“This comment doesn't really make sense. The whole point of the original piece was that Breivik is the one claiming that "Christian" equals "European," and then pointing out that the author does not agree with this nor do most ordinary Christians.”
KrautMan on Jul 27, 2011 at 19:50:47
“No worries, happens to all of us. Sorry for my opener, that was unnecessary.”
KrautMan on Jul 27, 2011 at 11:18:04
“Pay attention, nowhere does the article say that Breivik equals "Christian" with "European". It's the author of the article who decided that Breivik meant "European" when he wrote "Christian":
"The key to understanding his manifesto, his mania and the confusion currently dominating news headlines lies in the reality that by "Christian" he almost always means "European.""”
“No it isn't. The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy involves an ad hoc change in a definition in order to claim that a particular member of a certain class is not really a member of that class. This is not an example of that fallacy for two reasons:
1.) Ben's argument is that Anders Breivik never claimed to be a Christian in any ordinary sense, and, in fact, specifically rejects Christian beliefs in the ordinary sense and offers his own definition of Christianity. Therefore, Ben is not trying to exempt someone who otherwise claims to be Christian in the ordinary sense from that class of individuals. He is simply pointing out that Breivik already stated that he himself was not a member of that class.
2.) There is already a pre-existing definition of what constitutes Christian belief and behavior based on the teachings of Christ and the scriptures. Just because an individual claims to be a Christian, does not automatically make him one. His beliefs and behavior must conform to that pre-existing defintion in order to be considered Christian. Ben has argued that Breivik's belief and behavior does not meet this definition. This is a legitimate way to argue. Otherwise, anyone could claim to be anything at all and we could never make any claim to the contrary lest we be guilty of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
Thus, the claim that this article is an example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy is itself fallacious.”
“Great article Ben. It is a shame that today's media is so careless and dishonest in their presentation of things, no doubt mostly for the sake of stirring up controversy and generating a few headlines. It's also a shame that some folks are so eager to find any tool they can use to bludgeon the Christian faith that they will crassly grab onto the actions of a lone, clearly disturbed individual in a tragedy like this one and use it to smear the beliefs of millions of people, even though there is no necessary connection between this man's actions and the contents of the Christian faith.”
“The answer to your question, I think, is that most of the atheist types who post on sites like this are relentlessly insecure, small minded people who feel compelled to cover over their fear that they might be wrong by shouting loudly and belittling anyone who sees things differently than them.”
“Wrong. No one perceives reality directly. It is always mediated to us through the senses and what we perceive is interpreted and understood through the medium of language. Your naive belief to the contrary only shows how simple-minded you are despite your belief in your own intellectual superiority. Maybe you should try reading some actual serious thinkers and leave the Richard Dawkins aside.”
“Ah yes. And we all know that if you couldn't find any articles refuting him, then that means every Christian must absolutely agree with him. Gotta love the logic here.”
Numberwang on May 24, 2011 at 07:50:22
"Or maybe most other Christians are too busy actually living out their faith, and pursuing other serious interests to waste time on the ridiculous pronouncements of Pat Robertson."
Exactly, Christians just can't be bothered with the global image of their faith. They have allowed the crazies to represent them.”
Numberwang on May 23, 2011 at 23:31:43
“I did not say that. I only said (or meant to say) that those who do disagree, apparently dont disagree strong enough to defend their own position. Christians have let the lunatics take over the asylum.”