Bill O’Reilly sternly criticized the media for describing Anders Behring-Breivik, the man who has admitted to committing the mass killings in Norway, as a Christian, saying that such a thing was “impossible.”
O’Reilly singled out the New York Times, which called Breivik a “Christian extremist” in an article. Breivik also referred to himself as a Christian, as did the Norwegian police, and his 1,500 page manifesto has been described as coming from a Christian perspective. In the manifesto, he writes that he does not have a “personal,” religious relationship with Christ, believes in Christianity “as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform,” which he says “makes [me] Christian.”
To O’Reilly, though, it was “impossible” that Breivik is a Christian.
“No one believing in Jesus commits mass murder,” he said. “The man might have called himself a Christian on the net, but he is certainly not of that faith…we can find no evidence, none, that this killer practiced Christianity in any way.”
I sure don’t recall O’Reilly howling over a man named Scott Roeder entering the church of Dr. George Tiller and gunning him down execution style. Dr. Tiller was an abortion provider.
Is it because O’Reilly had gone around for years before calling Dr. Tiller, “Tiller the Killer?” Was Scott Roeder a Christian? Is he not howling because Dr. Tiller is only one person?
Don’t people get to determine if they are Christian or not? Isn’t it up to that person and his or her God to determine that? I think we, as human beings, can certainly address ‘Christian behavior.” We all have a pretty good idea what constitutes good Christian behavior and I think we are entitled to give our opinion on such behaviors. However, I don’t think O’Reilly or any other human being gets to stand in judgement of whether someone else is a Christian or not. That is a self-identifying task that no one else can do for you.