Christian and Biblical Fundamentalism

In an era in which the "end of ideologies" is a prophecy whose fulfillment will be always postponed, the religious ideologies promoted by Christian fundamentalist movements will exceed the traditional ideological boundaries of the territories and will manifest themselves as a source of influence, power and local reactivity, which will be felt and solved globally. Moreover, it is obvious that we found ourselves in full conflict of ideologies. Even if the Christian fundamentalism consists in religious ideologies, we should not forget that the destiny of religious ideology is similar to that of any ideology.

In the last 7-10 years, everybody heard about fundamentalism. The term use first use with a negative connotation, being associated with the Islamic religion and terrorism.

The use of the term fundamentalism involves three questions, according to Laurence J. Silberstein:

1. Is it possible that a term with a quite precise historic contextualization, intended to reflect a situation specific to the American Protestantism Christianity to be applied by reason of religious traditions outside of Christianity?

2. Is there an "ideal type" in the sense in which it is conceived by Weber as a mental construct, to suggest the legitimacy of an essential definition of fundamentalism?

3. Has the term a multicultural application or rather we should use other terms (radicalism, etc) to denote the extremist religious movements outside the Christian tradition?

The term fundamentalism is used in various contexts and with different meanings, being affected by the ambiguity of its dissolution in the common language. The term may designate heresy, intolerance, bigotry, sometimes aggressive traditionalism. But what is clear is that - as happens in the case of the term ideology-it is used most often to describe the vision of the other against which the individual option is restricted to genuine options.

Encyclopedia Britannica defines fundamentalism as being a militant conservative religion, characterized by the promotion of a strictly compliance to holy texts. As it was initially used exclusively in relation to the American Protestants who were insisting on the accuracy of the Bible, the term fundamentalism has been used more at the end of the 20th century, referring to a wide range of religious movements.

The same source defines the Christian fundamentalism as a movement in American Protestantism which appeared at the end of the 19th century, among conservative evangelical Christians, as a reaction to the theological modernism, which aimed to revise the traditional Christian beliefs to accept the new discoveries in natural and social sciences, especially the biological evolution theory.

Another definition of the Christian fundamentalism is given by Bruce Lawrence, Defenders of God:

"the affirmation of religious authority as holistic and absolute, admitting of neither criticism nor reduction; it is expressed through the collective demand that specific creedal and ethical dictates derived from scripture be publicly recognized and legally enforced."

In the United States, the Christian fundamentalism is a dynamic movement, supported by the state. Increasingly more schools and committees of parents made pressures to prohibit the teaching of evolutionism and to introduce the compulsory teaching of creationism. Examples in this regard are given by various articles published by CNN, Dallas News, MSNBC, No beliefs, About.com.

In countries like Romania, parents are free to say to their children any kind of theory about the origins of man, but this only at home. At the school, they learn what is scientifically proven. In the United States, however, parents made pressures in order that the theory from religious texts to become school disciples, replacing the science. Since education is controlled and supervised by the state and these changes are not cancelled, it can be said that the United States of America are a Christian fundamentalist state.

The Christian fundamentalism, if it is measured socially, does not have a negative connotation and can not be associated with the terrorism, as often happens. The fundamentalism was used at the beginning of the 20th century as a reaction to the theological liberalism, which itself has its source in the modernist paradigm is ironic, as the fundamentalists use the same modernism metaphysics (an approach to reality).

They state that there are certain absolute truths (perceived as axioms), which can be known with certainty; for the fundamentalists are the five basic statements (that can be called "the 5 sentences"). The fundamentalism essence that continues in the present is represented exactly by this idea, that there are certain "truths" whose debate is not allowed.

The "five fundamentals" promoted by the Christian Fundamentalism are:

- Inerrancy of the Scriptures

- The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14)

- The doctrine of substitution atonement by God's grace and through human faith (Hebrews 9)

- The bodily resurrection of Jesus (Matthew 28)

- The authenticity of Christ's miracles

The problems arise when the desire to bring in discussion the aspects that distinguish them in relation to the tradition that they claim, meaning the attempt to outline the ideological marked character of these movements, to reveal their orientation towards social and political transformation through the pursuit of a particular form of power.

The Christian fundamentalism involves an emphasized process of promoting the ideology of the religious tradition that it claims. Obviously, the ideology is not a very rigorous system of ideas. The ideology should rather be associated with a "vision" than a "doctrine". But, it always functions in the spirit of a systemic coherence.

Most theorists emphasize the ambiguous term of ideology. The ambiguity is often accompanied by the pejorative term acquired during the era of Western domination that tries to put ideologies under the sign of the end. That may explain the attitude that most ideologists have to appoint their own system as an ideology.

There is a kind of internal mechanism of self defense, which manifests itself as a methodological sincerity, which determines the theoreticians to let attracted by the extremely spread temptation of qualifying as an ideology only the other's perspective. However, we prefer at this point of discussion to keep a clear distinction between religion and ideology and to consider the theology not as a more inclusive category, but as the more elaborated form of reflection within established religions. As models of reality constructed globally, the Christian ideologies involve constructions based on the experience of humanity and on effective action, while the theologies- also an imaginative creation - are always the result of a connection between structures belonging to both sacred and transcendental.

In other words, the Christianity as a religion, in its most refined expression- the theology- represents the creation of a face. A face that can not be understood outside of the biblical revelation, with all the consequences that the theological model of the world involves; the image of a face on which, in an initial encounter always updated, is engraved by the power of a prototype that circumscribes it to a structural modeling in an interpersonal dynamic that is based on the immanence- transcendence unit.

A significant aspect of relations between Christianity and ideology is revealed by current discussions regarding the way to find some models of living together between majority groups and religious minorities. They represent a very special cultural and religious phenomenon, especially in the context of a major Church and a multitude of religious minorities that, in the virtue of human rights or individual rights, invokes the religious pluralism as a fundament of group rights.

The tolerance and multiculturalism are invoked as essential indicators in achieving a proper distinction between genuine religious traditions and more or less diffuse forms of dogmatism and intolerance that could occur and lead to manifestations of religious fundamentalism or extremism.

The rebirth of interest in religion and the global affirmation, which is more powerful, of the religious movements reveals that - without being necessary to make false prophecies regarding conflicts between civilizations or religions - the religious dimension will play, obviously, an increasing role in conflicts and it could even be a source of conflict that may have consequences on the process of globalization.

Without crediting the stereotypes of an imminent conflict between Islam and Western civilization, we can expect that the Christian and Biblical fundamentalism to lead to local conflicts that have global resonances.

One of the major problems that affect the analysis of the fundamentalist phenomenon is the difficulty to make a clear distinction between what we recognize as being a certain religion with its religious tradition and what we define as religious fundamentalism that tries to subordinate a particular religious tradition.

The distinction between the religion itself and religious fundamentalism is not easy to be done. It is clear that we can not follow the suggestions of Lawrence J. Silberstein and to judge the Christian and Biblical fundamentalism through an ideal model, a mental construct. In that case it would be necessary to show as clear as possible what characteristics we have in mind when talking about fundamentalism. However, most authors show the difficulty of giving a definition that reveals an essence of the

fundamentalism.

It's almost impossible to put into evidence a series of intrinsic characteristics that can be detected in all the repetitive movements or visions related to the Christian fundamentalism. Any analysis must consider the historical and cultural particularities, the economic and political tradition, that the movement in question is a majority faith or religious minority, and more.

An essentialist definition would lead to the impossibility of the term and we would assist to uncountable fundamentalist manifestations, without being able to speak about the presence of fundamentalism. It would result in a discussion in general terms, creating a template of fundamentalism that no longer takes into account the specificities of each religion and each movement.

The Christian fundamentalism is not a set of beliefs, but a way to make them known.

The main common characteristics of the biblical and Christian fundamentalism are the following:

1. The fundamentalism over simplifies the reality, in order to make the Christian thesis more credible, as they are apparently spiritual.

2. The fundamentalism forces dichotomies where there these don't exist, to validate its aversion to material things and ideas, issues that are not compatible to the Christian beliefs.

3. The Christian fundamentalism states that the Bible is sufficient, analyzing it throw its own assumptions, traditions and social-cultural contexts.

4. The fundamentalism is exclusivist, as it represents the only way in which God works and the world exists, according to the sacred words of the Bible.

5. The fundamentalism despises what is not biblical.

6. The fundamentalism uses the science only ideologically.

7. The fundamentalism claims to follow exactly the word of God.

8. The fundamentalism often distorts the reality, according to its beliefs.

9. The fundamentalism ignores the "complicated theologies" and the "wises speeches", but it claims to illuminate people throw translation of ancient languages.

10. The fundamentalism denies all the worldly theories, inviting people to a direct knowledge of God.

In order to understand the relation between Christian and biblical fundamentalism with modernity, it is significant the attitude toward the present history. The Christian fundamentalism has the faith that history takes place in a wrong sense, that what is evil in its pursuit is actually the modernity with its multiple appearances, and the mission of fundamentalists is to bring the history on its normal path.

This change in history is not just a matter of theological doctrine but also a practical action. In order to gain more followers of this action of restoring the history, the Christian fundamentalists try to draw the public attention by any means.

When the resources of radio, television, newspapers, school etc. are no longer sufficient, the military or paramilitary terrorism is inputted as useful means. Using these means is closely related to the mythological and cosmological aspects, throw which the war is valued in the symbolic mentality of religious fundamentalism.

A very important aspect is the way in which the Christian fundamentalism relates to the resources of cultural reproduction. First, the control over this reproduction is a major source of the legitimacy of this movement. Secondly, the more or less violent attack on the symbols and institutions of cultural reproduction has a very special place in stopping the opponent by projecting on him all the appearances related to modernity and to the historical diversion which it represents.

The term fundamentalism is considered a creation of the American media and it wasn't used outside of America before the '70s. Later, after the Revolution from Iraq ended, the fundamentalism became a global issue. Ronald Robertson (Globalization, Modernization, and Post modernization. The Ambiguous Position of Religion, in Ronald Robertson and William R. Garret, Religion and Global Order, Paragon House Publishers, New York, 1991, p. 289) mentions that the different local movements begun increasingly to accept some of the habits related to the spreading of fundamentalism, in which a main aspect is the idea that the fundamentalism is promoted by movements of spiritual renaissance or by important religious groups. John Coleman's analyses emphasize the fact that the fundamentalism is a global phenomenon, which after 1970 started to contradict all the social predictions regarding its extension at all the levels of society.

The Christian fundamentalist movements have a global development and an increased power. It is obvious that the globalization is based on the theory of the states' integration into a more coherent system of relations. But Coleman draws attention over a significant fact: understanding the globalization can be made only partial, if we don't take into account the concomitant process to globalize the religious problems and the movements associated to the religious fundamentalism, especially without the challenge that the fundamentalism proposes as religious integration beyond any distinction.

The religious fundamentalism appears not only as a reaction against modernity, but also as against a certain global model. Thus, the type of reaction developed by fundamentalists depends on the balance of forces that characterize different cultures, societies or regions.

In the same time, the Christian and biblical fundamentalism is a constitutive element of the global change, generated by the attempt to establish a certain religious tradition as a base of the global and social order, a base of a cultural identity by relating to the identity of the global culture. From a global perspective, the Christian fundamentalism is a form of anti modernism that is inevitably contaminated by modernism, by the global culture that is the modernity's culture.

Also, being part of the modernization processes, the Christian fundamentalism will have a more diminished role in relation to the development of liberal modernity, even if the fundamentalism is based on real individuals' deceptions, on global tensions and real contradictions between the local cultures and the global culture.

Works Cited

1. Armstrong, Karen (2001). The Battle for God. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 0345391691.
2. Encyclopedia Britannica
3. Bebbington, David W. (1993). "Martyrs for the Truth: Fundamentalists in Britain." In Diana Wood, ed. Martyrs and Martyrologies, Studies in Church History Vol. 30, 417-451. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, ISBN 0631188681.
4. Dollar, George W. (1973). A History of Fundamentalism in America. Greenville: Bob Jones University Press.
5. Globalization, Modernization, and Post modernization. The Ambiguous Position of Religion, in Ronald Robertson and William R. Garret, Religion and Global Order, Paragon House Publishers, New York, 1991, p. 289