Religious Fanaticism

[Suzie]

Do you believe there is such a thing as religious fanaticism? If so, what are your thoughts/views about it and how do you define it?

[Jane_Doe]

Totally a thing, and not good.  It is when religious fervor is taken to an extreme level, particularly that causes harm to other people.  It's not something that's easy to draw a line in the sand to define it binary style.

[mordorbund]

Religious fanatics come in two stripes:

1. Anyone who adheres to their religion more strictly than I do
2. Anyone whose religion is too different from mine

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, Suzie said:

Do you believe there is such a thing as religious fanaticism? If so, what are your thoughts/views about it and how do you define it?

 

I believe there is a lot of religious and political fanatics.    Often, I use the term that such fanatics will stand in the light of the bright sun at noon day and declare it night.

It is my belief that such fanatics come from those that have such false faith in what they want to believe that they will ignore even a preponderance of empirical evidence to the contrary to their belief.  Then at the same time unwilling to consider any possibility that they do not have all the truth of the matter.

My entire life I have struggled with the concept that we LDS do not really have a testimony unless we can say we “know” something.  My question here is – is it better to have knowledge or faith?  Can we not have a testimony based on faith?

I personally have had some experiences – like with the Book of Mormon (and a few other principle things) that go far beyond the concepts of faith in that I have experience that I cannot come close to explain or understand to any degree from my scientific background.   I know through the revelations of the spirit that the Book of Mormon is true – but I cannot prove it – not to myself let alone anyone else.  But then there is a preponderance of empirical (non-spiritual) evidence to support my understanding and little evidence otherwise.

I am content to say I believe or I have faith – but I am not content to explain much about what I think I know – About anything.  I do believe that I know that I love my wife – but when she bumps her head on a cupboard door I left open – I have no answer when she asks, “If you love me why did you leave the cupboard door open for me to hit my head on it?”

 

The Traveler

[Mike]

1 hour ago, mordorbund said:

Religious fanatics come in two stripes:

1. Anyone who adheres to their religion more strictly than I do
2. Anyone whose religion is too different from mine

Hahaha, to be sure. So it would seem that one person's fanaticism is directly proportional to the degree that his or her behavior annoys us.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Mike

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

I believe there is a lot of religious and political fanatics.    Often, I use the term that such fanatics will stand in the light of the bright sun at noon day and declare it night.

It is my belief that such fanatics come from those that have such false faith in what they want to believe that they will ignore even a preponderance of empirical evidence to the contrary to their belief.  Then at the same time unwilling to consider any possibility that they do not have all the truth of the matter.

My entire life I have struggled with the concept that we LDS do not really have a testimony unless we can say we “know” something.  My question here is – is it better to have knowledge or faith?  Can we not have a testimony based on faith?

I personally have had some experiences – like with the Book of Mormon (and a few other principle things) that go far beyond the concepts of faith in that I have experience that I cannot come close to explain or understand to any degree from my scientific background.   I know through the revelations of the spirit that the Book of Mormon is true – but I cannot prove it – not to myself let alone anyone else.  But then there is a preponderance of empirical (non-spiritual) evidence to support my understanding and little evidence otherwise.

I am content to say I believe or I have faith – but I am not content to explain much about what I think I know – About anything.  I do believe that I know that I love my wife – but when she bumps her head on a cupboard door I left open – I have no answer when she asks, “If you love me why did you leave the cupboard door open for me to hit my head on it?”

 

The Traveler

D&C 46:13-14 says to some it is given to know, to others to merely believe (paraphrasing).  So yes, a faith based testimony is just as worthy as a knowledge based testimony.  Also, it is axiomatic that where much is given, much is required.  Having a truly knowledge based testimony in every way means you may have a lot more to live up to than the rank and file, e.g. Joseph Smith.  I don't know about you, but I don't think I am ready to live up to that standard.  Church history is full  of people who probably did truly know then failed miserably (and sometimes disasterously, as in son of perdition disasterously) - Cain, King Saul, David, Solomon, Judas, David Whitmer, Sidney Rigdon... This is probably why true full knowledge based testimonies are not necessarily common- a strong faith-based testimony will get you to the Celestial Kingdom with perhaps less risk.

Edited February 18, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[Anddenex]

4 hours ago, Suzie said:

Do you believe there is such a thing as religious fanaticism? If so, what are your thoughts/views about it and how do you define it?

Do you believe there is such a thing as religious fanaticism? Yes.

If so, what are your thoughts/views about it? True religious fanaticism isn't good; however, it really depends on who is calling a person a religious fanatic. If a fellow Mormon considers me a religious fanatic because I do not support SSM (an easy extreme issue to point out not starting a SSM conversation), I am OK with this. I simply ask myself where do the Brethren stand? If I stand with them, I stand with God and being called a religious fanatic when I stand with God -- fine by me. 

Nephi was a religious fanatic as defined by his brethren Laman & Lemuel. He was excessively enthusiastic with regard to obtaining brass plates and definitely a bore in not willing to have fun on the boat. Nephi's beheading of Laban by today's standards would be considered fanatic. 

The children of Israel and the genocide of an entire population of enemies would definitely be considered religious fanaticism. 

If Richard Dawkins or any other atheist defines my enthusiasm to follow God as "fanaticism" -- fine by me. 

What appears evident, as defined by our modern society, the Bible, the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants (Pioneers) would be considered religious fanatics -- via presentism. 

How do you define it? When enthusiasm and action extends beyond being guided by the Spirit of truth leading to religious hobbies, itching ears, and other forbidden paths.

[Guest]

There is such a thing as religious fanaticism.  And there are some very few people claiming to be Mormons who are, in fact, religious fanatics.

Many years ago I heard of a Mormon who had a kid who broke a leg on Sunday.  Most of us would have taken the kid to the hospital to get their leg put in a cast, but not this brother.  He apparently decided taking the kid to the hospital would be breaking the Sabbath.  So, he had the kid lay on the couch perfectly still, all day long, until Monday morning, when he finally took the kid to the hospital to get a cast.

In case you are wondering, this is NOT OK behavior and it is NOT condoned by the Church in any way, shape, or form.  Taking care of your child's health trumps observing the Sabbath.  I would possibly consider this incident to be a form of child abuse, and now that I am an adult I would not hesitate to call CPS over something like this.  I would like to think this is basic sense, but apparently not to some.

That is religious fanaticism - taking a commandment so far from its intent that you actually end up committing a bigger sin than breaking the commandment in the first place.

Edited February 18, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[zil]

33 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

Taking care of your child's health trumps observing the Sabbath.

It doesn't trump observing the Sabbath, it is observing the Sabbath.

[Jojo Bags]

8 hours ago, Suzie said:

Do you believe there is such a thing as religious fanaticism? If so, what are your thoughts/views about it and how do you define it?

Jesus was a fanatic,  as was Joseph Smith, Moses, Abraham,  Lehi, Nephi,  Alma....  All of them taught radical concepts.  Fanaticism is in the eye of the beholder.

[Suzie]

11 hours ago, DoctorLemon said:

There is such a thing as religious fanaticism.  And there are some very few people claiming to be Mormons who are, in fact, religious fanatics.

Many years ago I heard of a Mormon who had a kid who broke a leg on Sunday.  Most of us would have taken the kid to the hospital to get their leg put in a cast, but not this brother.  He apparently decided taking the kid to the hospital would be breaking the Sabbath.  So, he had the kid lay on the couch perfectly still, all day long, until Monday morning, when he finally took the kid to the hospital to get a cast.

 

 

This is absolutely crazy, going beyond fanaticism.

[Suzie]

9 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

Jesus was a fanatic,  as was Joseph Smith, Moses, Abraham,  Lehi, Nephi,  Alma....  All of them taught radical concepts.  Fanaticism is in the eye of the beholder.

I suppose it is a matter of perspective but I want to believe anyone with some common sense will take a child who broke his leg on a Sunday to the hospital (DoctorLemon's example). This child's father didn't understand the teachings of Christ. Jesus defended the disciples when they pluck grain on the Sabbath when they were hungry, he also healed and gave the example of the ox fallen into a pit on the Sabbath. The pharisees were clearly not impressed. That's what a religious fanatic is to me, their obsessive focus on their interpretation of the law while missing what is truly important.

Some years ago, Elder Bednar gave a talk  and said that disciples of Christ do not become fanatics or extremists and they are not overzealous. He also quoted President Joseph F. Smith who stated:

“We frequently look about us and see people who incline to extremes, who are fanatical. We may be sure that this class of people do not understand the gospel. They have forgotten, if they ever knew, that it is very unwise to take a fragment of truth and treat it as if it were the whole thing” (

Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], 122).

 

 

[JohnsonJones]

Off topic, but relavant.  On the broken leg thing, I have had health insurance that had policies of only covering you when you went to an assigned medical provider.  AS these medical providers were not open on Sunday, it meant unless you wanted to pay for it yourself, risk bill collectors if you didn't (even if the hospital is required to help you, they can also collect the money, or try to), you HAD to go on another day to get medical care.  They allowed you to go to certain clinics on Saturday, but nothing they covered was open on Sunday.

The only exceptions were things that fell under what THEY considered emergencies.  Broken bones did not count.  Neither did severe allergic reactions unless you were hospitalized for them (which was frustrating, as we experienced these things personally under our insurance, such as when my wife had an allergic reaction to a medicine that was prescribed to her and started to swell up.  We went to an emergency room, but afterwards, as she was not hospitalized and simply got medicine to combat the allergic reaction, were warned by the insurance that this was not something they covered...which kind of annoys me, even today).

In the light that insurance companies can try to force such things, I'm not sure if a broken bone that was not taken to an emergency room is necessarily abuse, as waiting to see a medical provider outside the emergency room (which is also cheaper for the insurance companies I might add) seems to be encouraged by a few of the insurance companies out there.

Is it annoying...absolutely.  However, they do not view it as life threatening apparently.

[Jojo Bags]

2 hours ago, Suzie said:

I suppose it is a matter of perspective but I want to believe anyone with some common sense will take a child who broke his leg on a Sunday to the hospital (DoctorLemon's example). This child's father didn't understand the teachings of Christ. Jesus defended the disciples when they pluck grain on the Sabbath when they were hungry, he also healed and gave the example of the ox fallen into a pit on the Sabbath. The pharisees were clearly not impressed. That's what a religious fanatic is to me, their obsessive focus on their interpretation of the law while missing what is truly important.

 

I couldn't agree with you more.  Doctors are good for broken bones (I've had plenty of them) and necessary surgery among other things.  However....

I'm not sure if I'm misreading your question and comment, but what if the person(s) or group doing the labeling are wrong?  The pharisees were not interested so much in religious observance as interested in maintaining their power, control, and position within the Jewish nation.  Their obsession on the laws was unrighteous dominion and was used to control the common Jew.  I agree that obsession with gospel hobbies is a problem, but what if the "obsessive focus" on certain subjects is what is needed?  I've heard people in different wards grumble about the Brethren's focus on the basics of study, prayer, church attendance, etc.  I've heard people say, "I wish they'd talk about something else."  I've read of BYU professors who called Pres. Benson obsessive in his losing fight against socialism, yet we are warned specifically about an end time secret combination that would seek to overthrow the freedom of all nations (Ether ch. 8).  There is one political science professor currently employed by BYU (can't remember his name) specifically who wrote a Facebook post about this.  This professor is from the former communist block of East Germany.

On the other hand, there can be an obsessive lack of focus on subjects that need focusing on.  Pornography is a good example.  In every single ward and stake I've been in, the problem of pornography among the men and women of the church is almost never mentioned, yet an overwhelming majority of men and a substantial minority of the women have a problem with it.  I have read some stats that deal with fundamental Christians and I would consider LDS to fit that category.  At least 64% of the men and 28% of the women have a problem with porn.  When I was recently sealed to my wife, the brother who sealed us gave a small talk just prior to the ordinance.  He said that he was told by a person in the know (from the context, I took this to mean someone in a high position within the Church) that fully 85% of men and boys in the church have a problem with pornography. 

Again, fanaticism is in the eye of the beholder.

[Traveler]

I believe there is another element missing from a fanatic.   First, I want to introduce you all to a very good friend of mine.  He married a lady that is my wife’s best friend.  I am a scientist guy – my friend is anything but a scientist.  He was raised in a very simple culture (He is Polynesian if this helps).   He wants to bless everything he eats – at the place he eats it – and he wants to bless it out loud.   So here we are at a donut shop or ice-cream place and he pronounces a blessing on the treats.  He will actually say something like, “Bless these donuts (or ice-cream) to provide health and nourishment for our bodies.”  Sometimes I can hardly contain myself.

I have discussed this with my friend and my logic makes no difference to him.  When he says, he does it out of his love of G-d; I have to believe him because I know and understand his simple love.  He is 100% consistent in his desire to give thanks and ask for a blessing.  I believe G-d loves this guy and respects him more than me (me being someone that must have a logical reason for everything).  Even though his ideas or odd and very different than mine – I do not believe he is a fanatic.  Why?  Because he is honestly and completely himself and he does not expect anybody to do what he does just because he does it.  It does not bother him at all that no one else wants to bless the stuff.  It does not faze him at all that I snicker a little at him – he will just smile and wink at me.  I am happy to be with him; even when he wants to say a blessing and I will argue for him with anyone that wants to criticize him.  Even if he won’t.

To me the worse part of a fanatic is someone that want to force others support their different and very odd ideas.  Like paying someone to come to your marriage ceremony; that does not believe you should be getting married in the first place and then taking them to court because even if you pay them – they still do not want to come.  But even more is the nut job of a fanatic judge that goes along with this fanatic nonsense and punishes the person that does not want to come - even if they are paid to do so???

 

The Traveler

[Suzie]

5 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

 but what if the "obsessive focus" on certain subjects is what is needed?

I was just thinking about this last question earlier on. We all have different strengths and weaknesses. We also possess a unique personal history that reflects on our behavior and way of thinking. Maybe for some people, the way others think or behave makes little sense but perhaps if we take a psychological approach to it, we will realize that we are product of our lives and experiences therefore, maybe an "obsessive focus" on certain subjects is what the person think they need in order to cope and avoid evil otherwise they might fall again. Even though  I can understand that reasoning, I wonder how will they be able to cope like this in the long run.

 

 

[An Investigator]

18 hours ago, DoctorLemon said:

There is such a thing as religious fanaticism.  And there are some very few people claiming to be Mormons who are, in fact, religious fanatics.

Many years ago I heard of a Mormon who had a kid who broke a leg on Sunday.  Most of us would have taken the kid to the hospital to get their leg put in a cast, but not this brother.  He apparently decided taking the kid to the hospital would be breaking the Sabbath.  So, he had the kid lay on the couch perfectly still, all day long, until Monday morning, when he finally took the kid to the hospital to get a cast.

In case you are wondering, this is NOT OK behavior and it is NOT condoned by the Church in any way, shape, or form.  Taking care of your child's health trumps observing the Sabbath.  I would possibly consider this incident to be a form of child abuse, and now that I am an adult I would not hesitate to call CPS over something like this.  I would like to think this is basic sense, but apparently not to some.

That is religious fanaticism - taking a commandment so far from its intent that you actually end up committing a bigger sin than breaking the commandment in the first place.

Yes!! People taking things to extremes and believing these extremes make them more righteous, like the commandments aren't enough.    I think in this case,  Jesus healed people on the sabbath,  that's good enough for me.

[Guest]

Nephi murdered a man in cold blood because God told him to.

Abraham was going to kill his own son because God told him to.

Noah spent all his spare time, means, and energy on building an ark because God told him to.

The Israelites laid waste to many other civilizations because God told them to.

The Pioneers gave up all they had, suffered all manner of afflictions, and risked death to move to Zion because God told them to.

Elijah lived in hiding for much of his ministry because the existing government was merged with a false religion.  He did so because God told him to.

Jesus upended "other people's property" and took a scourge to those who defiled what He considered to be sacred.

Lehi spoke out against the powers that be and left all of his belongings to follow the Lord.

Joseph Smith broke down a printing press that was hindering the spread of the Word.

Now we have:

Atheists suing any small government entity because they dare to mention the name of God or do anything remotely religious in any way connected to a government entity.

GLBT suing others who refuse them service, effectively making the businessman a slave to the oen who was offended.

Muslims killing Christians and raping their wives and daughters because they believe they have more right to their religion than we do to ours.

East Indian religions are now taking to physically punishing (sometimes to death) Christians who dared to make their beliefs known.

The Westboro Baptist Church... nuff said.

[Mike]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

... nuff said.

I don't apprehend your point. ??