These terms are thrown around so much, even by folks who are not Christian, but I don’t really know what they mean. I’m wondering if anyone can explain to me the differences between these different designations as they apply to Christians.
Are they all essentially the same thing? Would a born-again Christian be insulted if someone called them an evangelical Christian? Are there different denominations (i.e. Baptist) that are officially one of these things or another, or is it something one decides for one’s own self? Does it matter if I capitalize or not when using these terms? A brief outline of what each of these designations believe would be really helpful. I just don’t get where the lines are drawn, or even which is the most broad and least offensive term.
IIRC, the fundamentalists have the strongest belief about the literal truth of the bible. They believe that Jonah was literally swallowed by a great fish and that the earth was created by God in six twenty four hour days while God rested on the seventh day, which is not to say that non-Fundamentalists cannot share these beliefs.
Enagelicals, IMHO, (ought to be) very interested in sharing their faith with unchurched people. They claim to be more interested in what the bible says than any dogmatic rules the church devises.
My understanding of a born-again Christian is an adult who acknowledges the sinfulness and ultimate destructiveness of his ways and asks Christ for forgiveness while accepting Christ as his saviour, leader, coach, teacher, inspiration, model, et al.
The above terms are not mutually exclusive. Other terms you might want to know about: denominational vs non-denominational, seeker sensitive vs seeker tolerant, exclusive vs inclusive, etc. You also might be interested in what the various denominations are about.
Lorenzo is right – they are not mutually exclusive, but they are not necessarily mutually inclusive. It is possible to be liberal or moderate dogmatically and still be evangelical. In fact I’ve known many like that.
Most if not all Protestant denominations encourage Christians to formally renounce sin and ask Christ for forgiveness. This is in fact being born again. Some churches make a big deal out it, for others, it’s a private matter between the Christian and his/her conscience.
Speaking as a born-again non-evangelical “bible believing” socially liberal Christian who is married to a Jew and going to synagogue (it’s a long story), I have to point out that labels often don’t fit folks who wear them very well. And often the lables overlap with one another.
“Born Again” is perhaps the broadest label of the ones you asked about. It applies to Christians who believe that as a result of doing all the things Lorenzo spoke of, Jesus’ spirit (AKA the Holy Spirit) co-mingles with one’s own in a mystical experience (at least on some level), transforming the person. Hence “Born Again”. A Born Again Christian may be evangelical or fundamentalist or neither. I’ve known born-again Lutherans and Presbyterians, who are certainly neither evangelical nor fundamentalist.
What Lorenzo said about Evangelicals is essentially true, although I disagree with him that they are primarily the ones who are interested in personal interpretation over church dogma. I think the non-denominational Christians are much more likely than denominational Christians to emphasize personal interpretation, but it’s a gradation kind of thing, not black & white. Evangelicals are present both in and out of denominational church.
I prefer the term “Bible Believing” vice Fundamentalist, because the former has wiggle room, in that you can believe that the Bible is 100% true without being 100% literal, unlike true Fundamentalists. Probably most of the folks who wear the Fundamentalist label are actually Bible Believing, but don’t want to acknowledge the distinction.
Could this be the first non religion-bashing, non argumentative, serious, polite discussion of religion on the SDMB? Nah, someone’ll be around soon to piss someone else off and pick an argument. Still, it’s nice while it lasts. Good job, folks.
White protestants in the US tend to fall into two categories, mainline and evangelical. The mainline denominations are Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, and Lutheran. The evangelical denominations tend to be of more recent origin such as Baptist, Assemblies of God, Evangelical Free, Vineyard, etc. Many but not all of the evangelical denominations are pentecostal. Mainline denominations tend to be more socially liberal and predominate in the Northeast. Many if not all evangelicals consider themselves born again and some are fundementalist. There are some in the mainline denominations who consider themselves born again but I don’t think there are any fundamentalists.
Ok so, am I getting this right? If I want to refer to folks who disrespectful types call “bible-thumpers” or “fundies” then Evangelical is probably the most respectful and accurate name? Or am I just not getting this?
While I doubt there’s anybody out there who would object to being called Evangelical (if they would otherwise be called “Bible thumpers”), I think simply “Born Again” is the most innocuous and universal term. After all, you’re not likely to be an Evangelical or a Fundamentalist if you’re not first and foremost a Born Again Christian, or at least think you are.
Many Christian groups do ask that a believer celebrate his or her spiritual rebirth by going through an adult baptism, whether or not he or she was already baptized as a child. (Other groups, primarily Reformed denominations, hold that one baptism lasts your whole life long and cannot be repeated, regardless of your spuritual state.) The baptism is symbolic, since the actual rebirth is a spiritual event.
To further clarify, the adult baptism is the baptisee’s public statement that he has asked Jesus Christ to forgive his sins and accepted Jesus Christ as his personal savior, etc.
It is possible for an individual to surf the web, watch a TV show, listen to a radio show or read a pamphlet or book and learn how to become a Christian very privately and never tell anyone. Many denominations believe that it is necessary for a new Christian to take the next step and make a public statement of one’s faith via baptism.
So, you could say that in many denominations adult baptism is necessary but not sufficient to becoming a Christian.
No, in fact, it can be inaccurate.
Sadly, I’m having a horrible time coming up with a definition other than “I know it when I see it” but there is a difference between evangelical and fundamentalist.
Still, if they are fundamentalist, then that is probably the most respectful and accurate name.
As an Anglican who believes in “baptismal regeneration” (You are “born again” during baptism) but who also had a classic “born again” experience, let me speak to the latter a bit. The sensation is that what you had intellectual “head” knowledge of about God becomes a more “real” “heart” knowledge – “comes alive” in you. The sensation is that by God’s grace you’ve been given a fresh start, a new and vibrant relationship with Him as a person. He’s quite as real to me as you are, sitting there reading this thread. (Granted this is subjective, but I’m attempting to describe a subjective feeling in this post to try to answer the OP, not arguing in Great Debates.)
Fundamentalist means believing in the Five Fundamentals (for which I don’t have the link – do a board search for keyword “fundamentalist” and poster “Duck Duck Goose” with a three-month timespan to get a good classic definition. What most people consider “fundamentalists” are “literalists” who hold that the Bible is to be taken as literally true and inerrant in every detail. (“Inerrancy” to the original fundamentalists referred to doctrine, not to factual content.)
Evangelicals are those who believe that the most important thing one can do as a Christian is to bring others to Christ who do not yet know Him. Hence they engage in such stuff as witnessing.
The three categories overlap to a large degree but are quite separate. I consider myself to be evangelical, but from a liberal Christian perspective that seems to annoy the conservative evangelical folks no end! And I’m “born again” in both senses of the term. But, except for standing for what I believe are the fundamentals of Christianity, in no way am I a fundamentalist.
And I’m “born again” in both senses of the term. But, except for standing for what I believe are the fundamentals of Christianity, in no way am I a fundamentalist.