The Rise of American Christian Fundamentalism (the Late 1800s and Early 1900s) Research Paper

Introduction

Christian fundamentalism grew from the urgent need by Protestants to assess the interpretation of the traditional Bible. Throughout the 19^th century, the Protestants visibly elected to interrogate the Bible as a historical text. This direction birthed queries regarding divine foundations, possible inconsistencies, and errors within biblical positions. A section of the Protestants referenced Charles Darwin, especially his theory of evolution, leading to deep doubts about the conventional biblical proposition around creation. A trajectory of activities around the United States in the 19^th century developed a fertile ground for the growth of American Christian Fundamentalism.

Various conferences designed to clarify positions on the Bible and allied prophecy events triggered the fundamentalism wave in the United States, paving the way for far-reaching changes in the Christian framework within the country. The publication of books and essays, including The Fundamentals, intensified the growth of radical Christian positions and firmly set the stage for full-blown Christian polarization. The rise of American Christian fundamentalism was based on aggressive radicalization and the visible determination of the Christian intellectual class to light a fire around conventional Bible positions.

The Millennial

The millennial played a substantive role in fueling the rapid rise of American Christian Fundamentalism in the late 1800s. The millennial generation class displayed division in the interpretation of prophetic positions. The millennials took to conferences to take firm stands and pronounce their unnegotiable beliefs on Jesus Christ coming to save within a millennial kingdom or what they qualified as 1000 years¹. However, this millennial cohort had divisions within them as they sort to identify the most suitable Christian ideological subscription point. The fundamentalists could hear none of the positions taken by the liberals, paving the way for highly polar differences.

James H. Brookes, a millennialism leader, heavily invested in getting the millennial protestant factions together, but his death eventually led to the death of the Niagara Conference. The Niagara Conferences gave fundamentalists platforms, allowing them to install their beliefs. So severe were the commitments in these events that they directly cleared the path for establishing fundamentalist bible colleges and institutions. They held discussions and promoted fundamentalist literature through the focus on concentrated Bible interrogations². The millennial energy and sense of clarity, out of their deep desire to advance fundamentalist positions, facilitated the needed fuel to drive the Christian fundamentalist agenda into the 20^th century.

Contesting the Charles Darwin Theory

Conservative evangelicals promoting Christian Fundamentalism did not have the time or latitude to entertain Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. In the world, humanity and all of earthly life sprung through fiat creation, and the works of individuals such as Darwin promoted the erratic positions taken by liberal Protestants. The contestation of Darwin’s ideologies advanced to the point of having tutors teaching evolution theories arrested and placed on trial. Based on the fundamentalist’s push for the observation of Biblical principles, John Scopes was placed on trial for the single reason of advancing Darwin’s evolution theorem in academic settings³.

Fundamentalism had risen on the ground of all positions taken up by the Bible as correct. Any other activity or literature antagonizing that position did not have value in the eyes of fundamentalist sponsors. In the strength of refuting Darwin’s evolution statements and supporting the creation, the fundamentalists accessed the ideological arsenal to identify at least three prophecies. They prophesied the 2^nd Coming of Jesus of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the Resurrection. Firm and incontestable positions taken up by fundamentalists could not create the space for the absorption of Darwin’s evolution narratives.

The Criticism of the Bible Higher

The higher criticism of the Bible accessed its energy from the bid to eliminate any form of the supernatural within the scripture and any other text that sought to promote that direction. Higher criticism extended its scope into interrogating supplementary Christian text with a heightened focus on literature existing before the construction of the Bible. All scholars concerned with higher criticism wanted a three-dimension history analysis with the strategy of contextualizing the Bible. The journey towards the achievement of such a goal only through the erasure of the supernatural angle within the conventional Bible⁴. The strong resistance to such thoughts by fundamentalists made them qualify as higher criticism based on their received attention. Further, the higher criticism only retained its focus on extracting extra historical sources and analyzing them to create an expanded understanding of the Bible.

The rise of higher criticism rode on the penetration of German models of education which created ample room for secular education. The liberalization of educational systems allowed the space for unrestricted questioning extending up to new ways of viewing the Bible. The Higher Criticism of the Bible mainly worked around displaying that the Americans now could question everything, and the Bible did not qualify as an exception.

The Fundamentals

The Fundamentals, an essay collective comprising 12 written facilities, mainly focused on thoughts on the essential Christian Doctrine, the inerrancy nature of the scripture, and the visible errors within groups thought to antagonize fundamental Christian beliefs. The essay sought to provide the literature necessary to secure biblical perspectives and retain the conventional gospel intact. They responded to the theological liberals who had displayed the intention to adjust or amend certain biblical propositions. In its introductory statements, the Fundamentals sought to “testify to the central truths of Christian faith and to be co-belligerents against liberal theology.”⁵.

These initial positions certainly signified the theme behind fundamentalism and how The Fundamentals sought to rise as an intellectual course to the broader cause. That cause included diluting all the activities and initiatives undertaken by liberals and leading the way into promoting the gospel of Christ unchanged. This library text unequivocally insisted on historical fidelity regarding respecting the virgin birth of Jesus of Christ. Liberals, referring to science, had, by the 1910 publishing of The Fundamentals’ contested the possibility of a virgin giving birth⁶. Other contested issues that The Fundamentals sought to defend included the bodily resurrection of Christ and the practical reality of miracles. The Fundamentals, by way of advancing Christian literature, came as a fundamentalist intellectual asset, customized to display the inerrancy of the scripture.

Various facilities and individuals carried their views on fundamentalism, referring to the fundamentals as a guiding text. The intersecting view advanced by liberal media was that fundamentalism sought to fight any form of rationalistic comprehension of the Christian gospel, moving to rise as anti-progressive. The ideological collective existed at a time of the industrial take-off in the United States, at a moment when the US sought to take its place as a global icon of science. Arguments also rose on the resistance by fundamentalists on such social activities as drinking and appeared to make attempts at shrinking the expanding American social space⁷. Some of these positions indicated that fundamentalists could only access support from their subscribers, highlighting a possible downward trend going into the future. The Fundamentals, as literary texts, did their part in illustrating fundamentalists’ high-level commitment to their ideological apparatus.

The Scopes Trial and Ramifications

The Scopes Trial manifested as a judicial and prosecutorial exercise designed to uphold the superiority of Christian Fundamentalism over science. John Scopes, a science teacher at a public facility, faced prosecution for his role in advancing Darwinism. A recent bill within Tennessee had held the teaching of the evolution theory as illegal paving the way for judicial actions against teachers who indulged in instruction exercises focusing on Darwinism. The case took up the interest of outspoken attorneys who deliberately took up the case as a chance to appraise the place of civil liberties in the United States. The possibility of the liberals, working as opposing attorneys, winning the case would be a blow to all forms of fundamentalism, including Christian fundamentalism. These lawyers were keen on creating the path towards the elimination of the Butler Act, a statute passed by the Tennessee state legislatures and which qualified the instruction of the evolution law as a misdemeanour⁸.

At this time, the fundamentalists were still fighting science’s steady rise and popularity. Some attempts to claw the progress made by liberals included using judicial actions as a gaging mechanism. Darwinism qualified as a blatant denial of biblical truth, and the fundamentalists were not yet ready to absorb its positions. Scopes attracted a fine sentence, with the judges finding him %100. The fundamentalists had won in that round and cleared the way for extended polarization between them and the liberals.

Conclusion

The essay elaborates more on the rise of American Christian fundamentalism and the visible determination of the Christian intellectual class. The Christian polarization in the 19^th and 20^th centuries took place in an intellectual theatre powered by individuals ready to use the power of scholarly criticism, published text, strong conferences, and instructional capacity. The strong urge and desire by Evangelical Conservatives to guard the historical sanctity of the Bible allowed the reasonably heavy investment in the protection of the doctrine to the point of making a militant and judicial position against the liberals.

The fundamentalists left nothing to chance to use judicial apparatus to make their case, as witnessed during the John Scope Trials. The presence of conferences in the United States and the publication of expansive texts like The Fundamentals showcased an ideological collective not keen on letting their guard. The scholarly community responded with such acts as an interrogation of historical texts to erase the supernatural angle in biblical narratives. Higher criticism and the evolution theory by Darwin did not deter the fundamentalists from extending their cause. The fundamentalists highlighted that intellectual conflicts exist in all environments, including religious circles.

Bibliography

Edeh, and Peter Daniel. “The Fallacy of Religious Fundamentalism and Its Ontological Boomerang Effect; an African Worldview.” Open Journal of Philosophy 05, no. 02 (2015), 156-162. Web.

Biola University. “The Fundamentals Vs. ‘fundamentalism’.” Biola Magazine – Biola University Blogs. 2022. Web.

Marsden, George M. “Fundamentalism as an American Phenomenon.” Fundamentalism and American Culture, 2022, 279-286. Web.

Sola Scriptura. “The Battle for the Bible: The Rise of Higher Criticism and the Fight over Biblical Inerrancy.” The Ramblings of a Young Minister. 2019. Web.

Torrey, Reuben A., and Amzi C. Dixon. The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth. 2003.

Trollinger, William. “Fundamentalism Turns 100, a Landmark for the Christian Right.” The Conversation. 2019. Web.

Footnotes

1. George M. Marsden, “Fundamentalism as an American Phenomenon,” Fundamentalism and American Culture, 2022, xx. Web.
2. William Trollinger, “Fundamentalism Turns 100, a Landmark for the Christian Right,” The Conversation, 2019. Web.
3. Peter Daniel and Edeh, “The Fallacy of Religious Fundamentalism and Its Ontological Boomerang Effect; An African Worldview,” Open Journal of Philosophy 05, no. 02 (2015): xx. Web.
4. Scriptura Sola, “The Battle for the Bible: The Rise of Higher Criticism and the Fight over Biblical Inerrancy,” The Ramblings of a Young Minister, 2019. Web.
5. Reuben A. Torrey and Amzi C. Dixon, the Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth (2003).
6. Ibid.
7. Biola University, “The Fundamentals Vs ‘fundamentalism’,” Biola Magazine – Biola University Blogs, 2022. Web.
8. Biola University, “The Fundamentals Vs ‘fundamentalism’,” Biola Magazine – Biola University Blogs, 2022. Web.