|By D. Wiberg at en.wikipedia|
I think these points are worth some discussion. I recognize that people will hold different opinions on both of them. I think it would be great if we could acknowledge that differences of opinions - even of such important subjects - can be held without needing to condemn those who might hold different ones from our own.
Religious Ideology and Murder
Should religious ideology be blamed for murders committed by religious extremists, and if so, how much blame seems appropriate? Referring to the 1994 murder of a physician by Christian extremist Paul Hill, Neil writes:
You can argue that his ideology didn’t provide sufficient condemnation for retributive murder, and perhaps there’s some room for that discussion. But it’s simply not fair to lay the blame for his actions at the feet of his theology. Anyone who understands that ideology well knows that even for theonomists Jesus’s censure of retributive violence in the New Testament trumps that element within the Mosaic law. Hill should have understood that, but he didn’t. Was that the fault of his theological system? No, it was the result of a dysfunctional personality.