Friday, December 16, 2011

Fundamentalism

Fundamentalism
A Study of Words and Thoughts Against Fundamentalism

I.       Preliminary
We often hear the word "fundamentalism". The word fundamentalism is not easy to be formulated in our lives, because everyone has different views and opinions in formulating the meaning of fundamentalism. Based on its development, the term fundamentalism is growing in popularity after the events of 11 September 2001 after the World Trade Center in New York was destroyed, and then in subsequent years in one after another by blasting in the cities of many countries.
Iranian Revolution in 1979-1980 also marked a turning point in the use of the term "fundamentalism". Media in an attempt to explain the ideology of Ayatollah Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution to Western audiences who are unfamiliar with Islam, came to describe as a "fundamentalist version of Islam" who use the analogy with the Christian fundamentalist movement in the U.S. it gives birth to the term "Islamic fundamentalist", which will come to be one of the most common usage of the term in the following years, although this is a misconception among people who believe it is begun with Iran. .[1]
When I heard the term fundamentalism, then it is having in mind we are a group of people or movements in the business tends to use violent means, do not be tolerant with other groups and consider themselves right. Fundamentalism stands against a more liberal positivism refers to and relies on the currents of secularism, who firmly mendikotomikan between religion and science as well as matters of religion (church) and state affairs.
During its development, the term fundamentalism is widespread in some religions. In India for instance, there is a very radical Hindu fundamentalism against government policy in the sense of harming them. Ireland also appear later in the Protestant and Catholic fundamentalist movements that confront each other. Later in Israel also appears very radical Jewish sect and hard especially when faced with the problem of Palestinian Muslim majority.[2]
In this paper discussed about fundamentalism to a study of words and thoughts fundamentalism. Is the relationship with religious fundamentalism and other insights?.

II. Description
2.1. Etymology and Terminology.
a. Etymology
Etymology use of the term fundamentalism seems lifted from a little book entitled The Fundamentals, published in America between the years 1910-1915. [3] The word 'fundamentalism' comes from the word 'fundamentalism'. In The Classic Oxford Dictionary, the word 'fundamentalism' means foundation or base of a wall, building, etc., can also mean the very bottom of an object, which can be occupied. From the word fundamentalism has developed the word 'fundamental' that is offensive about the foundation or base of the building, laying the foundation and go to the source material, can also mean a part of such a foundation or basis on buildings, fundamental. While the 'fundamentalist' is the foundation or base that rises to the top, examine the existing in essence or fundamental or a variety of outcomes, such as the revelation of the fundamental. [4]
Big Indonesian Dictionary defines 'fundamental' means are staple; fundamental: faith is a very fundamental thing in human life. Fundamentalist religious movement which means the followers of conservative and reactionary nature always feel the need to return to the original teachings of the religion as it is written in the scriptures. Fundamentalism is understood that tend to fight for the things radically.[5]  
From the etymological explanation above is clear that the original word does not imply a negative, but the longer fundamentalism increasingly defined as 'understand' the emphasis on textual interpretation of the Bible, without notice context.[6]

b. Terminology
Terminology fundamentalism is not easy to formulate. At first the word fundamentalism was first used in 1920 to describe a devout adherent of the religion, which refers to a movement within Christianity. The term appears in the crisis of civil war and found principally in the perfection of biblical concept developed at Princeton Theological seminary in the 1980's.[7] But in the later development of fundamentalism into trends present in all religions.[8]

2.2. Historical-Chronological
The emergence of fundamentalism was originally a reaction to the changes. At the end of the 19th century and early 20th century, the Christian Western world (Western Europe-USA) is dominated by secularism and modernization as well as the impact of modern technology. Sure and natural science (science) is accepted as the sole objective picture of the world and thus the image of another world in denying its validity. That is to say that science is in a position to win, while the church in a state of retreat continues. Picture of the world of Scripture that had a picture of world Christianity, now considered a relic of the era that is past, or still be used but meaningful as a religious language which is different from the language of science.[9]
The existence of the teachings of Darwin's theory of evolution is also considered contrary to the teachings of the church at that time. Though not necessarily reject the church's teachings, and it accused the fundamentalist church has mastered the spirit of the times and lose faith and confidence. For this fundamentalism that held a number of Bible conference to face the situation of the church that no longer shows the strength of faith in the face of the world. In circumstances as above fundamentalism is meant to be a "fortress of the Christian faith" which confirmed the main points of Christian doctrine, or as a challenge to the secular society. Therefore, everything is a fundamentalism formulate absolute and the absolute appearance, fundamentalism also requires a commitment to absolute truth.[10]
However, there are some groups who disagree with this state, the Christian religion should not adjust to the times, on the contrary, age and this world should be Christianized. If you adjust to the time of the Christian religion is not pure anymore, it's "liberal".[11] The emergence of fundamentalism in a state that aims to build a strong fortress in the struggle against the Christian faith of Christianity in the church. Fundamentalism firmly draw the lines of the struggle:
a.       Revelation of God is opposed to human reason.
b.      The Bible is opposed to science
c.       To secure the Bible against the criticism of the Bible (historical-critical criticism). Fundamentalism creates a strict doctrine of inspiration literally states that the Bible can not go wrong.[12]
In the appearance militant fundamentalists tend to his opponent (enemy). They fought desperately fighting for their conception, as a rival of what was contained in a secular society in those days. [13] There are a few of their conception or the necessity to maintain purity in the midst of progress at the time, which they called 'basic staple' or fundamentals. The fundamental principal is called a testimony of the truth, including:
1.      Inspiration of the Bible, so the Bible can not be wrong.
2.      Divinity of Christ (including His birth from a virgin).
3.      The death of Christ as redemption instead of destruction of the world.
4.      Literal resurrection of Christ from the dead.
5.      Christ's coming back for the second time literally.[14]

III. Analysis
3.1 Some Definitions of Fundamentalism
a.       Fundamentalism as a literal exposition of all assertion and establishment of the Bible and the militant disclosure of all assertion and establishment of a non-biblical.[15]
b.      According to theologian named Martin Marty, fundamentalism is understood that react against the many aspects of modern life; namely pluralism, consumerism, materialism, and the emphasis on equality of men and women. Fundamentalism is not dead or static but a growing and dynamic because the fundamentalists choose the norms of 'fundamental' outlined by certain beliefs and their lives, while opposing any doctrine of spiritualization which is a metaphor of scriptural texts. Such approaches is what makes them even become an exclusive, separatist and absolutist. They do not provide room for ambiguity and relativism, which tends to make them authoritarian. In terms of ethics, in general they allow people who do not like, especially in matters of sexuality and role in society. They also believe in himself as an agent of something sacred, as actors in a cosmic drama of God, which makes them theologically profound.[16]
c.       E. Gerrit Singgih said that religious fundamentalism as a reaction to changes that can be seen at the end of the 19th century and early 20th century in America.
d.      Biblicism, that is a word not much used in England. Its use is also not as ekstrime fundamentalism. For example, all states that all matter of faith, life and theology can be solved only with the use and exegesis of the Bible. And therefore there are no other considerations to take into account the knowledge provided rather than the Bible. He probably said this confirms the teachings of fundamentalist typical that the Bible was not contain any errors. He simply argues that, although the Bible contain any errors, especially the historical inaccuracies-he remained on the fact that the guidance only for theology. And all the effort of theology should be given only to the interpretation. So-called position biblistis.[17]
Speakers concluded that fundamentalism is the desire to return to the pure religious teachings because they feel that the world has been polluted, and they do not want to be tainted by following a lifestyle that is all around them through running a scriptural guidelines.

3.2  General characteristics The word fundamentalisma
a.       The term is associated with religion.
b.      Fundamentalism is based on a particular religious tradition and the use of the authority of scripture as a shield of tradition.[18]
c.       Aiming to address the context or the reaction to the context, because of fear if there is something due to changes in the context of their traditions.
d.      The tendency of militancy. Barr said that it was not all fundamentalists are millenarian, but millenarianism played an important role in the evolution of the fundamentalists.[19] Social scientists often claim that fundamentalists tend to be socially divisive society and often leads to violence.[20]
e.       Fundamentalism argues that truth is not negotiable and must be fought.[21]
f.       How to live in a world of fundamentalism took a position against all relations with the world. The result is militancy, intolerance, conflict and fanaticism.[22]
g.      Fundamentalism developed a kind of isolationism that only their own interests and not interfere with other groups. With their extreme selfishness is not only fighting for themselves, but also marched forward aggressively to the expense of other groups to defend their truth.
h.      The direction taken by fundamentalism at all incompatible with the dynamics of history. Fundamentalism wants to stop the movement of history and then play them back.[23]

3.3 The Position Of Fundamentalism
Much criticism has been offered the position of fundamentalists. One of the most common is that some claims made by the fundamentalists can not be proven, and irrational, indicating spurious, or conflict with scientific evidence.
A criticism by Elliot N. Dorff: "In order to carry out the fundamentalist program in practice, one would need a perfect understanding of the ancient language of the original text, if indeed the correct text can be seen from the next species, humans. Beings are the ones that convey an understanding between generations. Even if you want to follow the word of God, the first person needs to understand the words that require human interpretation. Through a process of human fallibility intimately mixed into the very divine sense of the word. As a result, one can only achieve a human understanding of God.[24]

3.4  Liberal
Liberalism is the flow of state administration and economics who want democracy and free enterprise and trade (there should be no government interference). Liberalism has a basic word liberal[25], which is free, free view (wide open). At first the word liberal is used for a special nickname for "art" or "knowledge" which is sorely missed 'those who contributed to liberating human beings'.
Along with the times, the term liberal has changed the conditions, pursuit, occupation or pertaining to something that is suitable for someone who comes from a superior class; 'host'. Freedom can also be interpreted as being in the gift; very abundant, generous, open heart. According to the speakers, we human beings a liberal man can be said to be liberal (free) is when he can begin to control themselves in speech and action, freedom can also be part of freedom is allowed and does not interfere with anything.
In the current understanding of the term liberal is used as the freedom of the allegations, can open the mind, and come clean, free from bigotry or unreasonable prejudice in favor of traditional opinions or established government. In in politics, liberal is good to change the constitution and reshape legal or administrative care in the direction of freedom or democracy. Liberalism is the holding of freedom of opinion in politics or theology. Characteristics of the political doctrine comes from freedom.[26]
In general, freedom can be interpreted as there is no compulsion. This freedom can be viewed from a general agreement, psychological arguments and ethical arguments. Based on the general consent or known also as the argument is empirical experience shows that almost all believers are equipped with free will. Freedom according to the psychological argument, either directly or indirectly aware of his freedom as a human person. Freedom according to the ethical argument, which is ethically indicated the existence of strong relationships between freedom with a clear realities. Expert psychological and modern thinkers deny that free will exists in the system determinism. Determinism is the belief that while it seems independent of human but determined, coerced, and restrained in everything he does.[27]
Freedom is one of the properties needed by humans. It is very basic of human beings is the unwillingness to be tamed, both in thought and action. Man can do everything well according to what he thought and did. When men do not gain his freedom then people will not be able to grow continuously and can only be fixed with the situation. Fundamental properties of the same nature, the fundamental nature of man is to meet basic needs and in one after another to the needs of secondary and tertiary. Within meet their needs, people are more inclined to think to produce a business that ultimately his efforts are to be evil sometimes. The human mind can not be dictated by others or anyone else, the thought has continued to grow in the presence of a problem and trying to find a way out of the problem.
Jean-Paul Sartre declared that "if there is a God then man is not free anymore" because God is working all things, God is the purpose of everything, everything is directed to God and not to man. but this concern does not discuss something very important which is transcendence and immanence of God, this is the relationship of the Creator with His creation so that makes these creatures become self-reliant and dependent on its creator.[28] Therefore, when men give himself to God so he does not have to worry about losing freedoms as wayang like "his life played by puppeteer". But he would likely have to peak their autonomy (not independence) are arbitrary but are willing to accept responsibilities.[29]
A free human being is a human being self-reliant and more dependent on God then the same thing also applies to the human will, and can mean that the freedom of human will is the place where God most effectively expressed His will in the world. However, Louis Leahy formulated a problem as follows: "If God knows everything, He knows what will come; He knows what I will do tomorrow morning. Then how can I say really free? ". Freedom in the can as far as a decision is determined by humans, humans do not specify this and it is God who determines the extent of human decisions, people do not decide. The point is that more men are free to determine themselves the living God to accept his decision, and the more effectively reverse the determination of God, God increasingly play a role in determining human freedom.[30]
Speakers concluded that freedom of thought and freedom of action that is human nature. Based on the psychology of human beings directly or indirectly aware of his freedom to be human. Freedom is not specified in a state of conscious or unconscious, human consciousness is not a basis that it characterizes human nature, but all aspects of human life both in consciousness and unconscious and that is the hallmark of human uniqueness. So if humans can not do things that are very basic as human beings think and act it is not fundamentalist. Liberalism may be a fundamentalist if liberalism Holding himself as the most appropriate way of life and hostile to the religion that is "conservative" even though doing terrorism.

3.5  Thought Humans
Are creatures who ask. He asked about what was in front because it requires knowledge, but in humans there are two realities that seem opposite and make it always wanted to know. First, of course, just because the idea that men act. She acted with all sorts of reasons, including the most basic is that he is compelled to meet her needs such as food and beverages. To fulfill it he must know where to obtain food and beverages. Secondly, properties unique to humans is that humans always want to know more insightful due to human. Human knowledge is always limited, but his insights are always limited, it never was the knowledge that meets the horizon of human attention and are therefore asking questions, particularly asking about God.[31]
Questions about God does not come from thin air. For religious people, God can not think rationally, because when there is confidence in the faith so that faith will surpass human reason. The fundamentalist claim that they base their beliefs solely on the faith so that they reject critical thinking about the faith that includes human reasoning about God.[32]
Faith can be rationally justified in the double meaning theologically and philosophically. Theologically faith accounted for if what the pious and the life lived by faith that is in accordance with the source of that faith.[33] So theology based on revelation religion is concerned. Accountability is the theology of faith occurs in the context of reflection and discourse of religious faith in the people concerned.
Accountability philosophical faith is different and this is indicated by the rationality of faith who use reason. Reason can check a belief or religious teaching from several angles, such as logical consistency point is whether there is any conflict between the teachings of that religion?. Angle of knowledge about the world and society; whether the doctrine of the creation of the world can be accounted for in terms of knowledge of natural sciences of the universe and the development of life on earth which can also be reviewed from the point of inner experience.
 Account of the term faith in God is rational is a moderate position because it would have a more limited meaning and believe in God very plausible. Accountability has a deeper meaning and significance of software is even harder.
Meaning is softer believe in the existence of God (the invisible) it makes sense because many of the facts of nature outside and the inner nature can be understood by a lot easier if we accept the existence of God. Meaning harder to say that there are some external and inner reality of nature is very difficult to explain if there is no God. So even though the data were not intellectually forced to accept the existence of God, but the realities can not be understood that God's existence can not be denied.The account for the existence of God in a rational way is through a healthy mind, which is capable of reasoning, not easy to believe, not superstitious, living in the modern natural and cultural environment to live them as ordinary, regular communication with its environment, if it continues to believe in God, do not do something weird , unreasonable, inconsistent with kemoderannya.

3.6  Fundamentalism In The Present Fundamentalism
Became a phenomenon in this century. The word fundamentalism has always been associated with terrorism and is also associated with Islam. In various discussions on the present clearly told that that triggers the behavior of fundamentalist is a person the United States, especially in the era of President George W. Bush. For example, people who become enemies of the United States is Osama bin Laden. But Osama is not a stranger to the United States. Once he had become American allies during the war against the Soviet Union. The Americans who trained him and his group to acquire specific skills that is needed in the military struggle. Similarly, the Taliban in Afghanistan can not be separated from the support of the United States against the Soviet Union. But later after the Soviet Union was expelled from Afghanistan, the Taliban turned into enemies of America. Osama bin Laden turned into a radical and turned against the Americans.[34]
These facts form the opinion that fundamentalism was created by the attitudes and behavior of the United States that is not fair. No other party, of course we do not deny the fact that in Islam there is any group which aspires to the establishment of a regime that "fair" and bring prosperity to mankind. These ideals as embodied in the establishment in Southeast Asia khalifa khalifa modeled in the century-medieval. Khalifa is believed to be a reliable alternative to replace secular regimes that do not reflect justice. Thus, it is necessary to achieve the armed struggle. Unfortunately, in order to achieve this goal, they did not hesitate to perform terrorist acts.[35]

3.7  Dangers
a.       There fundamentalism in all religions. If every religious fundamentalism meet each other there will be collisions.
b.      Fundamentalism within its own environment.[36]
Fundamentalism has the disadvantage of not having the main base or starting point of its own, as a result of this fundamentalism can be clear, firm, fierce in opposing, but not obvious in the case "for the ass".

IV. Implementation of Indonesia
Consists of a pluralistic society that consists of various religions. If there is a tendency of fundamentalism in all religions, there will be collisions. This can be avoided if all the people who are willing to develop and commercialize a harmonious religious life.
Harmony in question is not merely based on harmony that willingness to accept the existence of another in an atmosphere of common life but greet each other. Harmony should not be sacrificing the intrinsic meaning of the guarantee of freedom of religious harmony as set forth in article 29 of the 1945 Constitution. Living in harmony among religions can be realized with a good attitude when foster the development of family, respect and objective as well as stabilization of spiritual insight, the concept of nationalism, and the media as a means of human development.
The development of family, respect and objective, is to consider that differences in ethnicity, religion, and race, and class are the same and we treat as a brother. This point of view can make a more solid unity, mutual respect life, respect my brothers and fellow citizens. Stabilization of spiritual insight, the concept of nationalism, should continue to be deepened so that the diversity revealed a steady and mature, because it can avoid the narrow religious fanaticism. Developing insight into the nature of nationalism and fertilization of the community will be very useful to strengthen national unity in support of national integration nation. The mass media as a means of fostering community, must encourage residents to develop a mature attitude diversity is always respect for every religion that exists and spur them to actualize their religious values ​​into the spirit of social awareness is high.[37]
As a Christian, we must preach the gospel and apply it in everyday life because the Bible is teaching the theory and practice. In the teachings of Christianity, according to the words of Jesus that "love thy neighbor as thyself" requires us to love ourselves first before we can love others because it is impossible we can love others without first loving ourselves.
Christians in Indonesia can have a dialogue with people of different religions or groups through meetings to find common threads in every religion in terms of objectives and actions that teach kindness. If dialogue is not possible and could not be reached then Christians should actually do what Jesus said about "loving others as oneself". Basic loves doing this is because God has loved us then we must love our neighbor (John 3:16), and can be done through social activities, respecting the existence of other beliefs as they perform their religious rites of worship and through help in the management of parking and security.
So we also do not become a stumbling block for people who have different beliefs from us then we must be good to see situasidi around the church with minimal make uneasy residents of other faiths, such as in transportation, if there are some people who have cars in a single environment then the congregation can reduce the number of cars that will be used to go to church, this is done to reduce the number of vehicles in the parking lot, reducing pollution caused by fumes, and reduce the amount of money to buy fuel oil to be used by vehicles.

V. Conclusions and Suggestions
a.      Conclusion
Fundamentalism was originally the basis of religious cult who was already unmatched by current modernization. Every religion has its fundamentalist, if every religion bring fundamentalismenya each there will be clashes that could destroy the religion, society and even countries. Therefore, religion is the seed of fundamentalism, but it can be avoided by accepting diversity in society and in personal as well as the cult in order to create harmonious life in society.

b.      Advice
Fundamentalism may develop into better line with developments in the acceptance of different people of different religions, different basic thinking. Therefore, the basis of what is needed is to accept others for who they are because that's the uniqueness of human beings who do not have properties in common but have a way to accept others as they are.

VI. LITERATURE 
6.1. Dokumen, Ensiklopedi dan Kamus
Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, Balai Pustaka, Jakarta 1989.
Oxford University Press Vol. IV F-G, Amne House, London,.

6.2. Monografit
A. Yewangoe, Andreas, Tidak Ada Penumpang Gelap Warga, Warga Bangsa, Jakarta 1996
Barr, James, Fundamentalisme, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta 1996.
Dollar, G.W., A History of Fundamentalisme in Amerika, Bob Jones University Press, Greenvile 1973.
Gerrit Singgih, Emanuel, Mengantisipasi Masa Depan, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta 2007.
Magnis Suseno, Franz, Menalar Tuhan, Kanisius, Yogyakarta 2006.

6.3. Editing
Hunter, J.D., “Fundamentalism in Its Global Contours” dalam Fundamentalists Phenomenon, N.J. Cohen (Ed.); grand Rapids: Eedmans, 1990.
John Kelsay dan Summer B. (Ed.), Agama dan Hak-Hak Asasi Manusia, Institute Dian/Interfidei, Swiss, Yogyakarta.
Soetarman, dkk. (peny.), Fundamentalisme, Agama-agama dan Teknologi, Jakarta 1996.





[1] -, http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/fundamentalism, visited on October 25, 2010.
[3] James Barr, Fundamentalisme, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta,1996, hlm. 2.
[4] Bnd., Oxford University Press Vol. IV F-G, Amne House, London, hlm. 604.
[5] -, Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, Balai Pustaka, Jakarta,1989, hlm 245.
[6] Lih. Andreas A. Yewangoe, Tidak Ada Penumpang Gelap Warga, Warga Bangsa, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta, hlm. 235.
[7] John Kelsay dan Summer B. (ed.), Agama dan Hak-Hak Asasi Manusia, Institute Dian/Interfidei, Swiss, Yogyakarta, 2007, hlm. 36-37.
[8] Soetarman, dkk. (peny.), Fundamentalisme, Agama-agama dan Teknologi, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta, 1996, hlm. 21.
[9] Lih. Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, Mengantisipasi Masa Depan, BPK Gunung Mulia, Jakarta, 2007, hlm. 326-327.
[10] Liem Khiem Yang, Fundamentalisme Dalam Gereja dalam Fundamentalisme Agama-Agama dan Teknologi, disunting oleh Soetarman dkk, BPK-Gunung Mulia, Jakarta 1993, hlm. 17-20
[11] Lih. Ibid, hlm. 327.
[12] Lih. Ibid, hlm. 327.
[13] Lih. Ibid, hlm. 327.
[14] Bnd. Soetarman, Op.cit, hlm. 18.
[15] G.W. Dollar, A History Of Fundamentalisme In Amerika, Bob Jones University Press, Greenvile, 1973, hlm. xv.
[16] John Kelsay, Op.Cit., hlm. 37-38.
[17] James Barr, Fundamentalisme, diterjemahkan Stephen Suleeman, BPK-Gunung Mulia, Jakarta 1996, hlm. 6-7
[18] Bnd. James Barr, hlm. 12
[19] James bar, hlm. xiii
[20] Bnd. J.D. Hunter, “Fundamentalism in Its Global Contours” dalam Fundamentalists Phenomenon (ed. N.J. Cohen; grand Rapids: Eedmans, 1990), hlm. 63
[21] Lih. James Barr, 402
[22] Lih. Soetarman, Op.Cit., hlm. 14.
[23] Ibid., hlm. 14.
[24] Dorff, Elliot N. and Rosett, Arthur, A Living Tree; The Roots and Growth of Jewish Law, SUNY Press, Jewish Theological Seminary of America 1988, hlm. 51
[25] Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, Op. Cit., hlm. 522.
[26] Bnd., Oxford University Press Vol. VI L-M, Op.Cit, hlm. 237-238.
[27] Aholiab Watloly, Tanggung Jawab Pengetahuan, Kanisius, Yogyakarta, 2001, hlm. 166.
[28] Bergantung berarti menerima eksistensi penciptaNya. Jika semakin tinggi eksistensi penciptanya maka ciptaannya makin bergantung padanya dan membuat Pencipta dapat bertindak sendiri. Lih. Magnis, Menalar Tuhan, Kanisius, Yogyakarta, 2006, hlm. 210-211.
[29] Magnis, Ibid, hlm. 210-211.
[30] Magnis, Ibid, hlm. 212-216.
[31] Magnis, Ibid, hlm. 17-19
[32] Magnis, ibid, hlm. 19-20
[33] Wahyu adalah sumber kebenaran. Lih. Magnis, hlm. 22
[34] Yewangoe, Op.Cit., hlm. 241-242.
[35] Ibid. Yewangoe, hlm. 243-244.
[36] Lih. Soetarman, hlm. 21
[37] Lih. Soetarman, dkk. (peny.), Op.Cit, hlm. 25-27.

No comments: