Into That Darkness...The Mind Of The 'True Believer'

[LarsMac]

So the great myth of cheese pervades.

Heretics, all.

May the great mouse send his minions to nibble thy bread, and thy grain. (Not to mention thy graham crackers. )

[albertpollard]

Sheaves people, Sheaves!

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1305130 wrote: If Josef Mengele was insane then was Tomás de Torquemada? What makes one mad and the other a religious fanatic? Why is someone blowing up an abortion clinic in the states or killing an abortion doctor not as bad as a suicide bomber blowing up a bus on iraq? why is one action extreme but understandable and the other the act of a religious fanatic?
If you mean by a 'religious fanatic' someone whose mind has become so deranged by religion that they are prepared to commit murder and mayhem then surely the Reverend Michael Bray fits the bill.

Bray was convicted in the mid-eighties of fire-bombing seven abortion clinics in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. He is the author of the underground manual Army of God which provides detailed instructions for carrying out acts of terrorism against abortion facilities. He also advocates the murder of abortion workers. He has defended the actions of his friend, the Reverend Paul Hill, who killed Dr. John Britton and a colleague outside an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida in 1994. He has also defended the actions of his associate, Rachelle Shannon, who confessed to a string of abortion clinic bombings and was convicted of the attempted murder of Dr. George Tiller outside an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas.

How does Bray as a Christian justify acts of terrorism and murder? Like countless other religious fanatics, he claims that such acts are morally required by his religion. Both Bray and the Reverend Paul Hill are convinced that Satan is at work in the world and they regard 'the cutting edge of Satan's attack' to be 'the abortionist's knife'. Among the Christian sources which Bray cites as offering support for his homicidal position are Jesus Christ, St. Augustine, John Calvin, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Reinhold Niebuhr, the Bible, and two theological movements - viz. Dominion Theology and Reconstruction Theology.

For Bray, the Christian religion provides all the justification he needs for the use of murderous violence against not just abortion workers but also to help bring about a Christian theocracy in America and, ultimately, the entire world. In the pathological mind of the Reverend Michael Bray, committing acts of terrorism and murder are 'a small price to pay for the possibility of fulfilling God's law and establishing His kingdom on earth.'

[LarsMac]

Glaswegian;1306238 wrote: If you mean by a 'religious fanatic' someone whose mind has become so deranged by religion that they are prepared to commit murder and mayhem then surely the Reverend Michael Bray fits the bill.

Bray was convicted in the mid-eighties of fire-bombing seven abortion clinics in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. He is the author of the underground manual Army of God which provides detailed instructions for carrying out acts of terrorism against abortion facilities. He also advocates the murder of abortion workers. He has defended the actions of his friend, the Reverend Paul Hill, who killed Dr. John Britton and a colleague outside an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida in 1994. He has also defended the actions of his associate, Rachelle Shannon, who confessed to a string of abortion clinic bombings and was convicted of the attempted murder of Dr. George Tiller outside an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas.

How does Bray as a Christian justify acts of terrorism and murder? Like countless other religious fanatics, he claims that such acts are morally required by his religion. Both Bray and the Reverend Paul Hill are convinced that Satan is at work in the world and they regard 'the cutting edge of Satan's attack' to be 'the abortionist's knife'. Among the Christian sources which Bray cites as offering support for his homicidal position are Jesus Christ, St. Augustine, John Calvin, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Reinhold Niebuhr, the Bible, and two theological movements - viz. Dominion Theology and Reconstruction Theology.

For Bray, the Christian religion provides all the justification he needs for the use of murderous violence against not just abortion workers but also to help bring about a Christian theocracy in America and, ultimately, the entire world. In the pathological mind of the Reverend Michael Bray, committing acts of terrorism and murder are 'a small price to pay for the possibility of fulfilling God's law and establishing His kingdom on earth.'


No argument here.

It is a trait of the true believer - regardless the cause - that HIS cause, is THE cause, and death of heretics, or unbelievers is a natural part of the justification of the cause.

Religion, politics, nationalism, or even you favorite football team can be the cause for the TB to hold dear enough that no act in defense of the cause is unwarranted.

[Glaswegian]

LarsMac;1306272 wrote: No argument here.
'Blessed are the cheese makers.' (Matthew 5: 9)

[LarsMac]

Glaswegian;1306313 wrote: 'Blessed are the cheese makers.' (Matthew 5: 9)


HERETIC!!

The mice are coming for you.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much mice. - John 12:24

[gmc]

Glaswegian;1306238 wrote: If you mean by a 'religious fanatic' someone whose mind has become so deranged by religion that they are prepared to commit murder and mayhem then surely the Reverend Michael Bray fits the bill.

Bray was convicted in the mid-eighties of fire-bombing seven abortion clinics in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. He is the author of the underground manual Army of God which provides detailed instructions for carrying out acts of terrorism against abortion facilities. He also advocates the murder of abortion workers. He has defended the actions of his friend, the Reverend Paul Hill, who killed Dr. John Britton and a colleague outside an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida in 1994. He has also defended the actions of his associate, Rachelle Shannon, who confessed to a string of abortion clinic bombings and was convicted of the attempted murder of Dr. George Tiller outside an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas.

How does Bray as a Christian justify acts of terrorism and murder? Like countless other religious fanatics, he claims that such acts are morally required by his religion. Both Bray and the Reverend Paul Hill are convinced that Satan is at work in the world and they regard 'the cutting edge of Satan's attack' to be 'the abortionist's knife'. Among the Christian sources which Bray cites as offering support for his homicidal position are Jesus Christ, St. Augustine, John Calvin, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Reinhold Niebuhr, the Bible, and two theological movements - viz. Dominion Theology and Reconstruction Theology.

For Bray, the Christian religion provides all the justification he needs for the use of murderous violence against not just abortion workers but also to help bring about a Christian theocracy in America and, ultimately, the entire world. In the pathological mind of the Reverend Michael Bray, committing acts of terrorism and murder are 'a small price to pay for the possibility of fulfilling God's law and establishing His kingdom on earth.'


No Tomás de Torquemada was doing the work of god and you never see him describes as insane, or mad or anything like that, he got carried away, he was sadistic. Mengele is a monster, a maniac, insane.

The 911 bombers are fanatics, misguided but no one describes them as insane.

Same with Bray, haven't looked at it but I bet insanity was not even considered as a plea in mitigation. If someone commits an act of religious terrorism they can't be called insane because of their religious beliefs because it implies religion is itself insane. Calling them fanatic lays the blame on them and not on the religion that made them that way.

Word Origin & History

fanatic

1520s, "insane person," from L. fanaticus "mad, enthusiastic, inspired by a god," originally, "pertaining to a temple," from fanum "temple," related to festus "festive" (see feast). Current sense of "extremely zealous," especially in religion, is first attested 1640s. The noun is from mid-17c., originally in religious sense, of Nonconformists.


interesting how words change in meaning. If you're a religious nutter you can't really call your opponent a religious nutter can you? It would be like looking in a mirror. So we play with words and try not to offend those who seek to take offence at every opportunity.

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1306445 wrote: No Tomás de Torquemada was doing the work of god and you never see him describes as insane, or mad or anything like that, he got carried away, he was sadistic. Mengele is a monster, a maniac, insane.

The 911 bombers are fanatics, misguided but no one describes them as insane.

Same with Bray, haven't looked at it but I bet insanity was not even considered as a plea in mitigation. If someone commits an act of religious terrorism they can't be called insane because of their religious beliefs because it implies religion is itself insane. Calling them fanatic lays the blame on them and not on the religion that made them that way.

interesting how words change in meaning. If you're a religious nutter you can't really call your opponent a religious nutter can you? It would be like looking in a mirror. So we play with words and try not to offend those who seek to take offence at every opportunity.
What you seem to be saying is this:

The reason why Religion is not seen as insane is because it is so pervasive.

If this is your view then I assume you would go along with the following observation made by the writer Robert M. Pirsig:

'When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.'

[gmc]

Glaswegian;1306468 wrote:

If this is your view then I assume you would go along with the following observation made by the writer Robert M. Pirsig:

'When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.'


Remember that the next time scotland are in the world cup. Not so much the rapture as total despair :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

As to whether religion is insanity or not it's a moot point. It is a very human phenomenon though.

I don't have a problem with religion I do have a problem on the insistence that the beliefs of someone who is religious are somehow supposed to be beyond criticism and the attitude that they have a god given right to impose those beliefs on everybody, for "their" own good. Those carrying out the instructions of the church in the inquisition believed they were acting to help the unbeliever by making them convert. They are no different from the likes of Bray or the 911 bombers. But secular courts can't decide they were insane because by implication all religion is insane. But I don't believe all religious people are insane.

People understood the difference between good and evil long before monotheism came along - the words good and evil are actually from pagan languages that predate Christianity.

Some give too much credit to monotheism for it's civilising effect on humanity, perhaps you blame it too much.

[Glaswegian]

gmc;1306492 wrote: Remember that the next time scotland are in the world cup. Not so much the rapture as total despair :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
'There shall be weeping and gnashing of cheese.' (Matthew 24: 51)

[LarsMac]

Glaswegian;1306468 wrote: What you seem to be saying is this:

The reason why Religion is not seen as insane is because it is so pervasive.

If this is your view then I assume you would go along with the following observation made by the writer Robert M. Pirsig:

'When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.'


Or politics.

[Glaswegian]

LarsMac wrote: So, you keep saying "religion" but it seems obvious after reading your posts for some time, that you have a particularly bothersome burr under your saddle for "Christianity"
Glaswegian;1303669 wrote: I regard Christianity and all other supernatural belief systems as exemplifying varying degrees of psychopathology, LarsMac. I'll provide examples of psychopathology from other supernatural belief systems as the thread progresses.


ISLAMIC PSYCHOPATHOLOGY

'An Islamist rebel administration in Somalia has had a thirteen year old girl stoned to death for adultery after the child's father reported that she was raped by three men...A lorry load of stones was brought for the killing...Nurses were instructed to check whether Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow was still alive when buried in the ground. They removed her from the ground, declared that she was, and she was replaced in the hole where she had been buried for the stoning to continue.' The Guardian newspaper, 3rd November 2008

'Aisha was crying when dragged to the hole to be buried with only her head protruding...As the stoning proceeded, her face and head were bleeding copiously. "It is the command of Allah", said a man.' Testimony of an anonymous eyewitness, Today, BBC Radio 4, 4th November 2008

[Glaswegian]

Glaswegian;1306468 wrote: The reason why Religion is not seen as insane is because it is so pervasive.
This view has been given fuller expression by Sam Harris in his book The End Of Faith. He writes:

'We have names for people who have many beliefs for which there is no rational justification. When their beliefs are extremely common we call them "religious"; otherwise, they are likely to be called "mad", "psychotic", or "delusional"...To be ruled by ideas...for which there is no evidence is generally a sign that something is seriously wrong with your mind. Clearly, there is sanity in numbers. And yet, it is merely an accident of history that it is considered normal in our society to believe that the Creator of the universe can hear your thoughts, while it is demonstrative of mental illness to believe that he is communicating with you by having the rain tap in Morse code on your bedroom window. And so, while religious people are not generally mad, their core beliefs absolutely are.'

[Glaswegian]

AussiePam;1305049 wrote: Yes, I know it's the religious discussion forum. I agree absolutely that psychopathology is found among some "religious" people and that some of these psychopathological religious people have gone on to do awful things. Like you, I deplore these awful things.

But the whole tenor of your approach strongly implies that it is religion itself which causes this psychopathology. It is this sweeping, unsupported - except by anecdote - idea that I take issue with.
The disclaimer that religion itself has nothing to do with psychopathology (and religious violence) is often made by religious apologists, Pam. However, when the question is put to them as to what they mean by religion itself it is generally met with a blank expression, sullen silence and a request that the subject be changed.

The implausibility of the ‘religion itself’ apologetic has been brought out well by Christopher Brookmyre in his novel A Snowball In Hell. Brookmyre’s story features a female character, Angelique de Xavia, who has been recruited by the French Security Services to penetrate mosques and gather intelligence on Islamist extremists who may be operating therein. Here is de Xavia reflecting on her own religious upbringing - Catholicism - and its psychopathological aspects:

‘The hardest part had been immersing herself in another religious culture, having spent enough years trying to scrub off the emotional detritus of the one she was brought up in. It was depressing to think how much time she must have spent hanging around mosques, considering she was already bitterly mourning every last second of her life that had been wasted inside Catholic churches. All those dreary Sunday mornings throughout childhood, surrounded by equally miserable people too inured to the mindless tedium of it to be asking themselves whether what they were doing made any sense or why they were there at all when the experience gave them nothing in return except the odd skelf in their arses.’

‘It was only when you stepped outside of it that you could truly take in the scale of the absurdity. The few times she had returned to a church service in the years since had been for weddings and funerals, and what she had seen from this refreshed perspective would have been funny if it didn’t have such disturbing ramifications. Watching this host of adults, supposedly intelligent, autonomous beings, behaving like remotely controlled mindless automatons: all simultaneously standing up, sitting down, now to their knees but resting their bums, now forward on their knees, back on their feet, knees again, now line up, close your eyes, eat a wafer, back to your knees; and throughout, chanting, chanting, all in unison, monotonal, expressionless, zombie-like. Heads nodding, Pavlovian ingrained involuntary response whenever they or someone else said the word “Jesus”.’

‘She had seen it week-in, week-out as she grew up and thought little of it other than “I’m bored” and “This means nothing to me”. Coming back to it as an adult, however, it was just scary. She was looking at mind control. Human beings reduced to puppets by sheer indoctrination, force of habit and a kind of cultural inertia: we do this because we’ve always done it. But as Voltaire put it: once you can get people to believe absurdities, you can get them to perform atrocities. Once people have allowed themselves to become puppets, never questioning what they find themselves doing or why they are doing it, then they have arrived at a dangerously negligent level of intellectual abdication, and there are some very evil people poised to exploit that.’

‘Thus she was thoroughly fed up hearing apologists saying, “It’s not religion that makes them do it.”’

~o0o~

[Glaswegian]

CHRISTIAN WOMAN CUT OFF HER BABY’S ARMS FOR GOD

In 2004, Dena Schlosser, a thirty-seven year old Christian mother from Texas, cut off the arms of her living baby daughter, Maggie, with a knife. When police arrived at Schlosser’s home in response to a 911 call they ‘found her in the living-room, covered in blood, still holding a knife’. Schlosser’s reason for carrying out this horrific act was because she wanted to ‘give the baby to God’.

You can read about this shocking case of Christian psychopathology here:

UPDATE:Dena Schlosser/Mother who cut off baby's arms-Trial

(N.B. The individual who devised the above url is not a million miles from Schlosser in terms of psychopathology.)