Fundamentalism: The attempt to restore a unified sense of community anchored in epistemic certainties in the face of a puzzling and uncertain world.
The recent resurgence in science
denying Young Earthism among Western evangelical Christians appears to trace
back to the sixties. It is probably related to the ideological pressures that
Western Christianity came under during that decade. The assertion of a more
pronounced, emphatic and extreme belief system seems to be the manifestation of
a general psychological response when a community finds itself under the pressures
of marginalization and alienation: As society rejects the beliefs and values of
these communities, the more belligerent elements in them haul up the draw
bridges, repair the walls of defence, and generally do all they can define themselves
as a distinct holy remnant separate from their social environment, challenging
the values of their host society from their citadel. In fact they are inclined to become more vehement and convinced about the very beliefs that society rejects as crazy; as if sheer conviction conveys truth.
In effect these religious communities are returning the “compliment” of alienation by rejecting society’s values and that is likely to include its science. The likely underlying motive is the need to turn their backs on social fragmentation, rejection, anonymity, nihilism and restore a unified sense of community anchored in epistemic certainties. In these retrenched religious communities a varying blend of epistemic certainty, scriptural literalism, Gnosticism, fideism, religious legalism, paranoia and conspiracy theory feeds their mental complex. A side effect of this whole process is that liberalizing believers are purged from their ranks and subject to strident and shrill condemnation as at best bad conscience compromisers or at worst heretical apostates.
In effect these religious communities are returning the “compliment” of alienation by rejecting society’s values and that is likely to include its science. The likely underlying motive is the need to turn their backs on social fragmentation, rejection, anonymity, nihilism and restore a unified sense of community anchored in epistemic certainties. In these retrenched religious communities a varying blend of epistemic certainty, scriptural literalism, Gnosticism, fideism, religious legalism, paranoia and conspiracy theory feeds their mental complex. A side effect of this whole process is that liberalizing believers are purged from their ranks and subject to strident and shrill condemnation as at best bad conscience compromisers or at worst heretical apostates.
That the resurgence of Genesis
literalism is a recent phenomenon is in fact effectively admitted by
fundamentalist theme park manager Ken Ham himself where in a blog post entitled “Happy Reformation Day” (31 October 2013)
he applauds the reference to the 1960s YEC rival as “The Creation Reformation”. Prior to the
sixties there was only a low background of Genesis literalism, a background found amongst the more
extreme Christian sects like the Adventists, the Amish, the Jehovah’s Witnesses,
the Plymouth brethren and I guess numerous marginal fundamentalist
Christian sects in North America (See footnote *1). Since the rise of science YEC was never mainstream.
In this blog post I want to
document some of the texts I have compiled that may help demonstrate this process of neo-fundamentalist polarization against civic society.
There is a health warning I attach to all sectarian and fundamentalist religions especially when it borders on the cultish; it can be dangerous, (especially to
those seeking a revelation from God) for those who might be vulnerable to the suggestion pressures caused by the kind of emotional, social and
moral duress sects are capable of bringing
to bear on Christian believers. It is axiomatic amongst extreme sectarians that
those who don’t exclusively identify with their community have morally
compromised consciences, and an inferior faith or perhaps are even in a state of total depravity, sold out to
evil. This belief about the flawed moral state of outsiders justifies putting
moral duress on them by way of character assassination and accusations of sin. They are very quick to read moral imperfection in the behaviour of detractors. This can
have deep auto-suggestive effect on those who are already God fearers and who are aware of the human failure to fulfil moral imperatives. Some
sects are undoubtedly less extreme than others but I would advise that God
fearers, unless they are well armoured with cynical humour, are cautious in all
cases.
In this blog I want to convey
the extremes that the neo-fundamentalists are going to in their attempts to impugn the integrity and character of Christians who don’t bow to their views (and atheists! See for example the story of PZ Myers that I relate below).
***
OK, so I’ll start with some
quotes from my favorite text book fundamentalist, YEC theme park manager Ken
Ham. Although he claims that disbelief in his YEC opinions is not a salvation
stopper he has nevertheless made it clear that those opinions are being offered as a faith
testing Shibboleth. Ham makes the simple
epistemic mistake that what he
interprets from scripture is the de-facto word of God. Thus in Ham’s mind it
follows from this elementary epistemic mistake that those who oppose his opinions
– which of course he will claim to be God’s opinions – are also opposed to God
and above all to Christ.
Below I quote from Ham’s blog by way of evidence (My emphases in
bold):
Millions of Years – an attack on the Cross (June 9 2012) …..those who compromise God’s Word with millions of
years are (wittingly or unwittingly) really engaged in an attack on the Cross.
What a serious issue.
What’s the least you can believe? (March
29 2012)…..Believing in theistic evolution as a Christian means you reject the authority of God’s Word,
because the creation account in Genesis teaches a literal six-day creation (Ham quoting Steve Golden) Even the idea of “theistic evolution” is problematic,
because evolutionary ideas were created to explain
a world without God. (Ham quoting Steve Golden)
Which Jesus do you really believe in? (Dec 30 2011). Steve (Ham) shows that today
many Christian scholars who identify themselves as theological conservatives
and evangelicals are preaching a Jesus
different from the Jesus of the Bible.
More about those emboldened phrases later! But just before we leave Ham, let's be clear that he can be a menacing and intimidating person, willing to apply maximum moral duress on his detractors: Ham has little compunction about using a threat of divine displeasure and judgement to be visited on those Christians who don't agree with him:
Compromise teaching in a Christian school in Alaska (March 16 2013) Teachers like Kretschmer will be held accountable for the many students they lead astray with their compromise regarding biblical authority and undermining teaching. How very sad. And the board/administrators of such Christian schools will also be held accountable.
Compromise teaching in a Christian school in Alaska (March 16 2013) Teachers like Kretschmer will be held accountable for the many students they lead astray with their compromise regarding biblical authority and undermining teaching. How very sad. And the board/administrators of such Christian schools will also be held accountable.
Below I collect some material
from comments I have made on the churches web site “Network Norwich and Norfolk” (NN&N). From these quotes we can see how the embattled
fundamentalists turn their noisy moral, social and emotional duress up to a maximum volume. In
these comments I was responding to the posts by two fundamentalists who I name
as James May and Andrew Holland.
From an NN&N post 22/06/2011
There is something pathological
about the doctrinaire YEC community. They are obsessed with their concept of a
6000 year old creation and they will go to extraordinary lengths to insist that
other Christians follow suit. Here are some quotations from Hugh Ross’s book “Creation and Time”. Bear in mind as you
read the following quotes that Dr. Ross (an astronomer by profession) is not an
evolutionist, he believes in an anthropically universal flood, the inspiration
of scripture, has an evangelical faith and but believes in an old Earth. In some ways you might think him to be close to the YECs and yet.....
YEC AFFINITY FOR CONSPIRACY
THEORY: “When young-earth creationists
claim (As did Russell Akridge among others) that the worldwide community of secular
astrophysicists and astronomers are banded together in a God-hating conspiracy
to deceive the public about the creation date, the offence is driven deeper.
Given the tendency toward independence and nonconformity among them, it’s
absurd to suggest that tens of thousands of them would or could unanimously
carry out a plot through four decades to bamboozle the public” (P72) (Editorial note: When Ross refers to "four decades" I think he is acknowledging the "YEC reformation" of the 60s)
MAKING YEC A FAITH TEST: In the
following quote Hugh Ross tells the story of a new convert: “Almost immediately he met some fellow
Christians who happened to be young universe creationists. They insisted that
the price of his salvation was denial of the billions-of-years age of the
cosmos and the earth…..They backed their case with this Bible passage: ‘If
anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and
children, his brothers and sisters – yes even his own life – he cannot be my
disciple’ (Luke 14:26-27)”. (P159)
EVANGELISM OPPORTUNITY WRECKED
BY YECs “Another encounter took place
near Oakridge Nuclear Facility in Tennessee, where I spoke on scientific
evidence for the God of the Bible. With the room full of research physicists, I
focused on proofs from physics and astronomy for a transcendent, personal and
caring Creator. Unknown to me and the meetings organizers, a carload of YECs
had driven for four and a half hours to make a spectacle of me at this
gathering. When the question period opened they took over, attempting first to
take apart my physics and astronomy data. They were furious that the scientists
in the room would not join them in refuting my science. So blinded were they by
their indoctrination regarding the evils of belief in the antiquity of the
universe that they disrupted a meeting intended to introduce people to personal
faith in Jesus Christ (including His sacrifice to atone for our sin)” (P86)
NON YEC CHRISTIANS TO BE BARRED
CHURCH MEMBERSHIP?: Hugh Ross quotes YEC John Morris as follows: “I still am uncertain about young-earth
creationism being a requirement for church membership; perhaps it would be
proper to give new members time to grow and mature under good teaching. But I
do know one thing [young-earth] creationism should be made a requirement for
Christian leadership. No church should sanction a pastor, Sunday school
teacher, elder, or Bible-study leader who knowledgeably and purposefully errs
on this crucial doctrine” (P43))
MY COMMENT: It’s one thing to
believe YEC, it’s quite another to become obsessed by it to the extent that it
becomes an all-consuming crusade that sacrifices evangelical church life for
its version of legalism. Recall Andrew Holland’s fanatical insinuation about
making God a liar if you don’t follow Holland's views. Literalists are never subtle when it comes to imputing sinful motives:
“….the historical parts of the Bible, such as Genesis, should be
taken at face value, otherwise it is tantamount to calling God a liar! Thus the
account of creation, Noah's flood and Jonah's adventures are accurate and can
be completely trusted. They are all verified in the New Testament.” (Andrew Holland, my emphasis)
From an NN&N post 24/06/2011
We often hear Christians
referring to believers like James May (JM) and Andrew Holland (AH) as
fundamentalists. However, I think you will find that JM and AH are part of a
recent recrudescent trend that kicked in only in earnest from the sixties in
onward. This YEC trend is, in fact, more extreme than most Christians who
identified themselves with R A Torrey’s twelve volume series published between
1910 and 1915 entitled “The Fundamentals”,
a work that became the manual of the early 20th century fundamentalists. In their book
“Reason and Faith”, evangelical
Christians Roger Forster and Paul Marston comment as followers on the original
fundamentalists:
“A few points are worth spelling out in more detail here. First, by
Morris own admission [That is Henry Morris a founding father of modern YEC],
most founding fundamentalists accepted either the age-day or the gap-theory form
of creationism and he [Morris] can cite none who were young-earth
creationists….. Orr (1844-1913), who contended for a moderate Calvinist form of
historical evangelicalism in Britain and America …asserts: ‘The Bible does not
profess to anticipate the scientific discoveries of the nineteenth and
twentieth century. Its design is …..to reveal God and His will and His purposes
of grace to men, and, as involved in this, His general relation to the creative
world….Natural things are taken as they are given, and spoken of in simple,
popular language, as we ourselves every day speak of them.’” (P329, my emphasis)
Forster and Marston go on to
trace a link between contemporary YEC and Adventist prophetess Ellen G White through the
Adventist YEC apologist George McCready Price:
“What we find then, that Price’s [YEC] appeal was to his fellow
believers in the prophetess Ellen White, to some Lutheran pastors without
scientific training and to the very occasional irascible person with scientific
training. The bulk of critics of evolution did not accept flood theory. Even
the famous lawyer/politician William Jennings Bryan, who led the abortive
attack on evolution in the infamous Scopes trial, or Tennessee Monkey Trail as
it became known, was (by Morris’ own admission) an age-day theorist who
rejected Price and accepted orthodox geology” (P331)
MY COMMENT: JM and AH will try
to make out that they stand in the best traditions of the mainstream faith, but
they actually have a more natural affinity with the pre-scientific days of the
faith or to sectarian and cultic Christian figures.
From an NN&N 25/06/2011
Unfortunately today the term
“fundamentalism” has been cut adrift from its relatively moderate beginnings
and now has a de facto meaning brought about by it being linked to religious
extremists, science illiteracy and YECs. Moreover, the bad associations of the
term are being compounded by a growing association with geocentrism.
Firstly, the recent YEC attempts to solve the star light problem have lurched
towards geocentric cosmologies (See Jason Lisle and Ross Humphreys of AiG).
There is also this little piece below written by somebody who visited the
“National Bible-Science Conference” which appeared to be a Geocentric Physics
conference:
“How many of the creationists present were geocentrists, I do not
know. One Rev. Walter Lang, a Missouri-Synod Lutheran and Executive Director of
the Bible Science Association (headquartered in Minneapolis) was quite
sympathetic, and I was led to conclude that the Missouri Lutherans are bringing
back the geocentric doctrine. According to science-writer Robert Schadewald …..
five of the 18 speakers were known geocentrists. Just how fast "this
old-time astronomy" is spreading among believers in that "old-time
religion" I cannot guess, but not a single creationist spoke against it,
not even Duane T. Gish, the creationists' Lochinvar of the debate circuit.
Although he had a lot of quibbles with the thesis of one Dr. Kaufmann (who
thought Christians should be more exercise-conscious), Gish found nothing to complain
of when geocentrists were speaking…..The silence of all creationists when goof
centrists were speaking is quite puzzling. Does silence mean tacit acceptance?
Embarrassment? Or is it a case of honor among thieves: if you don't expose me,
I won't expose you.”
The full article can be found
here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/2/part3.html
What are we to make of this? Are
the YECs starting to do the Full Literalist Monty and really going the whole
hog in “taking the Bible at its (literalist) word”?
From an NN&N post 27/06/2011
As I have indicated above, I do
not accept YEC attempts to make a fundamental distinction between historical sciences
which they try to undermine with the quip “You
weren’t there” and those present tense continuous sciences like physics. Since
all information arrives at our observational door via circuitous routes in
space and time the “You weren’t there”
quip could be damagingly applied across the board and, if pressed, subvert the
whole domain of science and history. In this connection the following blog post
of mine may be of interest:
The above post links to a post
on atheist PZ Myers’ blog where he criticizes to the “You weren’t there” philosophy. The exact circumstances involve
Myers criticizing an eleven year old girl who had been taught to parrot this
quip by YEC ministries. Myers writes a gentle open letter to the eleven year
old.
Myers letter is in my opinion
very reasonable; he completely understands that the “You weren’t there” philosophy undermines not just the historical
sciences, but the whole of science (In fact ultimately it even undermines the
Bible). PZ Myers is basically assuming the world to be rational and coherent and
it is on the basis of that assumption that “You
weren’t there” nihilism is prevented from frustrating all science. Where I
would disagree with Myers is that the coherent ontology that permits science to
prosper is taken for granted by him as axiomatic; for him the highly coordinated
patterns of a rational cosmos are just descriptive brute facts of nature; end
of story. However, I would want to push the boat out further and suggest that
the coherent patterning in nature is not just descriptive but prescriptive,
with all the connotations of a guiding a-priori complex intelligence that the
term “prescriptive” entails (i.e. God)
My main reason for bringing this
up is that in spite of disagreeing with Myers on ultimate origins I’m entirely
at one with him on the assumption of the intelligibility of our world, an
intelligibility that is undermined by a thoroughgoing application of “You weren’t there” nihilism. Hence I
support Myers’ stand against implicit YEC nihilism. What I would like to point
out is that in spite of Myers reasonable and gentle open letter to an eleven
year old the YEC response to Myers was all but hysterical, triggering off a
frenzy of spiritual recrimination. He was accused of all sorts of heinous sins
such as “viciously attacking a little
girl”, and being “an instrument of
Satan” amongst other self-righteous fulminations.
Although I differ with Myers’ on
many things, in this instance I believe he has been unfairly treated by those
who profess to be Christians. My own opinion is that those professing
Christians should apologize to Myers for their treatment of him. This, I
suppose, is too much to ask, but the least they could do is engage
dispassionately with his perfectly reasonable argument rather than unfairly
assassinating his character.
From an NN&N post 15/11/2011
The YEC philosophy is at odds
with the views of many well respected Christians, evangelical and otherwise. I
list some below:
William Lane Craig – philosopher
and feared (amongst atheists) Christian debater.
David Instone-Brewer – writer of
scholarly articles in “Christianity” magazine.
Hugh Ross - astronomer and
leader of “Reasons to Believe”.
Davis A Young – Christian
geologist and author of “The Biblical Flood”.
Roger Forster and Paul Marston -
authors of the very instructive and erudite book “Reason and Faith”.
William Dembski – a leader and
mathematician of the Intelligent design movement.
John Polkinghorne – ex particle
physicist, now a C of E theologian.
John Lennox – Oxford
Mathematician and gentlemanly Christian debater.
Francis Collins – very
successful scientist; was leader of the human genome project.
…and many more could be added.
YEC is a sectarian and marginal
philosophy which I’m glad to say seems to be becoming increasingly marginalized
amongst Christians – see http://quantumnonlinearity.blogspot.com/2011/10/good-news-from-ken-ham.html
Stop press 28/01/2014:
Adding more to the above list:
Simon Conway Morris: Cambridge evolutionary
palaeontologist
Denis Alexander: Molecular
biologist and director of the Faraday institute.
See also:
See also:
These are the Christian
scientists, so diverse in their interests and specialisms who, according to the Kentucky theme park management, are “really
engaged in an attack on the Cross”, “rejecting
the authority of God’s Word,” “explaining a world without God” and "are preaching a Jesus different from the
Jesus of the Bible.” These are the words of the besieged and paranoiac
sectarian mind; it's the beginning of a kind of collective insanity, as some disturbing and well known cases suggest.
Footnote:
*1 The Jehovah's witnesses don't believe in YEC: See here: http://quantumnonlinearity.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/the-watchtower-and-creation.html. Also checking up on the cults I mention here I haven't been able to confirm either way whether they believe in YEC on not.
No comments:
Post a Comment