Anarchist among Jihadists raises questions Christians should consider

This is just such a fascinating article both because it tells us more about the situation in Syria than most of us in the West would otherwise know and because there are some intriguing ideas in it worth considering by Christians.

If like me you're used to Anarchists being fairly anti-God, then this is refreshing:

My real problem, and that of the oppressed in general I think, is not with god himself, but with human beings who act as gods and are so sick with authority that they think and act like gods, be they secular dictators like Assad or Islamic imams.
God himself is never as deadly dangerous as those who 'speak' for him.

Of course that's not to say there's any theism there, it's probably simply saying that believing in God is not high on the hit list (God may still be 'dangerous' in anarchist terms because God represents some degree of heteronomy) -there are more important issues; one being the way that God is used in human discourse to legitimise tyranny. And that is fair enough: I'm similarly concerned. And of course the converse should be noted too: atheism can be tyrannical (Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao Zedong demonstrate that well enough I think).

There's an intriguing thought too about sharing ones beliefs which I think bears further reflection. I'm interested to see it in relation to the issue of proselytism too:

I have never tried to convince anyone to be an anarchist and have always thought that trying to affect others is another way of practicing authority upon them.But now I see this issue from another perspective. It is all about making anarchism 'available' or known to those who want to fight any oppressing authority, be they workers, the unemployed, students, feminists, the youth, or ethnic and religious minorities. It is about trying to build an example — or sample — of the new free life, not only as a living manifestation of its potential presence, but also as a means to achieve that society.

I think that articulates quite nicely some issues to do with evangelism and its ethical implications. I wouldn't have used the phrase 'practising authority upon them' of my own accord, but it does say neatly what one of the problems can be. But then so is his 'another perspective' useful to help us to understand how a re-imagined evangelism could be. Working, as I do, in a context where the explicit 'contract' is to avoid proselytism, this perspective is useful: there is a difference between promoting ones views in a harassing or even bullying way and making a perspective or a set of facts and interpretations available to those to whom it may be relevant. I would say the former is proselytism, the latter is part of a free society.

Article here: http://peacenews.info/node/7061/anarchist-among-jihadists