Fundamentalism Another Look
Fundamentalism is a term popularly used to describe strict adherence to Christian doctrines based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. This usage derives from a late-19th- and early-20th-century transdenominational Protestant movement that opposed the accommodation of Christian doctrine to modern scientific theory and philosophy.
With some differences among themselves,
fundamentalists insist on belief in the inerrancy of the
Bible, the virgin birth and divinity of Jesus Christ, the
vicarious and atoning character of his death, his bodily
resurrection, and his second coming as the irreducible
minimum of authentic Christianity.
Millenarianism, belief in the physical return of Christ to establish a 1,000-year earthly reign of blessedness, was a doctrine prevalent in English-speaking Protestantism by the 1870s. At the same time, powerful conservative forces led by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield opposed the growing use of literary and historical criticism in biblical studies, defending biblical inspiration and the inerrant authority of the Bible.
The name fundamentalist was coined in 1920 to designate
those "doing battle royal for the Fundamentals." Also
figuring in the name was The Fundamentals, a 12-volume
collection of essays written in the period 1910-15 by 64
British and American scholars and preachers.
As fundamentalism developed, most Protestant denominations
in the United States felt the division between liberalism
and fundamentalism. The Baptists, Presbyterians, and
Disciples of Christ were more affected than others.
Nevertheless, talk of schism was much more common than
By 1950 it was either isolated
and muted or had taken on the more moderate tones of
EVANGELICALISM. In the 1970s and 1980s, however,
fundamentalism again became an influential force in the
1992 Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc.
The above chart came from http://www.ifas.org/library/survey/index.html, which went down in 2001. The similar survey for Liberals included with this original article showed similar upper income activists but differed in three important ways. The Liberal activists also tended to be older than Christian activists and also had higher net incomes above the general public. Second, more non-whites, but the vast majority was white. Third, liberals tended to be less owners and more professionals such as doctors and lawyers. This would make sense because so many of these types tend to be socialist (anti-business) and anti-religious. Neither group overall represents your typical working-class American, but many working-class people tend to be more religious then college-educated types. (Don't get the absurd idea these religious types are stupid.)
Most interesting is the 2004 presidential election where "moral values" seemed to carry the day. While it's easy to say a victory for the Religious Right, in my opinion it's more a failure of the Left and Liberalism. Bush got almost half the Hispanic vote and 56% (according to CNN) of the Catholic vote. So is this a victory for white, fundamentalist' Protestants or changes across the board?
Looking at other stats on this website, as of 2000 76.5% of the US population identified themselves as Christians while estimates of the Evangelical (Protestant) part of the population is between 15-20%. Secular/nonreligious/atheist/agnostic is about 15%. Christianity grew by 5% between 1990 and 2000, secular by 110% Evangelicals do a lot of missionary work, but tend to get people to change churches as opposed to reaching non-believers.
Another interesting stat is evolution. Atheistic evolution claims about a 9% following while belief in God claims 91%. But of that 91% for God, It's an almost even split that half of those that believe in God (40%) believe in evolution as the work of God. I guess it depends on the definition of God. The important thing to note is the shift away from evangelicalism (including Six-Day Creationism) seems to be as adults. 45% of scientists believe in God.