A deluded Christian leader predicted the world would end on May 21, but this weekend’s Norwegian terrorist attack has raptured the liberal media into the third Heaven. They exulted that the terrorist, who killed at least 76 people, is a “Christian fundamentalist” and possible “neo-Nazi” with (they repeatedly pointed out) blue eyes. Anders Behring Breivik appears to be precisely the white conservative the Department of Homeland Security has spent two years warning us is the “most likely source of terrorism” in the United States. There’s just one problem: Breivik states he does “not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ or God,” questions “[i]f there is a God,” defines Christianity as as a cultural construct to oppose Islam, favors a “secular” society, supports abortion in many circumstances, describes himself as “pro-homosexual” and “pro-Israeli,” wants to transfer child-rearing from the family to the government, hates Adolf Hitler, belongs to the Freemasons, supports a “New World Order,” wants to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple … and has a soft spot for breakdancing.
As he was about to unleash his deadly assault, Anders Behring Breivik released his 1,500-page manifesto 2083 — A European Declaration of Independence under the pen name Andrew Berwick. Unlike many of the mass media “journalists,” this author has read nearly all of it. It paints a picture of Breivik that shatters the mainstream media template of an angry Christian yokel.
The Rise of the “Christian-Atheist” and “Christian-Agnostic”
To begin with, he does not appear to be a Christian. He insists atheists and agnostics “are cultural conservative Christians without even knowing it.” He then asks:
So what is the difference between cultural Christians and religious Christians?
If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian (p. 1307).
The Cross, he writes, “should serve as the uniting symbol for all Europeans whether they are agnostics or atheists” (p. 1307).
To facilitate the new Crusades, Breivik and a group of others refounded the Knights Templar in April 2002. On page 817 of his tome, he notes that the 12 founding members included an “English Christian atheist,” a “German Christian atheist,” a “Russian Christian atheist,” a “Dutch Christian agnostic,” and three people with no religious description. That is, seven of the 12 founders do not feign any religion whatsoever.
The Knights’ ranks would be open to atheist recruits, whom he said would fight for secularism:
Being a Christian can mean many things; That you believe in and want to protect Europe’s Christian cultural heritage….European secularism is a result of European Christendom and the enlightenment. It is therefore essential to understand the difference between a “Christian fundamentalist theocracy” (everything we do not want) and a secular European society based on our Christian cultural heritage (what we do want).
So no, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian atheist. (pp. 1361-2, Emphases in original).
For a “Christian fundamentalist,” Breivik skirted the definition of Christianity and diminished the importance of its practice. When describing his preparations for the attack he wrote, “If praying will act as an additional mental boost/soothing it is the pragmatical thing to do. I guess I will find out … If there is a God I will be allowed to enter Heaven as all other martyrs for the Church in the past” (p. 1345).
However, he seems on thin ice for this belief. On page 1324, he introduces his “Christian justification of the struggle.” It consists of one verse from the Book of Psalms. In a later section on “self-defense” (pp. 1327-1334), he cites a series of Old Testament passages — and the verse in which Christ tells St. Peter to put his sword away, “for all those who take the sword shall perish by the sword” (St. Matthew 26:52-54).
Paganism may have played a greater motivating role than the religion of the Crucified One. Breivik writes, “Odinism is still and will always be an important part of my culture and identity” (p. 1360).
Despite his lack of faith, he has no timidity in planning to transform Christianity — or kill its leaders. Finding the faith of his fathers too passive and “suicidal,” he and his fellow knights “will rejuvenate” the Christian Church “by implementing our reforms” (p. 1307). The Church will always take a second place to secular learning, saying it is “essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings.” Later he says, since Pope Benedict XVI has not called for military coups in Europe, he “has abandoned Christianity” and is “a cowardly, incompetent, corrupt, and illegitimate pope…we will take the necessary steps to eradicate the corruption which is continuing to plague the Church” (p. 1327).
“Church leaders” who disagree with the Knights are listed as “Class B traitors” who will incur the “death penalty and expropriation of property/funds,” although he graciously allows, “Punishment can be reduced under certain circumstances.” He courteously tallied the exact number of Class A and B traitors in each EU country from the most (Germany at 82,820) to the least (Malta at 417).
Although he intends to kill at least some of the Church’s leaders, he does not target many of the issues held as vital by most Christians.
Pro-Gay, Pro-Abortion, Anti-Family “Christian Fundamentalism”?
Traditional Christianity opposes abortion, promiscuous sexual activity, and the homosexual agenda, but Breivik finds himself on the other side of these cultural issues. In an online post, he wrote, “we have to ensure that we influence other culturally conservatives to take our anti-racist[,] pro-homosexual, pro-Israeli line of thought.” Elsewhere, he says we must “Support Israel’s fight against Jihad” (p. 1243).
He assures us the sexual revolution “is not a Marxist concept but rather a liberal one,” and thus one we have to preserve. “So how do we preach chastity to a mob that wants unlimited access to free sex? The answer is that we don’t.” He added it was important not to “ram a puritan and deeply conservative way of life down the throat of everyone” (pp. 1168-9). Instead, he envisions the development of autonomous “liberal zones” similar to Las Vegas, where anything goes.
He allows for abortion ‘in the case of rape…or if the baby has mental or physical disabilities. The liberals zones may be exempt [from] this law” (p. 1179). A “ban on abortion,” he writes, would “strip women or basic rights” (p. 1181).
Many of Christianity’s cultural opponents have sought to redefine marriage. So does Breivik. “Marriage must be based on a specific agreement between a man and a woman who creates [sic.] an advanced pact which must have a limited validity of at least 20 years” (pp. 1176). These contracts fit into his plan to transfer child-rearing from the family to the State.
“Outsource Breeding” for the State
Similar to other totalitarians, Breivik the alleged “Christian fundamentalist” would destroy the family. He proposes what he calls “outsource breeding” by women in “low cost countries,” who would produce babies on demand. The parents could select sex traits via “reprogenics” (pp. 1192-4). Once the engineered babies arrive on shore, Breivik would have “the state, or state funded institutions take on the fostering [of] these children.” This will begin with “kindergarden boarding school” at “age 0,” where they will be “assigned a specific surname,” and continue through college at age 25 (p. 1182-3). The “parents” assigned to them would follow them for at least 25 years and be paid based on “performance” (p. 1196). To ease matters, schooling will be replaced with a “Brain-Computer Interface,” which loads “15-30 years” of learning “from an external device to the brain” (p. 1199).
If Breivik values few Christian conservative issues, he has strong convictions that there are too many people on earth — approximately three billion too many.
Anders Breivik: The John Holdren of Terrorism
Breivik wrote that “Overconsumption, pollution, and overpopulation are the three problems that threaten the future of life on earth” while calling for “global population control” (p. 1200-1). “We should create population capacity guidelines for continents or countries. If starvation threatens the countries who have failed to follow our guidelines, we should not support them…or send them any kind of aid.” “Our planet should not exceed 3 billion individuals so radical policies will have to be implemented” (p. 1202).
An environmentalist campaign of population control hardly sounds Christian or fundamentalist. However, it closely echoes the writings of current Science Czar John P. Holdren, who envisioned a similar scheme in his book Ecoscience.
Breivik appears to be an economic centrist. He wrote, “To my left you will find a socialist, to my right you will find a social democrat” (p. 1355). He favors the “development of alternative energy” to “save the environment” (p. 1199) and argues it is “essential” that “national states have a controlling stake in” multinational corporations (p. 1196).
The Breakdancing Zionist “Neo-Nazi”
The media intimated Breivik may be a neo-Nazi, based on his concern for Europe and, apparently, his blue eyes. That is easily discredited. “I consider myself to be an anti-racist, anti-fascist, and anti-Nazi,” he wrote (p. 1357). “If there is one historic figure and past Germanic leader I hate it is Adolf Hitler,” calling him “the great Satan” (p. 1162-3). Page 1097 has a picture of “The Badge of the Justiciar Knight,” which features a sword through a skull emblazoned with the Islamic crescent, the hammer-and-sickle, and the swastika. At one point, he refers to his Knights as “‘politically correct’ patriot intellectuals” (p. 1236).
He concedes the Knights are “a partly ethnocentric organization” — and that’s all he wants to say about it. “However, since the doctrines surrounding ethnocentric/indigenous principles is relatively vague and not very specific it is up to each and every Justiciar Knight to make his own personal interpretation.” (p. 1151). He reiterates, “Knights Templar, are not a racist organisation. Individuals of all races, providing that they are Christians, can join” (p. 1167). Although he seems highly concerned with Islamic “demographic warfare” and falling European birthrates, he envisions the knighthood supplemented by “nationalist European Jews, non-European Christians, or Hindu/Buddhist Asians,” expressing confidence “all minority groups will deliver” (p. 1259). He does make one negative comment about the “offspring of race-mixers” on page 1160.
He defines his ideology as “the Vienna school of thought,” or “Crusader Nationalism,” defined by “intellectuals” like Fjordman, Bat Ye’or, and Robert Spencer — and undoubtedly, despite her protests, Pamela Geller, whom he frequently cited (p. 1233, 1236). He calls his uprising “an anti-Jihad movement” (p. 1359). 2083 and his online writings prove him to be an ultra-Zionist, sometimes taunting left-wing Jews for not being hardline enough.
What self-respecting Nazi endorses Zionism … or breakdancing?
In a surprising biographical note, Breivik writes, “Since I was 12 years old I was into the hip-hop movement.” He made alliances with street gangs and painted graffiti on Oslo’s buildings (p. 1388). Though he now opposes the negative messages of hip-hop music, such as drug use and gang-banging, he would preserve “positive aspects…such as break dance” (p. 1209).
There are additional overtones to Breivik’s story that call into question his ideology and motivation.
Supporting the Masonic Lodge, Rebuilding the (Antichrist’s) Temple, and the “New World Order”
Anders Behring Breivik was a member of the Masonic Order. Although many fine Christian men belong to the Freemasons, traditional Christians — and an increasing number of evangelicals — teach that the Masonic Lodge is incompatible with Christianity. It teaches fidelity, not to Jesus Christ the Son of God, but to the “Great Architect of the Universe,” who is believed to be above Jesus Christ, Muhammad, or Buddha.
The “Ordination Rite” of the new Knights Templar is clearly based on the initiation into the Masons, including the use of sword, skull, and a Temple. And a blood-curdling oath, signed “with your own blood” before being burned. The initiate promises to wage war “under no less penalty than that of having my body severed in two, my bowels taken from thence and burned to ashes, the ashes scattered before the four winds of heaven, that no more remembrance might be had of such a vile and wicked a wretch as I would be” (pp. 1117-8).
Since “war is not pretty,” Breivik insists, “all armed resistance fighters really have no choice but to get used to the idea” of killing women. “Have no doubt about it,” he tells the martyrs of his twisted faith, “you will get caught or you will die.” The manual details the uniform, medals, and decorations of the Knights, although if you’re going to get caught anyway they seem somewhat superfluous.
He states there are currently “less than 100 Judiciar Knights spread all over Europe” (p. 1263). This lends credence to the claim he made in court that there are two more cells operating in Europe.
Despite their tiny numbers and hopeless outlook, Breivik has big plans for his Knights. He boasted, “We are some of the founding fathers of the new world order” (p. 1225). His foreign policy sounds like neocon on steroids. He will deport all Muslims from Europe and Israel (including the West Bank and Gaza), and launch a series of coups against EU governments. The new alliance will prevent any Muslim nation from getting WMDs, and will forcibly “disarm” Pakistan. He plans to demolish the Dome of the Rock mosque and build a Third Temple, which “will become a place of worship for both Jews and Christians” (p. 1320). Some Christians believe the Temple will be rebuilt to become the focus of worship…for the Antichrist.
Wittingly or unwittingly, that is whose bidding Anders Behring Breivik is doing. Only an ignorant or malicious media could report otherwise.