In his concluding essays, Strozier presents a very thorough analysis of the various tenets of apocalyptic fundamentalism and how they influence the overall doomsday mindset that has prevailed in society. It is interesting to trace Strozier’s didactic approach to understanding the fundamentalist way of thought. His previous readings writings introudced us to the dualism and particular psychology associated with apocalyptic violence. In his later essays, Strozier narrows his argument by linking the root of violence to paranoia.

Strozier markedly delineates the relationship between paranoia and apocalyptic violence, using the body as a means of violent internalization. It seems obvious that such a strong belief in a cause may sharpen certain senses or feelings that wouldn’t normally be so sensitive in any given person. In light of apocalyptic mindset, it is pertinent to understand that people’s sense of right and wrong becomes simultaneously elucidated and distorted as they try to win God’s acceptance, thus contributing to an unstable existence. Just as exemplified by his patient Harriet, paranoid people are overstimulated by external impulses that cause them to lose grasp of reality and recreate their own world. “The new reality is bursting with terror and is not stable terrain- paranoia, like anxiety, spreads- but at least this new world of malice is familiar.” (65)

Upon first glance, it seems so reverse that a “malice” becomes more familiar to a person as opposed to a calm and collective way of life. But as we break down this idea, we can see that the violence of apocalyptic mindset serves as a unifying force in society, of course with a fine line of division between the fundamentalists and the nonbelievers. And I wonder how we didn’t recognize this early on, considering that the Apocalypse is founded upon violence: the battle of Armageddon in conjunction with fire and brimstone, the blowing of the trumpet, the fornication of the whore of Babylon, complete destruction and the suffering of all who do not pass God’s judgment. For a while, I questioned how a fight for God’s approval could be so violent in nature; Strozier answers this question well by explaining it as a “killing” which “becomes a healing” for the paranoid.

In these definitive borders, it is understandable that the fundamentalists, who do everything in their power to lead a dignified and pure way of life most certainly still espouse a great degree of violence; this violence is just an appropriate means to an end, a “moral obligation” to God’s cause. This is seen in the second half of Glorious Appearing, as the fundamentalists await the arrival of the Messiah. When a young man asks Enoch whether Christ will kill a lot of people once he arrives again on Earth, Enoch replies, “I’m afraid He is. If they’re working for the Antichrist, they’re in serious trouble.” (190) Here, we directly witness the instillation of paranoia and its tight bond to violence. A similar notion is conveyed in Jesus’ soliloquy when he finally does arrive on Earth in the book:

“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; if anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch amd withered; and they gather the, and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. (208)
Fundamentalists have passed the stage where they could see that statement at face value and question the omnipotence of a God, who pledges such violence and extreme ends. They have succumbed to the canonization of the Book of Revelation, and their paranoia has overridden their moral values. But what else is to be ingrained into believers’ minds when the Book of Revelation itself is, as coined by Strozier, a “biblical genocide”, which involves God fighting his enemy with a two edged sword in his mouth. The gruesome imagery of the Book of Revelation thus serves two purposes indirectly; not only does it scare people into a state of intense paranoia but it also encourages a violent approach to eliminating all opposition to God. This was further emphasized in the climactic scene of LaHaye’s and Jenkin’s novel, when Carpathia and Fortunato were cast away into the lake of fire. This further propelled paranoia among the cast of fundamentalists:
“Even as far as he was from the action, Mac felt the tremendous heat emitted by the raging pillar of fire.” (309)
Here we see many elements of fundamentalism come into play. Christ uses violent means to extinguish the False Prophet and his follower, thus marking the end of time for the Antichrist and his disciples. It is with this “Glorious Appearing”, that God finally trumps his opposition, which mimics the revenge motif. Lastly, the fundamentalists who remained true and loyal to their God are left with the hope and reassurance of survivalism.

I was very intrigued by Strozier’s comment on personal agency and how much of the apocalyptic violence is guided by an individual endism to propel the messianic mission. This would help explain why technological means of extermination, such as nuclear weaponry, serves the fundamentalist goal of this religious genocide. Strozier proposes that the only way to guard against the dangers of nuclear weapons is “by becoming acutely aware of their dynamics”. Naturally avoiding the normal trend, we can attest to the fact that as technology augments the power of mass destruction, we seem to grow less and less detached from these powers. And perhaps the nature of this contradiction mimics the very root of doomsday ideology. The more we learn about the Apocalypse and try to get a hold of God’s Judgment, the closer to the end we come, and the more we push for it. Similarly, just as we advance to new levels of technology, we lose control over own thoughts or moral standing and do not understand the annihilation that can be cause by a weapon of such great intensity.

It may very well be that this new “technological deity”, is a completing God’ s work to an even fuller extent, as it has the power to destroy time, which is yet another seal of fundamentalism. Then again, a fundamentalist can take another stand and argue that nuclear weapons undermine God’s power, rendering humans responsible for the Apocalypse rather than the Lord himself. Thus, it would be difficult to note the exact relationship between apocalyptic technology and the commitment to God’s word. It makes me wonder whether there is a tradeoff between all the tenets that Strozier presents, and how they could ever be preserved when the original cannon of this entire movement is paranoia stricken and violent at its core.