greatest threat to European Christian society. It is highly probable that they were enthusiastic supporters of multiculturalism, with little love for Christianity, but the same is true for millions of other people who have not been so murdered. 

These children were victims from birth, born into nations that did not care about them, that exploited them, and over the course of their lives, brainwashed them into supporting self destructive tendencies. Breivik may well have damaged Labour party recruitment momentarily, but he has done so in the least Christian manner possible. 

A true Christian would aim to show these misguided youths the truth of Christianity, that they might hear the call of God’s salvation. Creating a generation of Norwegians who are sceptical of mundane authority and ideologies would be the best way to injure the Labour Party, and Christianity, with its focus on the commandments of God over the commandments of men, would be a powerful safety valve against multiculturalism and unchecked Muslim invasion. 

But despite the exhortations of the media, Breivik does not seem to be either a Christian or a conservative. This reeks of an intended slur against those who value their own religion and civilisation, and almost gives one pause to consider if the whole attack may have been planned by left wingers to discredit us. Mimicry and trickery of this kind was par for the course in the days of the Pharisees, why not today?

But even if Breivik really does believe the things he says, the man is no Christian. Certainly, he suggests he wishes to protect Christian culture, but this merely means he opposes Islamification. Many of those who oppose Islam do not do it because theu prefer Christianity, they do it because they wish to remain wallowing in their lusts and hedonism which would be denied them under Islam, and indeed, under any proper Christian law. What Breivik wants is a watered down quasi Christian nation, where religion does not interfere with his own selfish desires. 

His use of steroids seems to support this assessment. I have never heard of any Christian martyr of the past drugging themselves into a frenzy, nor has any Christian martyr spoken so obsessively of himself as some “knight” nor has any martyr blasphemously referred to themselves as the “saviour of Christianity”. 

Brievik is a frustrated, murderous creature with delusions of grandeur. He is no Christian martyr, and he should not be treated as such by anyone who thinks himself a decent Christian. In any true Christian nation, a man like Breivik ought to be executed. As we are told in Luke 17:2, “It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”

Breivik has committed the gravest of sins, and it is difficult to see how his salvation could be achieved. Instead, we should pray for those who have been murdered, for they are the true martyrs, slaughtered on the altar of greed and megalomania.

The Diversity Fallacy

An interesting article I saw in the Daily Mail the other day, centred around the residents of St Paul's Court, in Preston, UK, a sheltered housing scheme (similar to a retirement home, except there is greater independence with larger individual living areas, in addition to communal facilities, like an apartment block).

According to the Mail, residents have been instructed to remove any religious icons or imagery from the communal areas. The justification for this is, as ever, the “promotion of diversity amongst its residents and visitors”. 

This is the insidious nature of the secularist creep, whereby the removal of Christianity from our day to day life is justified as being in the interests of fairness and equality. It is part and parcel of the culture that the Anti-Christian rulers of our nations have sought to establish. 

But there’s an interesting aside to this battle, which is the sop to “diversity”. They are aware that if they just attack Christianity on the basis of it being full of evil Christians who ought to be shot and buried in a trench in Dartmoor, that would rather give the game away to even the densest of egalitarians.

Instead, we get “diversity”. You can almost hear their shrill cries. “We’re all in favour of diversity, don’t you know? We want everybody to be able to do what they want, without being forced to comply with other people’s beliefs!”

And so we get this strange doublethink situation, where diversity means the removal of things that separate people, ostensibly so that those people feel less inclined to conform, but in fact forcing them all to be the same. 

This is particularly horrible, as this attack is visited on elderly people in the twilight of their lives, people who have lived in a society that was more decent and Christian in character than the one we live in today, and yet they are not permitted to exercise their own religion freely in the place that they live in.

Note that they are committed to promoting diversity amongst the visitors as well. Imagine, the way this is worded almost seems to imply that they force their secularist moral code on anyone who walks in the door, and according to the Mail, “asked elderly residents to volunteer to become 'equality and diversity' champions”.

If you’ve applied for a job or training in the last five years and read the small print, you’ll probably know what that means. Some poor old lady or traditional old man will be hounded by some condescending woman wearing a name badge until they agree to parrot these concepts which are completely alien to them, but may feel they would get in trouble if they did not. 

It is as if this whole system is compulsory by stealth, similar to the charitable donations in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. You can opt out, if you wish, but woe betide you if you do choose that route. This pressure, being used against some of the most vulnerable members of our society, must surely be bullying or abuse of some kind? 

I’m also unsure of how they intend to promote diversity amongst the visitors, considering they will only be there for a few hours, which is not nearly long enough to convert to Zoroastrianism. Perhaps they will also remove rosaries and headscarves from people as they go in, or refuse families of Christians as their quota system requires six more Jainists and a Rastafarian first. 

More likely this reference to visitors is merely a demonstration of how far they are willing to extend their arbitrary, ungodly authority.

Returning to the “diversity” theme again, it has been explained to me, by a man who sounded as if he barely believed it himself and ought to have known better, that Christianity is only being diminished in relation to other faiths because it was in such a strong position to start with.

Well, that’s certainly the case, but it does not explain why in a democracy the religion of the majority should be diminished to permit other religions to flourish buy default in the void created. Nor does it explain why libraries now place the Qur’an higher on the shelves than the Bible, nor why in an EU diary distributed to schools, Christianity was absent whilst the Muslim and Hindu festivals were listed. 

A truly free religious system would not legislate on religion at all, and would allow the dominant religion to fluctuate naturally based upon which happens to be most popular. Though I would argue that the dominant religion should be the one that has led to a society that maintains it’s people in the greatest prosperity and safety. 

At least, in this case, Muslim and Christian leaders have spoken out against this ridiculous intrusion into the lives of these people. From my own experiences of Preston, the residents of this home would be predominantly Christian and Muslim, with some Hindu presence as well.

Now, I have absolutely no desire to increase the presence of alien religions in this country, but it certainly says something when rival religions see a greater danger in secularism than they do in Christianity. Most of the residents are likely to be old or infirm. They are not in any shape to begin a holy war in the laundry room.

But the secularists never actually care about what people actually want, they only care about pre-empting tension and putting the words in people’s mouths. I daresay there are many Muslims who wouldn’t have minded the Christmas decorations that were not permitted to be put up in Preston, nor would these old people have immediately called the police at the sight of a crucifix on the wall.

They could simply discuss their grievances with one another, though they must be careful, lest an employee report them for offensive behaviour in suggesting their religion is more real than another. In the long run, it is likely that this sort of thing will increase; indeed it is ordained in the scriptures that we will suffer at the hands of the ungodly. It is not too much of a stretch to see people living in apartment buildings and social housing denied the right to practice their religion by politically motivated landlord organisations and local government. The question is, how long will we put up with this treatment from a hostile government?

Antichristianity in the National Government

Trevor Phillips, head of the British Equality and Human Rights Commission, suddenly tells us that his subversive and irresponsible commission is not in opposition to religion, and that he wishes to defend people’s right to believe in a God and follow a religion. Certainly, his organisation has spent a lot of time defending Muslims from elderly Christians who have the gall to attempt to discuss their own religion with them on equal terms. 

It has spent a lot of the taxes of Christians in leaping to the judicial defence of every self obsessed heathen with a grudge against Christianity, while Christians who are victimised by these attacks are forced to pay their own court costs, though some have had their defences nobly paid for by the Christian Institute.

Trevor Phillips is only interested in permitting a diluted, sanitised version of Christianity, but he has no intention of allowing our lives to be lived in the way God intended in the Bible. The march of secularism can often seem like a reasonable goal in the interests of equal rights, but it inevitably means a diminishment of Christianity, a removal from it’s presence in public life.

In addition, Christianity teaches many things, such as objective morals, preaching the truth to others, and various prohibitions and restrictions which secularism deems incompatible with granting everyone equal rights to do whatever stupid thing pops into their head at any given moment. Secularism in such circumstances would be a reduction in true, Biblically ordained Christianity, which those like Trevor Phillips refer to as “Christian Extremism”.

This is in itself a partisan, anti-equality judgement, because it implies that there is an acceptable form of Christianity which Trevor Phillips likes, whilst every other kind is wrong, extreme, and no doubt liable to be prosecuted for hate crimes. 

Of course, he gushes with praise for Islam, because they have supposedly made great steps to make their religion compatible with his godless society. I imagine many Christians would question whether that was true.

In any case, the Muslims have a concept which they call “Taqiyya” which basically translates to “deception”. It is the doctrine by which a Muslim may conceal their faith in the interests of safety or long term goals. Trevor Philips may be in for a shock if he thinks Muslims have any intention of conforming to his beliefs. It is entirely possible that he is aware of this, and merely wishes to use Muslims as a stick with which to beat the native Christians.  

This obsession with compatibility is almost reminiscent of how democracy works in the European Union, where votes are held again and again until a result is given that is compatible with the goals of those who control the union from behind the scenes. Probably the mainstream churches will carry out revisions and consultations until they have developed a bastardised form of Christianity that suits our antichrist leaders. But I do not think it will suit God. 

Christianity favours truth, not Muslim deception or compromised surrender. Our God is supreme, and our goals cannot be put on hold to satisfy the whims of the godless. Christianity created our nations, and it is our nations which must conform to Christianity, and not the other way around. 

Trevor Phillips is not an especially important creature himself, for he is merely a vocal lackey of the people in power who so desperately hate Christianity, but cannot say so themselves for fear of awakening the masses of ordinary believers in Christ to their own enslavement to secularism. 

But Trevor Phillips is a symbol of the nasty things which will keep crawling out of the woodwork and demanding ever greater restrictions on Christian worship, until the day when Christians finally say enough is enough, and start to live their lives as God intended, fearing no censure but His. 

In the meantime, we will suffer at the hands of the antichrists, but we will prevail as long as we keep our faith. As is said in 2^nd Timothy chapter 3, verse 15, “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them, And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”