What is a Fundamentalist?

[go_Leafs_go]

Where can I find a list of Fundamentalist beliefs in a brief point-form outline. My girlfriend is a Born Again Christian but much of what she and her mother have said mimic what I have read in Karl Keatings Catholicism and Fundamentalism (which I am almost done and what an amazing book) and views they hold.

Thanks

 

[Calvin]

it is probably not proper to quote myself but I posted this in another thread in another forum:

Fundamentalists (Fundies) take their theological inspiration from a book called “the Fundamentals” that was published in the early 1900s. The book was a reaction against “liberalism” in Protestant churches. The book argued that there are five fundamental beliefs that are the marks of a “true” Christian: 1) inspired and inerrant Bible, 2) virgin birth, 3) physical death and bodily resurrection of Christ, 4) substitutionary atonement (Christ died for your sins* in your place*) and 5) immanent second coming. Note that the emphasis is on what you believe, not what you do. No fundamentalist would dispute anything on that list (although they might add some more – I’ve seen other lists of fundamentals floating around.) That was what started the movement.

Fundamentalists are congregationalists. They believe that each congregation is a church unto itself and accountable only to God. As such, worship styles, church government, and doctrine will differ from parish to parish. A common theme, however, is the need to “accept” Jesus as “personal Lord and Savior” which is described as being “born again.” A Fundie would deny being a Biblical “literalist” and would say he or she simply looks for the “plain meaning” of Scripture. They believe that the Bible is easy enough to interpret on your own and it is the only ground for faith and practice. Fundies tend to disdain “traditions” that can’t be proved from the Bible. They are likely to be anti-Catholic.

Congregations that describe themselves as “independent,” “non-denominational,” “fundamental” or “BibleChurch” tend to be Fundie or have strong Fundie influences. The Fundies have a strong influence in the Southern Baptist denomination (which is really not a denomination – the organization has no power over the local congregations).

Evangelical is a much less precise term. Describing yourself as an “evangelical” is like saying “I believe in America” – it doesn’t tell you a whole lot but it is important to the person who says it…

Evangelical can be found in every major American denomination (I have even seen a person describe himself as an “Evangelical Catholic”). There are Evangelical congregations that are Methodist, Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, etc. Evangelicals come in all shapes and sizes – they can subscribe to just about any Protestant theology. There are Anglo-Catholics, Liberals, Congregationalists and many others who call themselves “Evangelical.” Two common themes of Evangelical theology are: 1) high view of Scripture and 2) the need to share the Gospel.

Note that this is a “high” view not the “infallible inerrant” view of the Fundies. Evangelicals would say Scripture is inspired and “inerrant in doctrine” but after that differences would set in. Some would say the Bible makes mistakes when it comes to science; others are 6-day creationists. Also Evangelicals would all agree that we need to “share the Gospel” but wouldn’t describe the Gospel in exactly the same way. Some would use Fundie-type language of being “saved” others would describe it terms more familiar to Catholics. Overall, Evangelicals are willing to look to Church history for help on doctrine and interpreting Scripture (Fundies are Bible-alone).

So I would say Fundamentalism is a subset of Evangelicalism, but most Evangelicals don’t see themselves as fundamentalists.

 

[go_Leafs_go]

Calvin:

it is probably not proper to quote myself but I posted this in another thread in another forum:

Fundamentalists (Fundies) take their theological inspiration from a book called “the Fundamentals” that was published in the early 1900s. The book was a reaction against “liberalism” in Protestant churches. The book argued that there are five fundamental beliefs that are the marks of a “true” Christian: 1) inspired and inerrant Bible, 2) virgin birth, 3) physical death and bodily resurrection of Christ, 4) substitutionary atonement (Christ died for your sins* in your place*) and 5) immanent second coming. Note that the emphasis is on what you believe, not what you do. No fundamentalist would dispute anything on that list (although they might add some more – I’ve seen other lists of fundamentals floating around.) That was what started the movement.

Fundamentalists are congregationalists. They believe that each congregation is a church unto itself and accountable only to God. As such, worship styles, church government, and doctrine will differ from parish to parish. A common theme, however, is the need to “accept” Jesus as “personal Lord and Savior” which is described as being “born again.” A Fundie would deny being a Biblical “literalist” and would say he or she simply looks for the “plain meaning” of Scripture. They believe that the Bible is easy enough to interpret on your own and it is the only ground for faith and practice. Fundies tend to disdain “traditions” that can’t be proved from the Bible. They are likely to be anti-Catholic.

Congregations that describe themselves as “independent,” “non-denominational,” “fundamental” or “BibleChurch” tend to be Fundie or have strong Fundie influences. The Fundies have a strong influence in the Southern Baptist denomination (which is really not a denomination – the organization has no power over the local congregations).

Evangelical is a much less precise term. Describing yourself as an “evangelical” is like saying “I believe in America” – it doesn’t tell you a whole lot but it is important to the person who says it…

Evangelical can be found in every major American denomination (I have even seen a person describe himself as an “Evangelical Catholic”). There are Evangelical congregations that are Methodist, Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, etc. Evangelicals come in all shapes and sizes – they can subscribe to just about any Protestant theology. There are Anglo-Catholics, Liberals, Congregationalists and many others who call themselves “Evangelical.” Two common themes of Evangelical theology are: 1) high view of Scripture and 2) the need to share the Gospel.

Note that this is a “high” view not the “infallible inerrant” view of the Fundies. Evangelicals would say Scripture is inspired and “inerrant in doctrine” but after that differences would set in. Some would say the Bible makes mistakes when it comes to science; others are 6-day creationists. Also Evangelicals would all agree that we need to “share the Gospel” but wouldn’t describe the Gospel in exactly the same way. Some would use Fundie-type language of being “saved” others would describe it terms more familiar to Catholics. Overall, Evangelicals are willing to look to Church history for help on doctrine and interpreting Scripture (Fundies are Bible-alone).

So I would say Fundamentalism is a subset of Evangelicalism, but most Evangelicals don’t see themselves as fundamentalists.

That is exactly what I was looking for. They attend a non-denominational Bible Church. Thanks

 

[Buckeyejoe]

Can anyone really define a Fundamentalist? Each Fundamentalist church has a little twist to the scriptures, It’s a moving theology, and when the pastor get’s a little better educated, then his theology shifts because now he’s more enlightened. And another thing…

Non-denominational churches have no set doctrinal beliefs, or so they claim but they will force a specific belief upon you.

I do not understand Fundamentalism or Non-denominationalism, it is undefineable…the more you study it, the less sense it makes. Problem is, most new recruits into Fundamentalism are ex Catholics. So people are searching, and leaving the Mother Church for a poor substitute, kind of like the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Question is…Why are they leaving?..

 

[Calvin]

Buckeyejoe:

Can anyone really define a Fundamentalist? Each Fundamentalist church has a little twist to the scriptures, It’s a moving theology, and when the pastor get’s a little better educated, then his theology shifts because now he’s more enlightened. And another thing…

Non-denominational churches have no set doctrinal beliefs, or so they claim but they will force a specific belief upon you.

I do not understand Fundamentalism or Non-denominationalism, it is undefineable…the more you study it, the less sense it makes. Problem is, most new recruits into Fundamentalism are ex Catholics. So people are searching, and leaving the Mother Church for a poor substitute, kind of like the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Question is…Why are they leaving?..

Most non-denominational congregations will have a written “statement of faith” or “constitution” somewhere. Some will display it promanently (my brother’s congregation prints it on the back page of the handout every Sunday) and in some you have to ask for it. Generally, they should be happy to share such things with outsiders.

Obviously (since I am investigating Catholicism and Orthodoxy) I have “issues” with Protestant theology. I think, however, that the “make-it-up-as-you-go-along” charge is, largely, bogus. The more correct way for Catholic apologists to think of Protestant congregations is as a bunch of mini-magisteriums with mini-popes. I have participated in hundreds of conversations with people who were trying (just like Catholics do on this forum) to understand and apply the doctrines of their denomination. Very few of them would I accuse of having “moving theology.” Most of them it was an honest “this is what we teach but this is what I believe, how can I reconcile that” discussion.

Certainly there has been a lot of theological innovation within Protestant theology. And the doctrine of an individual congregation may appear to be “moving” to an outsider but, as a historically versed outsider myself, I have to say I could rattle off numerous examples of “moving” Catholic theology. Now you would probably say (correctly) that the theology “developed not moved” or that the “fullness of truth was revealed over time.” It is not fair, however, to deny your Protestant brothers and sisters the same courtesy.

As for why folks are leaving? As an outsider it seems to me that the Catholic Church does a terrible job at chatechism. The simple fact is that most Catholic laity do not understand the basics of their Faith. As such, they don’t see much difference between Catholicism and Protestantism (or even Catholicism and non-Christian religions) and go where it “feels good.” If you improve at teaching and preaching, I bet fewer folks would leave.

-C

 

[bengal_fan]

you know…the term “fundie” is derogatory and offensive to your fellow Christians. you might say that they are constantly derogatory towards catholics but who cares, that shouldn’t affect how you treat them. just letting you know that you open up a can of worms when you use language that could offend. i know it’s hard not to when your online as it is easy to say things we normally wouldn’t say to some one’s face (sometimes out of fear of a punch in the face…lol), but we do need to guard our tongues. that’s my :twocents:

 

[Calvin]

bengal_fan:

you know…the term “fundie” is derogatory and offensive to your fellow Christians. you might say that they are constantly derogatory towards catholics but who cares, that shouldn’t affect how you treat them. just letting you know that you open up a can of worms when you use language that could offend. i know it’s hard not to when your online as it is easy to say things we normally wouldn’t say to some one’s face (sometimes out of fear of a punch in the face…lol), but we do need to guard our tongues. that’s my :twocents:

You are right, but chalk this up to the difficulties of internet communications. When I say “fundie” I smile and no one who was with me, in person, would think my tone was derogatory. I also call my one of Catholic friends a “papist” and he calls me “Luther boy” but it is all in fun…

You are correct. I apologize to any Fundamentalists who may read my comments and took offense.

My denomination is very liberal and I am very conservative and I have been called “fundie” many times (even though I haven’t, theologically, been one for ten years). So it is a term of endearment for me, a label I have worn, and one that I still (in some circles) wear.

I have a good Catholic friend who calls me “Luther boy” and I call him “papist.” It is all in good fun but I (we?) would never use that term in general discourse. It is an inside joke between us.

So when I used “fundie” it was as an insider might. I didn’t mean any offense by it.

-C

 

[go_Leafs_go]

I have found that the difference between Catholics and Fundamentalists is huge. People say focus on we there is in common however I have found that Fundamentalism contains much beliefs of heretics condemned throughout Chrisitian history. Thus I don’t understand how someone can honestly continue to be a Fundamentalist knowing these facts. Just my opinion, just a little frustrating, that’s all. Great people with misguided beliefs.

 

[Calvin]

go Leafs go:

I have found that the difference between Catholics and Fundamentalists is huge. People say focus on we there is in common however I have found that Fundamentalism contains much beliefs of heretics condemned throughout Chrisitian history. Thus I don’t understand how someone can honestly continue to be a Fundamentalist knowing these facts. Just my opinion, just a little frustrating, that’s all. Great people with misguided beliefs.

Speaking from personal experience, it is hard to be born into schism. It is very difficult to change your entire way of thinking about things.

It must be what the Soviets went through in Russia where entire generations grew up “brainwashed” by their school system and cultural institutions and now they are supposed to be able to believe in God and practice free market capitalism!

The Catholic friend I referred to in my last post once asked me which of the seven deadlies I thought was most affecting America and I said “lust.” He argued that it was really “sloth” as in intellectual sloth. I thought he had a good point. I’m not going to accuse people born and raised fundamentalist for being slothful but I will say that very few people, Catholics or Protestant, honestly question their world-view. It is hard work.

I’m not surprised that many people continue with it.

-C

 

[The_Barrister]

Buckeyejoe:

Can anyone really define a Fundamentalist? Each Fundamentalist church has a little twist to the scriptures, It’s a moving theology, and when the pastor get’s a little better educated, then his theology shifts because now he’s more enlightened. And another thing…

Non-denominational churches have no set doctrinal beliefs, or so they claim but they will force a specific belief upon you.

I do not understand Fundamentalism or Non-denominationalism, it is undefineable…the more you study it, the less sense it makes. Problem is, most new recruits into Fundamentalism are ex Catholics. So people are searching, and leaving the Mother Church for a poor substitute, kind of like the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Question is…Why are they leaving?..

Good point. The Fundamentalist approach is to put into place one or two core beliefs, and then everything else revolves around it. Makes it hard to pin them down on any particular belief outside the core beliefs, and gives them a leg up since they are free to adapt to come up with all sorts of slippery arguments against Catholicism.

I am not speaking of Fundamentalists generally as much as I am speaking of the hard-core followers of Boettner, et. al.