This paper addresses the conception that fundamentalisms are “anti-modern.” I propose that this view is a mischaracterization of fundamentalisms. I argue that an understanding of fundamentalisms would be better served by forgoing this “anti-modern” characterization and instead approaching fundamentalisms from the perspective that they are wholly modern phenomenon. In my analysis I use the writings and speeches of Pat Robertson as examples of the modern nature of America Fundamentalism in four areas. The first area examines how the Enlightenment influenced Fundamentalism’s development of inerrantism. The second area examines Fundamentalism’s prophetic interpretation. The third area examines the political nature of Fundamentalism. The fourth area examines Pat Robertson’s rhetoric to reveal that he reflects philosophically modern thought and rejects postmodernism.

The term “Fundamentalism” used as a comparative category within the academic study of religion has become problematic. Fundamentalism, is not one comprehensive movement but is, in fact, a phenomenon which encompasses a variety of beliefs, practices, and expectations. This thesis will explore the diversity of several different and distinct fundamentalist movements. I will discuss the natures of four Christian movements that have been labeled “fundamentalist” – Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christian Reconstructionists, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson – on several key points, eschatology, political philosophy, as well as level of social involvement. I will then turn to fundamentalism as it is used as a category to describe a global phenomenon. I will discuss three different scholarly approaches by turning to the work of Bruce Lawrence, Mark Juergensmeyer, and Bruce Lincoln on the Islamic “fundamentalist” group al- Qaeda. Finally I will argue that the category “fundamentalism” can be best understood in terms of a family resemblance.

Christianity is not anti-intellectual; however, there is a distinct quality of anti-intellectualism in the rhetoric of the Christian Right. This thesis explores the ways in which rhetors in the Christian Right encourage anti-intellectual sentiment without explicitly claiming to be against intellectualism. I argue that the Christian Right makes these anti-intellectual arguments by invoking the tropes and topoi of populism, anti-evolution, and common sense. I analyze how Pat Robertson, as a representative of the Christian Right, used the stock argument, or topos, of populism in his 1986 speech, in which he announced his intention to run for President. I argue that while Robertson used the generic argumentative framework of populism, which is "anti-elitist," he shifted the meaning of the word "elitist" from a wealthy person to an intellectual person. This formed a trope, or turn in argument. Next, I consider the Christian Right's argument against the teaching of evolution. I analyze William J. Bryan's argument in the Scopes Trial, a defining moment in the creation-evolution debate. I show that Bryan used the topos of creationism, which included the loci of quality and order, to condemn the teaching of evolution, arguing that it would be better to not have education at all than for students to be taught something that contradicts the Bible. Finally, I consider how both Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin used the topos of common sense. Reagan used this topos to create a metaphorical narrative that was to be accepted as reality, or common sense. Sarah Palin, then, used the common sense narrative that Reagan had created to support her views. By calling her ideas "common sense" and frequently referencing Reagan, her rhetoric gives the illusion that good governing is simple, thus removing the space for an intellectual in public life.

The term “Fundamentalism” used as a comparative category within the academic study of religion has become problematic. Fundamentalism, is not one comprehensive movement but is, in fact, a phenomenon which encompasses a variety of beliefs, practices, and expectations. This thesis will explore the diversity of several different and distinct fundamentalist movements. I will discuss the natures of four Christian movements that have been labeled “fundamentalist” – Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christian Reconstructionists, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson – on several key points, eschatology, political philosophy, as well as level of social involvement. I will then turn to fundamentalism as it is used as a category to describe a global phenomenon. I will discuss three different scholarly approaches by turning to the work of Bruce Lawrence, Mark Juergensmeyer, and Bruce Lincoln on the Islamic “fundamentalist” group al- Qaeda. Finally I will argue that the category “fundamentalism” can be best understood in terms of a family resemblance.

No description available.

Drawing from observation, autoethnography, ethnographic research and audio-taped interviews, this thesis explores the complicated and emotionally charged relationship between homosexuality and Christianity. The current culture war being waged in the media between the Religious Right and members of the LGBT community often results in the isolation and rejection of those who would define themselves as gay Christians. This thesis explores the role of the Bible as it informs and catalyzes this war and other foundational beliefs used as weapons in this rhetorical conflict. Additionally, this thesis analyzes the current battle between the church and the social movement for change in light of the historical battles fought over similar movements. The rhetoric of Christianity, specifically Fundamentalist rhetoric, has been emphatically defended and then dramatically changed in every such battle. Is this a possible resolution for today’s current battle? The thesis explores the historical basis and current application of rhetorical effects on this conflict through the author’s insight as a veteran of both worlds, interviews with major players in the battle such as Randy Thomas and Kristin Tremba of Exodus International and interviews with people who step on the battlefield everyday as pastors, congregants or observers in the fight. With each interview or rhetorical analysis, the viability of dialogue between these two groups is questioned and investigated.

No description available.