|
Jim Fetzer
McKnight Professor Emeritus of Philosophy
University of Minnesota, Duluth
 |
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) expresses its core argument, "The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy." |
1 | 2 | 3
Contents
Madison, WI (OpEdNews) February 22, 2009 — We live in a new “Dark Age” typified by the elevation of ideologies and contempt for science, reason, and rationality. Among the most important manifestations of this tendency is a distinctively-American brand of “fundamentalism” that finds refuge from a changing world by anchoring itself to a few, very basic, religious doctrines, the “fundamentals”, which include the Virgin Birth and the bodily resurrection. It finds solace accepting the BIBLE as the infallible word of God, which provides the ultimate foundation for the movement. It advocates creationism, creation science, and intelligent design as alternatives to the theory evolution, which it claims cannot explain the emergence of the species. In conflicts with the BIBLE, the good book as the word of God takes precedence. Evolution, accordingly, cannot be sustained.
My purpose here is to offer an overview of this phenomenon from three points of view, namely: as a religious doctrine, as a political movement, and—closely related—as a resource for public policies. Insofar as parochial schools of various faiths, as Christian grammar schools or high schools, may have a powerful motivation to slant the courses their students are provided to insure that the study of biology, for example, does not conflict with the point of view of that religion, agnosticism should prevail within our public schools. I shall endorse a principle known as “The Ethics of Belief” to identify kinds of doctrines that should not be allowed to affect public policy debates and will conclude that overcoming their influence requires a strong system of public education.
|
James Fetzer is Distinguished McKnight University Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Duluth. He has written on the philosophy of science and on the theoretical foundations of computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science. Two of his most recent books were on the evolution of intelligence and philosophical aspects of "the Christian Right's crusade against science". He is also an advocate of the 9/11 conspiracy and Kennedy assassination theories. He has published three collections of studies on the death of JFK, co-authored another on the plane crash that took the life of Senator Paul Wellstone, and edited the first book from Scholars for 9/11 Truth, an organisation he founded. Fetzer makes frequent appearances on radio and television.
You can sign up here to receive the monthly featured article by email.
These questions are assuming increased importance in American society, as states are attempting to alter the debate about abortion by redefining what it takes for a form of life to qualify as a “person”, where personhood signifies a state at which a developing entity acquires the most basic “right to life” where abortions are permissible only to preserve the life or the health of the mother. In particular, the Australian press has reported that “North Dakota lawmakers vote that 'personhood' starts at conception” (heraldsun.com.au, February 19, 2009), which seems to be an effort—no doubt motivated by fundamentalist beliefs—to undermine the decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade. This means we really have no choice but to confront fundamentalism as it encroaches on public policies.
AS A RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE
The degree of conviction evinced by fundamentalists invariably exceeds the strength of the evidence in their support. The history of the composition of the BIBLE, for example, was dependent upon an oral tradition and the vicissitudes of translation. Even the basic doctrine of the Virgin Birth appears to hinge upon the probable mistranslation of a word for “young girl” as “virgin”. This difficulty is not peculiar to Christianity, of course. In Islam, the belief that young men who die in holy wars are going to enjoy the company of 72 virgins in heaven has been disputed on the ground that the old Arabic term, “hur”, has been mistranslated as “virgin” but actually means “white grape”. If this were to become generally known, there might be fewer suicide bombers.
Difficulties with rendering a coherent interpretation of the BIBLE are well known. Even Genesis poses problems from the start. According to Genesis 1:2, God created day and night on the first day. But according to Genesis 1:14-16, He only created the Sun and the Moon on the fourth day. Similarly according to Genesis 2:27, God created man and woman together “in his own image”, yet according to Genesis 2:21-22, God first put Adam into a deep sleep and then created Eve out of one of his ribs. Both accounts can’t be true although, of course, they could both be false. The obvious solution is to take the passages as symbolic rather than literal, an option that is unavailable to fundamentalists.
In the case of moral imperatives, the difficulties may be even more serious, since some purported “moral maxims” appear to be cruel or even sadistic. According to Leviticus 20:9, children who curse their parents should be put to death. According to verse 10, the same fate should befall those who commit adultery. They are “maxims” that do not seem to qualify as “moral”. Difficulties in sorting these things out leads to great faith being placed in the movement’s leaders, persons such as Rev. John Hagee, who has described the Catholic Church as “the great whore”, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
According to Hagee, hurricane Katrina vented God’s wrath on New Orleans for its indulgence of gay sex, including a “Gay Pride” parade scheduled for the following Monday. Falwell and Robertson agreed the day after 9/11 that it was God’s revenge for tolerating homosexuality, abortions, and the ACLU. I was perplexed by his inclusion of the ACLU until it gradually dawned upon me that the First Amendment guarantees not only freedom of speech but freedom of religion, where those who “know the truth” take a dim view of those who do not. The ACLU is not welcomed by every “true believer”.
Most importantly, those who see God’s hand in history perceive what others cannot see. One of the great virtues of fundamentalist interpretations of history of this kind is that it is impossible to prove them false. Even belief in an omniscient and omnipotent God is compatible with any course of historical events, no matter how brutal or destructive they might be. By the same token, those views cannot be verified either. The situation is actually rather drastic, since we cannot prove there is a God or no God at all, much less whether God is a man or a woman, or whether there might be gods for every season.
|
