Could you make it clearer?
I can try.
Absolutism. Fundamentalists are, by definition, absolutists. God said it, ergo it's the truth. The rest of us own opinions, not truths. If people who own opinions get together to solve a problem, they can learn from each other, change their minds, persuade, compromise, do all sorts of consensus building things. But if you throw in a few folks who believe that they own the truth, there is only one way, the right and true way. No mind changing. No compromise. It really gums up the democratic works. Absolutism is an authoritarian construct, not collaborative. This country is pluralistic. Pluralism and authoritarianism are incompatible.
Anti-modernity. I think evolution is a good example of this. How do you fit the belief in a young earth and a six day creation in with modern science? We want to be respectful of people's religious beliefs but what do we do when those beliefs contradict reality? How do we train top scientists when they come from a culture that tells them the Bible trumps the microscope? The stem cell controversy is another example. Fundamentalism looks backwards and to authority for answers, not forward and to creativity. That is anti-modern. To the extent that fundamentalism holds us back, we are at risk.
but that confusion tells you how little the critics know of Christianity.
It also tells you how little the evangelicals know of their critics. |
