I get called a Fundamentalist all the time, so I was wondering: what exactly IS a Fundamentalist? Is it someone who believes the Bible to be the literal, inerrant, complete word of God? Do Fundamentalists call themselves Fundamentalists, or is it an insult or nickname for some specific church?
That’s exactly right. And it appears there are some fundamentalists who don’t mind the term and use it themselves, most prefer “evangelical” or just “Christian”, you know, “Christian”, or often “True Christian”, etc.
But of course just about every culture has its fundamentalists, the obvious example being Islamic fundamentalists. You could use the term to describe a rigid or literalist follower of any well-established doctrine.
From “Fundamentalism”, a lecture by Dr. Terry Matthews,Wake Forest University (NC).
You’re really, really a Fundamentalist if:
-
You subscribe to The Sword of the Lord.
-
You completely understand the position of Bob Jones University in regards to interracial dating.
-
You think that Jack Hyles is misunderstood by his fellow fundamentalist ministers.
-
You have a favorite bible verse, and it’s from the Old Testament. Bonus points, if it’s from the Pentateuch.
-
Your pastor thinks that the Southern Baptist denomination has gotten way too liberal.
-
You have a computer, but you don’t subscribe to an ISP. The net is evil. You use the computer mostly to compile your sermon notes.
-
The list of things you don’t do far outnumber the things that you do.
-
You have a Tract rack hanging by your front door.
-
Your church splits Sunday school between the unchurched (completely African-American) and the churched (White) kids.
-
Jack Chic is a punk liberal, in your personal opinion. But still produces ok tracts for those who don’t know better.
If you have any idea of what this list is about–congratulations! You either were raised in a Fundamentalist church, or you are a sociologist who has a fondness for “snake-handlin’ christianity”. Feel free to respond, dopers! I’d like to know ya’ll better. Anybody know what I’m talking about? Word to Lloyd Ohlke…
I’m going to hell. I just know it. 
A book I suggest you get called The Battle For God by Karen Armstrong, discusses fundamentalist movements in the “big three” religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) throughout history and into modern society, and shows how they are all related and similar. Here is a passage from the introduction:
[quote]
But before we proceed, we must look briefly at the term “fundamentalism” itself, which has been much criticized. American Protestants were the first to use it. In the early decvades of the twentieth century, some of them started to call themselves “fundamentalists” to distinguish themselves from the more “liberal” Protestants, who were, in their opinion, entirely distorting the Christian faith. The fundamentalists wanted to go back to the basics and reemphasize the “fundamentals” of the Christian tradition, which they identified with a liberal interpretation of Scripture and the acceptance of certain core doctrines. The term “fundamentalism” has since been applied to reforming movements in other world faiths in a way that is far from satisfactory. It seems to suggest that fundamentalism is monolithic in all its manifestations. This is not the case. Each “fundamentalism” is a law unto itself and has its own dynamic. The term also gives the impression that fundamentalists are inherently conservative and wedded to the past, whereas their ideas are essentially modern and highly innovative. The American Protestants may have intended to go back to the “fundamentals,” but they did so in a peculiarly modern way. It has also been argued that this Christian term cannot be accurately applied to movements that have entirely different priorities. Muslim and Jewish fundamentalisms, for example, are not much concerned with doctrine, which is an essentially Christian preoccupation. A literal translation of “fundamentalism” into Arabic gives us usuliyyah, a word that refers to the study of the sources of the various rules and principles of Islamic law.(1) Most of the activists who are dubbed “fundamentalists” in the West are not engaged in this Islamic science, but have quite different concerns. The use of the term “fundamentalism” is, therefore, misleading.
Others, however, argue simply that, like it or not, the word “fundamentalism” is here to stay. And I have come to agree: the term is not perfect, but it is a useful label for movements that, despite their differences, bear a strong family resemblance.[ol]
[li]Abdel Salam Sidahared and Anonshiravan Ehteshani (eds.) Islamic Fundamentalism (Boulder, Colo, 1996)[/ol][/li][/quote]
The author also cites a monumental six-volume set called Fundamentalism Observed by Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby published in 1991 as an excellent overview.
Yer pal,
Satan
TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
One month, one week, 5 hours, 21 minutes and 37 seconds.
1488 cigarettes not smoked, saving $186.11.
Life saved: 5 days, 4 hours, 0 minutes.
That is a really great question.
“Fundamentalist” seems to be the term under which all the extreme, creepy, offensive Christians are filed. This led to some serious inferiority complexes for me for a few years before I realized that though my family and church had always called themselves fundamentalist, the majority of people on the net making comments about fundamentalists were talking about the aforementioned scary Christians. To us, the term fundamentalist just meant believing that the bible is accurate. Before I realized all this, I had no idea why my theological group was being singled out for derision. Not a pleasant experience.
As for Beakeroni’s fundementalist list, I’d have to answer a definite “no” to all ten, but the tract rack by the door is kind of an interesting idea. Ha, I’d almost look forward to Jehova’s Witness visits. <eg>
<hijack> I just had an amazing idea–skepti-tracts! Debunking tracts that you could hand out to your astrology-enthusiast friends and your homeopathy-curious relatives! I want some to keep in my backpack.</hijack>
“Singing with the Fundamentalists” by Annie Dillard is a great essay on the fundamentalism subject.
Quite a while back there was an “Ask the Fundies” type thread. Usually, if you believe the Bible to be the inerrant, infallible word of God, somebody’s sure to call you a fundamentalist!
I don’t visit that often. Snot flys out my nose. Messy on the screen.
Let’s try this again.
“Get your ass to church!” I have got to get that bumper sticker.
Kiva said:
Go over to the Skeptic’s Dictionary at http://www.skepdic.com and print out the stuff you find there for later handing out!
Lauralee wrote:
Hmmm. I’m certainly not a fundamentalist by that definition, because I believe the Bible contains errors and is sometimes not literal. And a Mormon Fundamentalist is not a member of the LDS church but rather (usually) a polygamist who is considered an “apostate” and who has been excommunicated from the LDS church.
Nope, that’s not me either.
Sure, I believe the doctrines of my religion, but does that make me a fundamentalist? By the same definition, all hardcore atheists are fundamentalist atheists, yet you’ll never see those terms together, probably! David B is in no way in danger of being called a fundie, for example. Yet I believe in my religion and am called one. Double standard?
There is nothing for an atheist to be “fundamentalist” about.
I do see where you’re coming from, but prosyletizing does not equal fundamentalist.
There is nothing for an atheist to be fundamental about, until there is a atheist book of truth that is oft-quoted, thumped, and accepted as the unquestionable truth by the atheist community. Obviously, written tenets of faith or non-faith fly in the face of the reasons why people are atheists in the first place.
DavidB may be a glib, zealous, and smarmy atheist but that doesn’t mean he’s a fundie or that all of us are like him.
- You believe that the cover on the Bible is really leather.
I was told this by a Fundamentalist…which just proves that being a Fundie doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re a humorless hopeless case.
Lynn
Apollyon quoted Dr. Terry Matthews’ “Fundamentalism” lecture as saying:
Aha!
I’ve heard more than one conservative Christian refer to himself as a “Steward of Christ.” Is this a secret in-the-know code word for Milton and Lyman Steward’s books, and hence, for Christian Fundamentalism itself?
You Know You’re a Southern Baptist Fundie If:
[ul]
[li]You can cheat on your SO, curse like a sailor around the house, and insult your friends behind their back but still find the gumption to tell anyone not in your church that they’re hellbound.[/li][li]You can interpret the bible as being literal while cheating on said SO.[/li][li]You can say that god is love while promising everyone around you an eternity set at broil.[/li][li]You keep religous tracts right next to the copies of Hustler.[/li][li]You’re convinced that nobody deserves salvation but you.[/li][/ul]
Sorry if that wasn’t funny. It reflects life.
Horselover said:
And David B is none of those things anyway…
DavidB wrote:
Isn’t the Skeptic’s Dictionary great? Robert Carroll should be sainted or whatever the atheist equivalent is. <g> But I had something a little different in mind. Little stapled booklets with cartoons and bright colours. Something to draw in kids and the anti-science types. This could be big–someone call CSICOP.
Go over to the Skeptic’s Dictionary at http://www.skepdic.com and print out the stuff you find there for later handing out!
Wha? skepdic.com isn’t a porn site? No Carl Sagan doing Ayn Rand money shots? I’m disapointed.
Kiva said:
Prometheus Books – the sister publisher of CSICOP – has a few children’s books out related to skepticism. Unfortunately (IMO), they are flawed a bit as they also make statements about religious belief. Thus, it is more difficult to give them to children as just a critical thinking tool, because it may (rightly) upset the parents. This also means they cannot properly be distributed to schools – just as I don’t want to see religious books handed out at public schools, I would not support the handing out of anti-religious books either.
Phil Klass put together a kids UFO book/pamphlet a while back, though, and it was pretty amusing. When I wrote an article about the St. Louis Science Center having a bunch of pro-UFO books in their store, and a newsletter subscriber in St. Louis went and complained to the Center, they called CSICOP and got a bunch of the Klass books for kids.
Other than that, not much for kids, I’m afraid. Some local groups have fact sheets on their web sites. Our group reprinted a few of them from the North Texas Skeptics:
http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v05/n02/esp-fact-sheet.html
http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v05/n03/astrology.html
http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v05/n08/graphology-write-and-wrong.html
Wow. We really hijacked this thread, didn’t we?