Fundamentalism and Me

I find Fundamentalism, as it is defined in the dictionary, an odd concept. For one thing, it fails to recognize that the document which Fundamentalists insist is the literal and absolute truth, has been translated from its original language to another and then, in some cases translated again. What's more, the idiom of the time has been translated to a more modern idiom. In addition, there is, in the Bible, a great deal of societal custom that is no longer considered an acceptable part of a civilized society. Despite these things, however, Fundamentalists insist that the literal interpretation of the Bible is right and appropriate.

I've taken some classes in Latin and German, and I've struggled through a few bits of Spanish. One thing that is imminently clear: the old bromide about a translation being the equivalent of looking at the backside of a tapestry is very apt. Most words that are translated from one language to another are approximations of their original meaning. This is all the more pronounced when one is comparing texts from times long passed. The act of translation, by its very nature, changes the text from its original form to a view through the lens of the translator's ideas and opinions on how the language should be translated. So, how is it that Fundamentalists can adopt a philosophy that embraces the exact, literal interpretation of the Bible, when that Bible has been translated from its original language (which varies from book to book)? What's more, it is also interpreted from the older English of the King James Version to the New King James Version or from some other older version to some newer version. It is not a stretch to say that the original thoughts of the author were penned at least two translations ago, and depending on the genealogy of the version in question, perhaps as many as four or more. It is fair to say that insisting on the literal interpretation of texts that have been fundamentally altered by one or more translators is, well, a bit odd.

Then there are some of the more archaic social customs of Biblical times. According to the Bible, slavery was acceptable. Various punishments such as stoning were not considered barbaric. There are a great number of things that are explicitly listed as acceptable that are now considered barbaric and cruel. For one to then insist on a literal interpretation of that text denies any change in social mores over the last 4000 or so years. I think no moral person, not even the most Fundamentalist, would insist, for example, that slavery is a good and moral thing. It is impossible, I think, to make the argument that the ethics of society have not evolved since the days of the writing of the various books of the Bible. It is equally impossible to argue that most, if not all, of this ethical evolution is to the good. Things like the status of women in society, the status of people of different races and beliefs and the ideas concerning the way people treat one another have all grown from the days of the book of Genesis or even the book of Matthew. In point of fact, the birth of Christ marks an incredibly radical shift in ethical belief about a person's relationship with God. Before Christ, the God of the Bible was a harsh and often cruel God. Some examples of that are the Flood and the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah. Once Christ was born, once the Son of God was part of the planet, the opportunity for forgiveness was given to all who truly repented of their sins. This is a tremendous departure from Old Testament belief. Yet even with such a radical shift appearing in the text itself, the idea of moral evolution is, at best, approached with a great deal of skepticism.

Thus, I find Fundamentalism very difficult to understand. It seems to me that this inflexible use of literal interpretation is merely a way for people to avoid consideration of various ethical problems, instead using a very old text that is likely quite different than the original as the matrix from within which all decisions must be made. In some ways, the Bible can then act as a sort of moral computer. Feed in a question and the Bible will give you a solution, all without the need for messy thinking.