What are religious fanatics?

Question

How would you define religious fanaticism?

Answer 1

A person whose 'personal' identity has become so entwined with their religious identity that they cannot emotionally or psychologically abide anyone who does not 'believe' as they. Those people (infidels, non-believers, the unsaved, etc etc) thus become 'attackers' who (when defeated) become symbolic 'sacrifices' the 'devout' offer to their 'God' in order to sustain the fragile symbiosis to which they have surrendered themselves.

In other words, fanatics cannot deviate from 'doctrine' because to do so would mean that the building block upon which it has been placed (their own sense of self) would be undone if it were changed or altered. A fanatic is thus one who cannot abide change.

Answer 2

The definition of a religious fanatic would be broad. Look to history to see what it is. Savonarola of Florence, Osama Bin Laden of the mid east, Jim Jones from the states. Here you have three different forms of fanaticism at it's worst.
Mother Theresa, Joan of Arc, Pope John Paul 2, are three example of the worthy fanatics.
The physician Luke of the New Testament, Saul who was a Rabbi renamed Paul, would be two examples of Holy fanatics.
It is a very broad definition throughout history, choose the one you like to use and it would reflect on your state of mind towards religion.

Answer 3

Monday, July 18, 2005

Christian Terrorist Rudolph Sentenced
What the Rightwing Press Will not Say

Notorious Christian terrorist Eric Rudolph was sentenced to two life terms on Monday. The one-time fugitive had carried out four bombings that terrorized the southeastern areas of the United States. Among his crimes were the blowing up of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed a policeman, and a bombing of the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, Georgia.

As his sister-in-law made clear, Rudolph is driven by the ideology of the "Christian Identity" hate group. Terry Nichols of the Oklahoma City bombing was likewise connected to Christian identity and their "Elohim City".

Of course, you won't see the headline above in American newspapers, even though any Muslim who acts as Rudolph did would be called an "Islamic terrorist" (a particularly objectionable term because "Islamic" means "having to do with the Muslim faith). It is like talking about "terrorism rooted in Christianity."

Other things you won't see in the American press about this story (satire alert):

Thomas Friedman will not write an op-ed for the New York Times about what is wrong with white southern Christian males that they keep producing these terrorists. He will also not ask why Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are not denouncing Eric Rudolph every day at the top of their lungs.

No reporter will interview frightened Iraqis about their fears at hearing that there are 138,000 armed Christians in their country belonging to the same faith as the bomber, Rudolph, some of them from his stomping grounds of Florida and North Carolina.

Daniel Pipes will not write a column for the New York Post suggesting that white southern Christians be put in internment camps until it can be determined why they keep producing terrorists and antisemites.

George W. Bush will not issue a statement that "Christianity is a religion of peace and we will not allow the Eric Rudolphs to hijack it for their murderous purposes."

Frank Gaffney will not write a column for the Washington Post castigating the Republican Party for appeasement in surrendering to the terrorist threats of radical Christians, by now opposing reproductive rights.

Max Boot will not point out that if the United States could only keep the Philippines in the early twentieth century by killing 400,000 Filipinos, than that was what needed to be done, and if the US can only beat back radical Christians by killing 400,000 of them, then that may just be necessary.

Pat Buchanan will not write a column blasting King George III for having promoted the illegal immigration into the American south of criminal elements, whose maladjusted descendants are still making trouble.

posted by Juan @ 7/18/2005 06:34:00 PM

Answer 4

A religious fanatic take everything about their religion and follow it to the teeth. Also, they usually completely disregard every religion other than their own and sometimes bible bash other religion.

Answer 5

It is when a person goes to extreme measures to defend or justify his/her religious beliefs. Some have healthy, beneficial means, like dedicating one's life and service to his/her respective Supreme Being (example, giving charity for the rest of one's life, or giving away all of one's possessions to the poor), while others can kill, steal, or torture people in faith.

Answer 6

Fanatic is anyone who trows something he owns at you.
Religious fanatic is someone that throws his belief at you. For a wider effect this trowing is usally accompanied by some kid of bum-bum hardware or easier ones.

Answer 7

I would define it as a person and/or group of people whose sole focus of life is based upon religion... like religious OCD.
They are willing to do anything (and I do mean ANYTHING!) for the "good" of their gospel.

Answer 8

A terrorist in all fashions. These are people who cannot think for themselves or see anything past their God. They are willing to die and to kill for their beliefs. They are... fanatics.

Answer 9

someone who has not learned gods love 4 all mankind

Answer 10

People who have a form of godliness

but deny the power of God

People who have spirit of religion and know not God............

it's an evil spirit.....................