What is a religious extremist?

[stevecanuck]

I go for neither, an extremist to me is one that either does do or intends to do demonstrable harm on the basis of their religious beliefs.

Yes, however the question is whether or not such a person has to extrapolate the tenets of his religon, or merely follow what is clearly stated without deviation.

If one's religious tenets were entirely peaceful it would seem to me an oxymoron to call them a religious extremist just because they followed their tenets to the letter in my view.

A Jain who avoids accidentally stepping on ants would probably qualify under the definition of extremist because they believe that "that the path to enlightenment is through nonviolence and reducing harm to living things (including plants and animals) as much as possible."

 

[Brickjectivity]

An extremist of any kind religious or otherwise is someone who does not recognize that there is higher and lower truth. The lower truth may conflict with the higher, given context. This means they insist upon complete consistency in all of their experiences, but complete consistency is a child's fantasy. Unfortunately truth is often like a ball in a game, and sometimes the same ball is used for different games. Children and extremists do not handle this well. They cannot accept necessary lies nor truths which are true in one room and false in another room.

Even my post here is unacceptable to an extremist. They cannot accept it. To the extremist it must contain at least one lie, because it suggests higher and lower truth and truth which is changed by context. There are no necessary lies to them. This, however, is the adult human experience of reality.

"How then" the extremist asks "can you make sense of the world?" One piece at a time. That is how.

 

[stevecanuck]

Extremism relates to someone holding a series of religious/ideological views considered outside the normal and acceptable by the person using the term.

It appears you have chosen the second option.

For me, they would also have to advocate acting on them.

Advocating action fits regardless of which option is chosen.

Someone who follows their personal interpretation of the tenets of their ideology or religion in great detail wouldn’t necessarily be an extremist, fundamentalist or any singular label.

How about 'strict adherent'?

It would depend on what their ideology/religion is, how they interpret it and your attitude towards it.

Again the word 'interpret' implies you favor option 2.

I broadly agree with this, but think even peaceful belief systems can be austere, intolerant and judgemental in a manner that could be considered extreme.

I think you could be a Jain extremist for example.

Agree.

 

[stevecanuck]

Well, no religion has a true message. That's why there are so many divisions in religions, like a theological buffet that has to apveal to many tastes.

What I meant was the 'actual' message being conveyed. Whether or not it's true is not what I meant. Apologies. I'm going to edit that if I can.

 

[stevecanuck]

An extremist to my mind is notable due to a suspension of basic facts and knowledge, like we see in creationists, and/or believe in a rigid set of moral codes that also violate the rights of others to some degree.

All of that could be contained within a given religion. If a person believes all that and tries to live it, then you're describing option 1.

This can mean the actions of evangelicals taking away abortion rights, to book banning, to suicide bombing, etc. An extremist has an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society.

Which could be written "An extremist A religion has espouses an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society."

 

[stevecanuck]

There is a strange kinship between some anti-theists and religious fundamentalists whereby they tend to ignore historical reality and insist that the fundamentalists are indeed the only ones being honest and practicing the correct version of the religion.

Determining that requires judging just how clear the message is.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

All of that could be contained within a given religion. If a person believes all that and tries to live it, then you're describing option 1.



Which could be written "An extremist A religion has espouses an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society."

An ideology espouses an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society.

 

[stevecanuck]

To me a religious extremist is one example of a fanatic. A fanatic is single-minded and has excessive zeal. This often leads to extreme behavior of one sort or another. It can and does lead to the sense that if you don't agree with the fanatic you are less than human and should be forced to do what the fanatic wants or killed in the extreme case.

That is one example. Jains and Mennonites could be called equally extreme in their passivism.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

An ideology espouses an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society.

Like cattle rustling and making pacts with the devil?

HACIENDA DE CHALGUAYACO EKLIPSE DE LUNA video oficial

EKLIPSE DE LUNA presenta este sencillo homenaje a las comunidades de Galindez y el Pilón cauca , gente trabajadora y emprendedora. agradecimientos muy especiales al señor rector JOSE ALIRIO IBARRA GONZALES , a la profesora corrida LOLA GRUESO y a su grupo de estudiantes de la institución educativa DOS RÍOS.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Like cattle rustling and making pacts with the devil?

HACIENDA DE CHALGUAYACO EKLIPSE DE LUNA video oficial

EKLIPSE DE LUNA presenta este sencillo homenaje a las comunidades de Galindez y el Pilón cauca , gente trabajadora y emprendedora. agradecimientos muy especiales al señor rector JOSE ALIRIO IBARRA GONZALES , a la profesora corrida LOLA GRUESO y a su grupo de estudiantes de la institución educativa DOS RÍOS.

I don't understand.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I don't understand.

See here:

Post in thread 'Does any supernatural god exist?'
Does any supernatural god exist?

Post in thread 'Does any supernatural god exist?'
Does any supernatural god exist?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

See here:

Post in thread 'Does any supernatural god exist?'
Does any supernatural god exist?

Post in thread 'Does any supernatural god exist?'
Does any supernatural god exist?

That is beyound me. That you can make sense of it, good for you.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

That is beyound me. That you can make sense of it, good for you.

This is Lola and her school:

Sur Real - La pedagogía de la corridez (Capítulo completo)​

 

[F1fan]

All of that could be contained within a given religion. If a person believes all that and tries to live it, then you're describing option 1.



Which could be written "An extremist A religion has espouses an extreme view that defies basic, accepted norms of society."

Yet religions are common and basic lore are norms. It’s extremism that deviates from the norm in some negative and/or harmful way.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

That is beyound me. That you can make sense of it, good for you.

Incidentally, just in case you didn’t notice, the second link above is to a DeepL translation into English.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Incidentally, just in case you didn’t notice, the second link above is to a DeepL translation into English.

I did notice.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I did notice.

It’s from the PhD dissertation by the anthropologist who made a career studying afropatiana religion and culture.

Here’s the author getting a selfie.

Con la maestra Lola Grueso- de Patia​

And here she is doing fieldwork for her dissertation.

Anthropology is hard work, as you can see:

TUNO Patia VIOLINES

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It’s from the PhD dissertation by the anthropologist who made a career studying afropatiana religion and culture.

Here’s the author getting a selfie.

Con la maestra Lola Grueso- de Patia​

And here she is doing fieldwork for her dissertation.

Anthropology is hard work, as you can see:

TUNO Patia VIOLINES

Okay, but I am slow and not that smart.
Explain the point of the posts you have made about this in as simple words as possible.

 

[Nakosis]

I go for neither, an extremist to me is one that either does do or intends to do demonstrable harm on the basis of their religious beliefs.

If one's religious tenets were entirely peaceful it would seem to me an oxymoron to call them a religious extremist just because they followed their tenets to the letter in my view.

Would you consider allowing a ban on abortion demonstrable harm?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Sermon on the Mount list the Beatitudes, blessings to come, and in no way relates to this Apoplectic mumbo-jumbo that was twisted and wrung out of the early teachings in the 6th century to control the masses through fear and intimidation.

I have no idea what 6th Century "mumbo-jumbo" you're talking about. I'm talking about what's actually in the Gospels.

BTW - my memory was off. I thought that the "seven woes" were part of the Sermon on the Mount; turns out they're later in Matthew.

That being said, the Sermon on the Mount have enough threats of violence on their own. They refer to "fiery hell" (Matt 5:22), "hell" (5:30), "destruction" for non-followers (Matt 7:13), and throwing people "into the fire" (Matt 7:19).

And even in the Apostles Creed, the words of judgement say nothing of horrific punishment as the "controllers" formulated out of many of the texts.

They refer to judgment for an audience that would have understood what running afoul of God's judgment entails.

I'm not 100% sure what the most common phrase in the Gospels is, but "wailing and gnashing of teeth" has to be in contention (8 times).

That's why I stated the "history, or tradition" to clarify what has been used and abused from the loving message of hope, brotherhood, and endurance that is the core to Christianity in is pure and abiding form. And yet many churches close their services with “as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.”

There is no "pure and abiding form" of Christianity. There's just what it is, which changes somewhat over time.

Christianity is a diverse religion; I don't think there's any specific tenet of Christianity that every Christian believes and denomination proclaims, but there are some things that are so common that they're almost universal. My general impression is that, among Christians, a belief in violence for dissenters is probably not as common as Trinitarianism, but more common than belief in the Virgin Birth. Do you have a different impression?