Does Anyone even believe in Christian Fundamentalistm Anymore?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IGotQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would say it is a dead movement and was a particularly AMERICAN movement.
 
Son_of_Niall said:
I would say it is a dead movement and was a particularly AMERICAN movement.
Click to expand...
What would make you say Christian Fundamentalism is dead? :confused:

It seems to be alive and well in a great many places in the US depending on what you’re using to define the term.
 
Padres1969 said:
What would make you say Christian Fundamentalism is dead? :confused:

It seems to be alive and well in a great many places in the US depending on what you’re using to define the term.
Click to expand...
It’s not dead, but genuine fundamentalism is drastically reduced in influence. The great majority of Baptist conventions, and large congregations, have modified their views considerably. They may be accepting of fundamentalists, but their own positions now are much closer to what most Protestant churches were teaching, say in 1960.

You can still find pockets here and there, especially in rural or isolated areas, of Christians who believe the pope is Antichrist, the world was made in 7, 24 hour days, that every word in the bible must be taken literally, etc. But these kinds of people used to run some major daily newspapers, elect some politicians, and dominate school boards. That is rarely the case now.

The word fundamentalist is thrown around more now. Anyone who opposes legal abortion or gay marriage gets attacked as “fundamentalist”. In a decade, anyone who says Jesus is (or was) in any way different from any other human being will be labelled a fundamentalist.

But yeah, you can still find a few passing out tracts, etc.
 
I see “fundamentalist” as an outsiders’ term used primarily against conservative Protestants. Sure, some groups are legitimately willing to identify themselves as fundamentalist (e.g., FLDS, though they are not Protestant). However, you will find that it is simply stuck onto various groups that people see as “old-fashioned” or “closed-minded”.

Perhaps it’s best to just stick to non-pejorative terms.
 
Hatikvah said:
I see “fundamentalist” as an outsiders’ term used primarily against conservative Protestants. Sure, some groups are legitimately willing to identify themselves as fundamentalist (e.g., FLDS, though they are not Protestant). However, you will find that it is simply stuck onto various groups that people see as “old-fashioned” or “closed-minded”.

Perhaps it’s best to just stick to non-pejorative terms.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I prefer " Traditional" or " Confessional," myself. 😃
 
Padres1969 said:
What would make you say Christian Fundamentalism is dead? :confused:

It seems to be alive and well in a great many places in the US depending on what you’re using to define the term.
Click to expand...
I agree. And to me, one of the defining characteristics of fundamentalism is a literalist interpretation of Scripture.
 
Like others have said, it depends on what you mean by “fundamentalism.” I table pretty regularly with an atheist group at a local college, and while most of the Christians I talk to are not ones that I would call fundamentalists (young-Earth creationism, biblical literalism, etc.), a notable number are, even among the students. Pretty much all of the street preachers who come to campus with signs and shout at people are fundamentalists.
 
Thorolfr said:
I agree. And to me, one of the defining characteristics of fundamentalism is a literalist interpretation of Scripture.
Click to expand...
Truth!

But thankfully they don’t pluck out their eyes or maim themselves…
 
Probably the real fundamentalists are the Catholics/Orthodox. The original Christians who keep the original teachings/practices and belief where everything is essential.

The word has taken a new twist though in this modern day; it is not what it was.
 
Reuben_J said:
Probably the real fundamentalists are the Catholics/Orthodox. The original Christians who keep the original teachings/practices and belief where everything is essential.

The word has taken a new twist though in this modern day; it is not what it was.
Click to expand...
Yeah, some non-Catholics see Catholics and Orthodox fasting or whatever and they think we are being like pharisees. Not sure how we arrived at this point where spiritual exercises have become a bad thing.
 
Reuben_J said:
Probably the real fundamentalists are the Catholics/Orthodox. The original Christians who keep the original teachings/practices and belief where everything is essential.

The word has taken a new twist though in this modern day; it is not what it was.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly.
 
DaveBj said:
If you’re talking about “classical” Christian fundamentalism, it is alive and well. See the “Christian Fundamentalism” section in this article:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism
Click to expand...
“However, fundamentalism has come to apply to a tendency among certain groups—mainly, though not exclusively, in religion—that is characterized by a markedly strict literalism as applied to certain specific scriptures, dogmas, or ideologies, and a strong sense of the importance of maintaining ingroup and outgroup distinctions…”

As I thought, an emphasis on literalism…
 
Thorolfr said:
“However, fundamentalism has come to apply to a tendency among certain groups—mainly, though not exclusively, in religion—that is characterized by a markedly strict literalism as applied to certain specific scriptures, dogmas, or ideologies, and a strong sense of the importance of maintaining ingroup and outgroup distinctions…”

As I thought, an emphasis on literalism…
Click to expand...
And that also, in answer to the OP, is alive and well, even within Catholicism.
 
Reuben_J said:
Probably the real fundamentalists are the Catholics/Orthodox. The original Christians who keep the original teachings/practices and belief where everything is essential.
Click to expand...
Part of the core belief of fundamentalists is literal belief in Scripture, Sola Scriptura to an extreme. This means extreme suspicion of any kind of “tradition” or “magisterium”. Baptists in the US for instance never established “denominations”. They have “conventions” which are loose associations of independent congregations (not persons). Many Baptist congregations reject even that loose affiliation - perhaps as too Catholic - and affiliate with no convention at all. These tend to be closest to classic “fundamentalist” today. It has not only to do with moral issues, but even the format of the worship space, or “altar”.

Don’t use “fundamentalist” as a synonym for conservative. You can be a very conservative member of LCMS or Anglican Continuum, but far from fundamentalist.

Orthodox Christians, who accept authority of Tradition, and Catholics, who have Tradition and the Magisterium, can be conservative, but not fundamentalist. If we keep twisting words to fit whatever we want, the word becomes useless. Should we label Richard Dawkins a “fundamentalist atheist”? He does seem pretty hard boiled, adamant, unyielding after all. Is Shirley MacLaine a “fundamentalist New Ager”? Of course not. Let’s not be sloppy in “adapting” words.
 
I LOVE South Carolina, people here are usually willing to talk about Jesus, and very few seem to have a problem with me being Catholic (the main exception being the “former” Catholics, which are numerous here), but there was one incident where I was at a Pro-life rally in Columbia with a guy holding a sign saying “Roman Catholicism is not the Christianity of the Bible” (at least he admitted we were Christians), so I would say from that experience, that it’s alive and well.
 
There are many “hats” that carry the fundamentalist label. There has been a decline in fundamentalism, especially in evangelical circles, but as a previous poster stated, you cannot broad brush Baptist, Church of God, etcetera without boring down to individual churches. One theology which is seeing a slight resurgence is dispensationalism. It is fundamental in nature and teaches verbal plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. I follow this theology. But the large majority of Baptists do not. They are mostly Covenant theology or buying in to the Calvanist resurgence. As in most of Christiandom, as the older adherents go home to Jesus, the number of new believers, either cradle or convert, is falling off. The exception would be in the mega church movement. Unfortunately these folks are being fed garbage wrapped up in a feel good about yourself theology that will not stand.

Fyi, for what its worth, many Baptists do not consider themselves to be "protestant ". The roots of the Baptist denominations differ from the mainstream churches that grew out of the reformation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top