The YEC movement. Why is it so dominated by American fundamentalists?

I think much of it has to do with the "bottom up" approach to what it taught in many fundamentalist chrurches, as opposed to the "top down" approach from mainstream churches.

In many fundamentalist sects it is the congregation as a whole that dictates what is taught - both in sermon and in so called bible colleges. In such cases, the educated / scholarly opinion is disregarded.

For better or worse, in most mainstream churches (just about all of which accept evolution) rely on the clergy to dictate what will be preached. The most extreme example may be the Catholic church in which the pope and top bishops set policy so to speak. The clergy in most mainstream churches are very well educated in theology and philosophy.

Well that is my opinion.

I know a bit about how the fundamentalist movement arose anew in this century and how the YEC movement got jump-started. My father was an Assembly of God minister (one of the most fundamental of the denominations) and I was educated in fundamentalist schools until the last two years of high school.

During the early part of this century, the movement rose in the South (still considered the Bible Belt as a result) in reaction to the less "accessible" denominations. The South was still economically destitute and education was very poor. When preachers came along preaching a brand of Christianity that was "simply open and read, it is understandable to even the meanest intellect" and based more on the emotional and relational aspects of our Christian walk than theology and understanding, it went over BIG. This was very appealing to given audience. It was dramatically easier and more comforting for the target audience to adopt a strict rule of "literalism" since there is so much less analysis and thought required.

This movement grew like wildfire in the south among the poor, then began to spread, even moving into more affluent groups for whom the accessibilty was also inviting. Then, as youth grew up in this environment, even those who became more educated could not break the shackles of this literalistic approach.

Soon we began to see alternatives to the accepted scientific models which attempted to reconcile nature with the literal readings of the flood and creation stories. This obviously appealed to those who saw the glaring conflicts and it caught on just as fundamentalism had. It grew apace and then it really took off in the 70's and 80's, with "ministries" developing to promote YEC'ism.

Yes, it is still the minority of Christians worldwide, but I would say it is now about 40% or so of Christians here in the US.

That's because the Fundys read the bible and understand it for what it says...they have no need to filter it through the dogmatic religion of evolutionISM

Case in point.

Yup, case and point vance...glad you agree.

Chi_Cygni said:

But the YEC movement as a whole is dominated by American fundamentalists.


In fact the fundamentalism movement is very American based.

I think statistically fundamental Biblical literalists comprise only some 5% of Christianity worldwide but they comprise some 20%+ of American Christians.

Why is this?

Click to expand...

Part of the reason may be because the "fundamentalist movement" began in America. It is generally traced back to the publication of Milton and Lyman Stewart's The Fundamentals: A Testamony of the Truth, a series of 12 small booklets that reasserted the liteal inerrancy of the Bible and emphasized five basic doctrines that the Stewarts considered to be fundamental to the Christian faith.

Whether the booklets were intended to be divisive or were intended to set out the fundamentals upon which virtually all Christians could agree can be (and is) debated. However, that is almost a moot point, since the fundamentalist movement was jumpstarted or hijacked (depending upon one's point of view) when the World's Christian Fundamentals Association was formed in 1919 and set out the essential beliefs that organization considered necessary to be a true Christian. Needless to say, they added additional doctrines and dogma to the five set out by the Stewarts. Because the WCFA considered the theory of evolution to be the great evil of the day, they adopted the rather questionable chronology worked out by James Ussher about 1650 as being one of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith......

The concept of literalism in interpretation follows a separate but parallel course throughout Christianity. Early fathers such as Augustine believed that we must not attempt to read all Scripture literally. Prior to that, Jewish Scholars for the most part did NOT believe the early texts (written in THEIR language!) should be read literally.

Throughout Christian history, there have always been these two approaches, but the literalists have always been in the minority and still are today.

In short, non-literal interpretation did not arise recently and definitely not as a means of accepting evolution.

Chi_Cygni said:

Why is this?

Click to expand...

Probably the same reason so many people there claim to have been abducted by aliens.

Ark Guy said:

That's because the Fundys read the bible and understand it for what it says...they have no need to filter it through the dogmatic religion of evolutionISM

Click to expand...

Or because they don't like to think?

Sinai said:

Part of the reason may be because the "fundamentalist movement" began in America. It is generally traced back to the publication of Milton and Lyman Stewart's The Fundamentals: A Testamony of the Truth, a series of 12 small booklets that reasserted the liteal inerrancy of the Bible and emphasized five basic doctrines....

Click to expand...

Interesting post Sinai, I did not know that.

I never knew I was a YEC until I wandered into this forum over a month ago. I honestly had to ask what "YEC" meant!

Seriously, either we take the Bible at face value, or we have to run it through a (subjective?) interpretation matrix...what does it REALLY mean, or who wrote this, or what council founded that, or (you fill the blank).

Either the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of the Living God or it isn't. If it is, we'd be wise to not simply read it, but to eat, sleep, and breathe it. If it isn't, why should we even care?

*(Short testimonial) - I was saved at 19, nobody even 'witnessed' to me, I simply started reading a Gideon Bible that was issued to me in Basic Training. I just picked it up and read, and believed that God's message was just as clear as the day. Now, that short testimonial automatically makes me a YEC Fundy. An abnormailty of the faith? Dare i suggest that there may be more people "in church" that may not step into the Kingdom.

I keep asking for someone to assist me with this verse, but my literality must have me confused, it looks like he's talking to "CHRISTIANS" (quotes intended) here:

Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'

Mat 7:23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

If He is talking to "christians" (people who prophesy, cast out demons, perform miracles) then how can WE, (I'm serious!) HOW CAN WE BE CERTAIN THAT WE ARE NOT IN THIS CROWD OF SELF-SUPPOSING BELIEVERS!?

Any ideas?

Well, as I have stated before, NOBODY really reads the Bible without interpreting it and in many cases the "plain reading" is so UNPLAIN that we end up with hundreds of different beliefs by those who think they are just taking it at "face value".

I think it is very insightful that the Salvation message, though, is so imminently clear that your testimony is repeated millions of times the world over throughout history. God seemed to have made sure of THAT at least.

As for the Scripture quoted, notice that it does not say "those who BELIEVE and ACCEPT the redemptive gift" will be turned away. Those turned away are those who are doing a lot of talking and acting, but we do not see their heart.

Buck72 said:

I keep asking for someone to assist me with this verse, but my literality must have me confused, it looks like he's talking to "CHRISTIANS" (quotes intended) here:

Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'

Mat 7:23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

If He is talking to "christians" (people who prophesy, cast out demons, perform miracles) then how can WE, (I'm serious!) HOW CAN WE BE CERTAIN THAT WE ARE NOT IN THIS CROWD OF SELF-SUPPOSING BELIEVERS!?

Any ideas?

Click to expand...

Some athletes' performance on game day fail to live up to their talk prior to the game. Similarly, merely calling Jesus Lord does not necessarily make him Lord of my life. The contrast is between says and does. Lip service--or joining a particular church--or participating in particular activities--is not enough. Have we accepted God's plan of salvation? Have we made Jesus Lord of our lives?

Our good works are not enough. Our own righteousness is not enough. Remember that even the righteousness of man is as filthy rags before God. Only God's grace is sufficient to save us. We must realize that we have sinned, that we deserve to die, and that we are powerless to save ourselves; we must confess our sins and our need for God; and we must receive God's gift of salvation through faith in Jesus the Christ, making Him Lord of our lives. The Bible tells us that we can know that we have eternal life [1 Jn. 5:13]. The verses you quoted deal with false prophets and teachers. Hopefully, you are not following them, but are rather following Christ....

Buck72 said:

Interesting post Sinai, I did not know that.

I never knew I was a YEC until I wandered into this forum over a month ago. I honestly had to ask what "YEC" meant!

Seriously, either we take the Bible at face value, or we have to run it through a (subjective?) interpretation matrix...what does it REALLY mean, or who wrote this, or what council founded that, or (you fill the blank).

Either the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of the Living God or it isn't. If it is, we'd be wise to not simply read it, but to eat, sleep, and breathe it. If it isn't, why should we even care?

Click to expand...

As you so eloquently pointed out, if the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of the Living God, we'd be wise to not simply read it, but to eat, sleep, and breathe it. That is one reason I like to study not just the English translations, but also the original Hebrew and Greek on the more difficult passages. The neuances of what God's word is actually saying is so much more exciting than merely reading a pale translation of what one or more translators think the Word is probably saying, I really wonder how I managed to get by so many years without getting into the deeper study.

Just be aware that Hebrew is a much more primitive language than Greek or English. It doesn't even have punctuation marks or spaces between words--which makes it much more difficult to determine where one word, sentence or thought ends and another begins. It also lacks the rich shading of meanings that a large vocabulary with many words that have similar meanings permits. The persons translating the Hebrew into English generally use the most common meaning for a particular Hebrew word (unless the text makes it obvious that a different meaning is required)--but that sometimes causes a particular scripture to appear to conflict with other scripture or with scientific or historical discoveries. And that is where a closer examination of the original Hebrew can generally resolve the apparent conflict.

In order to safeguard against reading meanings into the scripture that probably were not intended, I like to read commentaries on the scriptures that were written by top Bible scholars and theologians at least 650 years ago--well before science began making the spectacular discoveries of the past 500 years (especially since the invention of the telescope and microscope, and the discoveries of fossils). Since their words would be based upon close studies of the scriptures themselves and not upon scientific discoveries made since then, the range of possible meanings are not colored by a desire to bring the scriptures in line with modern scientific thought.