Why do religious adherents claim that extremists aren't a part of their religion?

[Philomath]

Any time a religious extremist does something I hear this same rhetoric.

"They aren't really a member of ___ religion."

Most recently with Muslims and ISIS I've heard this. You can claim that these extremists aren't following their religion correctly and that they aren't representatives of the religion as a whole..... but that doesn't mean that they aren't a part of that religion.

If they identify themselves as a part of that religion and use that religion as justification for their actions or to support them.......how are they not a part of that religion?

 

[Brinne]

From my experience people don't say they aren't part of the religion just that they aren't properly representing it or practicing it or going against it. However, I don't think the extremists of ISIS should be grouped in with the majority of the Muslim population. ISIS and other extremist groups are, IMO, off in their own section since they're very VERY different from the normal/majority Muslim population.

 

[beenie]

I can't say that they aren't a member of a particular religion, but I sure as hell CAN say that they aren't following it, especially when it's fairly obvious that no religion worth paper would condone much of the behavior we see today.

 

[Levite]

Any time a religious extremist does something I hear this same rhetoric.

"They aren't really a member of ___ religion."

Most recently with Muslims and ISIS I've heard this. You can claim that these extremists aren't following their religion correctly and that they aren't representatives of the religion as a whole..... but that doesn't mean that they aren't a part of that religion.

If they identify themselves as a part of that religion and use that religion as justification for their actions or to support them.......how are they not a part of that religion?

In my experience, the majority of religious people do not claim that religious extremists are not part of their religion so much as that they claim that religious extremists are not practicing their religion correctly or appropriately, and/or are misrepresenting inauthentic or false teachings as correct or true teachings within the religion.

I can certainly say that there are some appalling and embarrassing extremist groups and communities in my religion-- none quite so horrendous as ISIS or Al-Qaeda, I admit, but unpleasant enough-- but while I frequently hear people say that they are twisting, abusing, or otherwise torturing Judaism, I do not, as a rule, hear people say that they are not Jews.

I usually hear similar things from my Christian and Muslim colleagues about the embarrassments of their own faith traditions.

 

[icehorse]

The problem with ISIS, Boko Haram type groups that is that they're the only ones that seem to be applying Occam's razor to their religion. It's the moderates who have to do the mental gymnastics.

 

[s2a]

As I am not a member of any club that would invite me to membership. I can honestly say..."I don't know".

Just generally speaking tho', it's most likely fair to conclude that any focused "club" aligned with any broader "faith" IS "EXTREME". Catholics do that a lot. To lesser degrees, so do Jews. So...finding Muslims with "EXTREME" ideals is hardly unexpected, original, or unique.

Long before the advent of "Mohammed" as "the TRUE" prophet, other religions preceding have fairly claimed (long enough) their own brand of "extremists" (which kinda rhymes with "excrement's", but undoubtedly coincidental).

NO human long outlasts the accountings of more than four/five generations that follow..., yet I've yet to hear even one avowed and prominent adherent insist that THEIR "god" will be sure to send yours to Hell, unless of course, they happen to kill you before facing any issues of some "divine" justice and dispensation.

I don't fear these adherents. They don't frighten me. They are simply cowards in masks that hide in the dark. You got nothing I need, want, or accept.

You have my permission to go away in peace, or just perish very badly.

Come knock on my door and try to "convert" me.

I'll invite you to examine another definition of "holey".

 

[ChristineES]

There is no way I can deny that there has never been any extremists in my faith. If they call themselves that faith, we can't really verify it. It is very easy to say "He doesn't behave the way our teachings are", mostly because it's usually true; but as for them actually being a member of the faith, we can't really deny them, either, as sad as that is. This is what I mean when I say such things as "It isn't the faith that's the trouble, it's some of the people who follow (or say they follow) the faith that are the trouble".

Edited to add: The reason people balk at calling them their faith is because they don't want to believe that someone of the same faith would do such things. People want to save face and don't want their faith given "a bad name" (so to speak). (You really can't blame them)

 

[Sunstone]

As I am not a member of any club that would invite me to membership. I can honestly say..."I don't know".

Just generally speaking tho', it's most likely fair to conclude that any focused "club" aligned with any broader "faith" IS "EXTREME". Catholics do that a lot. To lesser degrees, so do Jews. So...finding Muslims with "EXTREME" ideals is hardly unexpected, original, or unique.

Long before the advent of "Mohammed" as "the TRUE" prophet, other religions preceding have fairly claimed (long enough) their own brand of "extremists" (which kinda rhymes with "excrement's", but undoubtedly coincidental).

NO human long outlasts the accountings of more than four/five generations that follow..., yet I've yet to hear even one avowed and prominent adherent insist that THEIR "god" will be sure to send yours to Hell, unless of course, they happen to kill you before facing any issues of some "divine" justice and dispensation.

I don't fear these adherents. They don't frighten me. They are simply cowards in masks that hide in the dark. You got nothing I need, want, or accept.

You have my permission to go away in peace, or just perish very badly.

Come knock on my door and try to "convert" me.

I'll invite you to examine another definition of "holey".

WTF? The OP asked about extremists professing to be members of this or that religion, NOT "What's your least convincing imitation of 'Internet Macho'?" Jeebers! Drink much?

 

[s2a]

There is no way I can deny that there has never been any extremists in my faith. If they call themselves that faith, we can't really verify it. It is very easy to say "He doesn't behave the way our teachings are", mostly because it's usually true; but as for them actually being a member of the faith, we can't really deny them, either, as sad as that is. This is what I mean when I say such things as "It isn't the faith that's the trouble, it's some of the people who follow (or say they follow) the faith that are the trouble".

While I admire admire your candor in reply, I remain disturbed that you refuse to alienate or chastise any adherent members you feel remain within the folds of your own professed "faith".

You recall (to my mind) those amongst (otherwise) organized "societies" that may not accept their distinct "views/methods" in gaining "converts" from even admitted "rogues" within that "faith".

That's...a cop-out. Big Time.

Either take out the trash, or hop in the bin of collected unwanted waste.

Stop apologizing for, or excusing, "extremists" if they do NOT exemplify your "values" or ideals.

It's time.

 

[psychoslice]

No religion is perfect, because no one following religion is perfect.

 

[s2a]

WTF? The OP asked about extremists professing to be members of this or that religion, NOT "What's your least convincing imitation of 'Internet Macho'?" Jeebers! Drink much?

Yes, yes I do.

I believe I addressed the OP with adequacy.

What you smokin' dude?

Never-mind, it's no concern of mine.

Do continue...

 

[beenie]

While I admire admire your candor in reply, I remain disturbed that you refuse to alienate or chastise any adherent members you feel remain within the folds of your own professed "faith".

You recall (to my mind) those amongst (otherwise) organized "societies" that may not accept their distinct "views/methods" in gaining "converts" from even admitted "rogues" within that "faith".

That's...a cop-out. Big Time.

Either take out the trash, or hop in the bin of collected unwanted waste.

Stop apologizing for, or excusing, "extremists" if they do NOT exemplify your "values" or ideals.

It's time.

How on earth is one to "take out the trash" of extremism? I would love for them to go away somehow, but can you explain how one is supposed to do this without violence, which is against most religious doctrine?

 

[rusra02]

Why do members of organized crime and drug lords pretend to be upstanding citizens, even benefactors? Religions hide behind a veneer of righteousness but their works betray what they are. "Be on the watch for the false prophets who come to you in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? *Likewise, every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit.*A good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. *Every tree not producing fine fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." (Jesus Christ, Matthew 7:15-19)

 

[Revoltingest]

It's the old "No True Scotsman" method of distancing themselves from the bad pennies of their religion.
If Psychoslice got caught stealing cars, I'd deny that he's a "true" RF member, cuz we don't do things like that.
(Btw, don't leave your keys in the ignition around him....just in case.)

 

[LuisDantas]

It is of course just natural for people to feel that extremists (or in some cases, people who are too moderate) are not fair representation of the same Faith they claim allegiance to.

In most cases, people want to seek refuge in the perception of one's own religion as a safe and wise haven. It is certainly unusual and arguably unproper to remain in a religion we do not find healthy.

I assume most people simply end up hoping no one will lend much importance to those they disagree with. That is arguably a mistake. Caring for one's religion must, IMO, involve also standing for the health of its doctrine and making a point of challenging excesses and serious misguidance.

However, it seems to me that exercing such challenges is never particularly safe or pleasant, and in some cases may be an exercise in futility. It is perhaps more of an affliction for Islam (and Christianity) because they are so often so reliant on scripture and faith in God, though.

 

[sandandfoam]

Is the term 'religion' so broad as to be meaningless?
I think so.
It could be argued for example that the Westboro Baptist church and Unitarians are members of the same religion. To my mind that would be daft.
Are Islamists practicing the same religion as Badshah Khan? For the life of me I cannot see it.

 

[Quintessence]

In general, people do not want to associate themselves with groups that are out of favor or demonized in the eyes of others. The reasons for this are obvious: being associated with demons means you too will be treated as a demon. It is in the interest of your own self-preservation to not get lumped in with a crowd of people that are ostracized by others. To that ends, people will take all sorts of measures to distinguish themselves from those branded as demons by others. The precise form it takes will vary, but the overarching purpose is the same: "I am not the same as those people, so do not treat me like those people and do not judge my fellows like those people."

This is so basic to human social interactions and cognitive heuristics I don't see it ever going away. We will always be lumping people into categories to create cognitive shorthands in our minds, so we will always be making errors in judgement and generalizations that may be harmful to some particular group. On the other hand, these same shorthands are also tremendously useful and often correct, which is likely why the Spirit of Evolution has preserved it in our species.

 

[LuisDantas]

Is the term 'religion' so broad as to be meaningless?

Quite often.

I think so.
It could be argued for example that the Westboro Baptist church and Unitarians are members of the same religion. To my mind that would be daft.
Are Islamists practicing the same religion as Badshah Khan? For the life of me I cannot see it.

I certainly see your point.

 

[Yerda]

The problem with ISIS, Boko Haram type groups that is that they're the only ones that seem to be applying Occam's razor to their religion. It's the moderates who have to do the mental gymnastics.

Can you elaborate upon this, please?

 

[paarsurrey]

Any time a religious extremist does something I hear this same rhetoric.

"They aren't really a member of ___ religion."

Most recently with Muslims and ISIS I've heard this. You can claim that these extremists aren't following their religion correctly and that they aren't representatives of the religion as a whole..... but that doesn't mean that they aren't a part of that religion.

If they identify themselves as a part of that religion and use that religion as justification for their actions or to support them.......how are they not a part of that religion?

Why do religious adherents claim that extremists aren't a part of their religion?

Simply because the acts they do are not in the teachings of the religion.

Regards