One interesting thing is how this incident made people do abrupt reversals. Those who think Islam is inherently violent, and were pointing to this attack as further evidence, are now saying that we can't say that his political or religious beliefs had anything to do with it. Those who think Muslims are being persecuted in the West, and were insisting that we can't generalize from this attack to condemn Islam in general, are now saying that the attack was obviously the product of his right-wing politics and Christianity. Strange days.
Update (27 July): Sam Harris, one of the "new atheists" (a group I haven't paid attention to yet), finds some passages in the murderer's manifesto that make it difficult to say he was a devout or serious or (as some newspapers are saying) "fundamentalist" Christian. Here's the beginning of a longer quote:
I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person as that would be a lie. I’ve always been very pragmatic and influenced by my secular surroundings and environment.
Via KBJ. Again, I'm a little disconcerted by the fact that I'm somewhat relieved to hear this. As if it brings any of the victims -- mostly children -- back to life to know that he wasn't doing it in the name of Christianity.
Update: More from Sultan Knish:
Breivik described himself as not a religious person and mentions praying only once. His plans leading up to the attacks involved multiple visits to prostitutes. ... Breivik did call himself a Christian, but meant that in a cultural sense, rather than a theological one. He emphasized that he was not seeking a theocracy, but a secular society. His idea of a Christian Europe had nothing to do with religion.