In Volume 1, for this date, we began with homiletics and ended up with reference to fundamentalism. Any reference to the fundamentals of anything begs for explanation. What is meant? We are driven to a lesson in language. What a word (symbol) denotes is not necessarily what it connotes. At its best, a term denotes rather clearly one thing, one concept perhaps with previously agreed upon boundaries of meaning in the terms used. Nearly any word (term or symbol) may be interpreted with emotional contexts (to advantage or disadvantage in the debate). In a controversy, the uses of language may communicate the opposite of what the term meant in its long-term denotation. This may be illustrated in numerous contexts, but is especially known in religious discussions and responses for persons, even for nations.
A speaker may have a clear denotation for the terms of his sentence, but the listener is so taken by his own connotation that the speaker’s objective is damaged. It may be damaged to such a degree that it was better that the statement had not been made at all. The speaker and listener are further apart than would have been the case if nothing had been said. The listener/reader may refuse apology and reconsideration.
Fundamentalism in Christianity was once a clarifying concept that bore objective understanding. During the early part of the twentieth century, the word fundamental eroded into a connotation of harshness, of a minority perception, of a belligerent and confrontational attitude, of judgmentalism, and even a sense of negativism bearing upon negatives assumed to rejection of Christian concepts of redemption and/or damnation. The two basic fundamental doctrines of Christianity relate to the belief that God is (exists); and, he communicates (represented primarily through Christian Scripture, the Holy Spirit and prayer response as related to Jesus Christ in God). Those are fundamental statements, that if denied one holds something other than biblical Christianity. Without those clear fundamentals one may have something that is quite good, but it is not fundamental (originally defined) Christianity. It may be called Christianity, but the definition must come from some other source than the biblically oriented person is able to grant. For many persons, a Christian is simply connoted as being good. Goodness is a consequence of personal context, a major factor for persons of faith or nature. For Christians it is defined in Scripture.
Recently I have heard persons talking about fundamentals in a number of contexts. Our baseball team in Minnesota had a poor beginning this year, 2012. We were informed that the team was returning to the fundamentals so to regain its former strong position. Public education is deep into controversy for the evaluation of a declining situation in America. Formerly the country was listed as #1. This year it appears to be #17 in the world. Former president Clinton referred to it in addressing the Democratic Convention in 2012. We are told it will not improve until a return to fundamentals. Business moguls have been having a rough time of it lately. The TV Network devoted to business and investment keeps repeating that the market must return to fundamentals to recover. So the story goes. What does the world need from Christianity in the human context? It needs the fundamentals (Christ/Redemption and Message/Scripture) that lead to righteousness and service – related to immortality (hope) as personal award.
We are always seeking for ways to save time, with as little effort as necessary, but treat matters responsibly. So we label things. One label is American, so it applies to me. But it also includes factors I deplore. I am a Christian, but that means for me the fundamentals that Christ came for our redemption and that Scripture evaluates life, both human and spiritual. I deplore many factors that some have added, whether inside or outside the Church. I can, if I will, find the fundamentals, apply them in myself, and in that freedom choice make a life I believe God wants of me. In doing that, in the details, I can be effective in peace, and in service to self and society as God meant for me. We do well to skip such terms as liberal or conservative, and be clear about our fundamental beliefs and conducts reaching out to a world in need of understandings and solutions. What do I hold as my lowest (least) denominator? *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020