S/O -- Christian, but not a Fundy?

[Jenny in GA]

Another thread was talking about assuming that homeschoolers are Fundamentalist Christians.

Someone said, "I'm a Christian, but not a fundy."

 

I have always wondered what the difference was between just a "Christian" and a "Fundamentalist Christian."

 

1) What does it literally mean to be a Fundamentalist?

 

2) If different, what do people usually assume or imagine that it means?

 

Jenny

(Christian but suspects she is not a Fundy)

[milovany]

I just found this at a website and thought it explained it somewhat well:

 

Evangelical is often distinguished from "fundamentalist" — a term that originally meant Christians who believed in five major fundamentals of the faith, but which eventually came to be associated with ultraconservatives who were against scholarly studies, against new translations, against anything new, and generally against anyone who wasn’t a fundamentalist. Some of the more opinionated fundamentalists gave conservative Christianity a bad name, and in the 1950s moderate conservatives began to group themselves under the "evangelical" label to give themselves some verbal distance from their right-wing cousins.

 

This addresses the somewhat negative view of fundamentalism, but there are Christian who would say they are fundamentalists and not agree that these negatives aspects are part of their faith.

 

As a side note, these definitions apply to Protestantism and not Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Christianity (you don't find "evangelicals" and "fundamentalists" in these branches of Christianity).

 

ETA: Wikipedia had a good introductory paragraph as well. I didn't read further because I need to get to the library with the kids.

Edited March 12, 2010 by milovaný

[Jenny in GA]

Thanks!

 

So can anyone sum up the "five major Fundamentals"?

 

Are there Fundamentalist Lutherans??

[Melinda in VT]

Thanks!

 

So can anyone sum up the "five major Fundamentals"?

 

Are there Fundamentalist Lutherans??

 

According to the wikipedia article:

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":[13]

 

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

By the late 1910s, theological conservatives rallying around the Five Fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists."

[milovany]

Thanks!

 

So can anyone sum up the "five major Fundamentals"?

 

Are there Fundamentalist Lutherans??

 

 

See the Wikipedia article I linked above. I'm an Orthodox Christian and don't ascribe to these; so I'll leave defining/describing them to someone who does! ;)

 

ETA: I'm editing myself so much today!! Busy, busy. I saw the "sola scriptura" one listed and that's the one I no longer ascribe to in the Wikipedia list. Sorry I over generalized! My apologies!

Edited March 12, 2010 by milovaný

[Renee in NC]

According to the wikipedia article:

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":[13]

 

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

By the late 1910s, theological conservatives rallying around the Five Fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists."

 

I'm confused - which Christians don't agree with these? I am Catholic and believe them!

[Laurie4b]

I just found this at a website and thought it explained it somewhat well:

 

Evangelical is often distinguished from "fundamentalist" — a term that originally meant Christians who believed in five major fundamentals of the faith, but which eventually came to be associated with ultraconservatives who were against scholarly studies, against new translations, against anything new, and generally against anyone who wasn’t a fundamentalist. Some of the more opinionated fundamentalists gave conservative Christianity a bad name, and in the 1950s moderate conservatives began to group themselves under the "evangelical" label to give themselves some verbal distance from their right-wing cousins.

 

This addresses the somewhat negative view of fundamentalism, but there are Christian who would say they are fundamentalists and not agree that these negatives aspects are part of their faith.

 

As a side note, these definitions apply to Protestantism and not Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Christianity (you don't find "evangelicals" and "fundamentalists" in these branches of Christianity).

 

ETA: Wikipedia had a good introductory paragraph as well. I didn't read further because I need to get to the library with the kids.

 

I agree with this distinction between "fundamentalist" in theology (nearly all evangelicals would affirm the theology) and "fundamentalist" as regards other social/cultural practices . As an example: Fundamentalists and evangelicals might well differ in social practice about whether or not dancing is acceptable behavior, with many fundamentalists saying no and most evangelicals saying yes. In general, the two groups would agree that sex outside of marriage was wrong.

 

I would say that there is also a general trend among cultural fundamentalists be separate from the larger culture, whereas evangelicals would tend to be more likely to attempt to engage the culture.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Laurie4b

[Daisy]

According to the wikipedia article:

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":[13]

 

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

By the late 1910s, theological conservatives rallying around the Five Fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists."

 

According to *that* definition, I'm a fundie, though I tend not to think of myself as such. I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

The IFB church school I went to growing up is a good example. I was a preacher's kid and still not conservative enough for them. I hid in my car during lunch so I could listen to Carmen (gasp).

 

If fundamentalist means someone who believes in the actual historical truth of Scripture, the Nicene Creed, and the Apostles Creed, well, I guess count me in.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I am a conservative evangelical but I would not consider myself a fundamentalist because I am not King James only. I know there are other distinctives but this one seems to be a huge dividing line for some congregations. (And I'm sure that there are people who are King James only who might not consider themselves a fundamentalist for other reasons).

[BikeBookBread]

I hid in my car during lunch so I could listen to Carmen (gasp).

 

If fundamentalist means someone who believes in the actual historical truth of Scripture, the Nicene Creed, and the Apostles Creed, well, I guess count me in.

 

:lol:!!! What would they say about Petra :ohmy:? (I'm dating myself...)

 

Interesting thread...

 

Don't many denominations and creeds believe these same five things??? I definitely believe the Five Things, but wouldn't call myself a Fundamentalist. Christianity can't be distilled down to these five points alone, but they are a good starting place. So is it the holding of additional beliefs (rules of conduct, "no dancing" etc...), or is it the holding of NO additional beliefs (nothing outside of the Five Points), that makes one a Fundamentalist?

[milovany]

What does Orthodox Christian mean?

 

I am at the library with the kids, so I'll just quickly link an article for you. Here you go. Hope that helps!

Edited March 12, 2010 by milovaný
Took out extra info. so as not to hijack the thread.

[milovany]

I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

 

 

This is the way I think I've thought about it too. I think it goes into the first article I quoted above -- why "evangelicals" tried to distance themselves from "fundies".

[lionfamily1999]

According to the wikipedia article:

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":[13]

 

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

By the late 1910s, theological conservatives rallying around the Five Fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists."

Hmm, I would've thought that covered all Christians, too.

According to *that* definition, I'm a fundie, though I tend not to think of myself as such. I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

The IFB church school I went to growing up is a good example. I was a preacher's kid and still not conservative enough for them. I hid in my car during lunch so I could listen to Carmen (gasp).

 

If fundamentalist means someone who believes in the actual historical truth of Scripture, the Nicene Creed, and the Apostles Creed, well, I guess count me in.

I used to love him! It's been ages, but I did see him in concert once. That was so much fun.

[Lovedtodeath]

Good question. I had never heard of different categories of Christians until I saw them here. Conservative, Liberal, Fundamentalist. Nope. Never.

[lionfamily1999]

Good question. I had never heard of different categories of Christians until I saw them here. Conservative, Liberal, Fundamentalist. Nope. Never.

That does seem like breaking Christians into political groupings.

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Hmm, I would've thought that covered all Christians, too.

:iagree:Julie, I saw my name in bold in your post, and was like, HUH? LOL Edited March 12, 2010 by Lovedtodeath

[Angel]

According to *that* definition, I'm a fundie, though I tend not to think of myself as such. I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing. - I don't go out and dance, but will dance at a wedding or around the house with my kids

No card playing.Dh & I absolutely LOVE Eucher:D

No pants.Love my pants, especially in the winter

No make-up. Wear makeup when I want

No secular music. Ok, we don't do secular music-I don't like the messages, nor do I like Christian music that sounds like secular where you can't tell the difference

No mixed swimming. We do mixed swimming

No secular friends. I have some of these

No secular tv. Um, I voted that we watch 8 or ore videos a week :lol:

 

 

 

I would consider myself a "fundy." I am King James Only. I believe the Bible is God's word and we should take it as such, not just what we like or want to like. I believe there is only one way to salvation, through Jesus Christ.

 

I believe all these too

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

I'm really tired and getting ready to nap so those are the top points off the top of my head.

 

I don't associate being fundamental with the above quoted list. I see that more as legalism. Though I do know of ultra-conservative fundamental churches who do believe the above. Being fundamental, to me, is all about what we believe about Jesus, God, and the Bible and what we do with that, not about extraneous rules that are not specifically mentioned int the Bible.

[Jenny in GA]

Hmm, I would've thought that covered all Christians, too.

 

I used to love him! It's been ages, but I did see him in concert once. That was so much fun.

 

Ohhh!!

 

When she said "Carmen," I thought she meant the opera!:lol:

[kmacnchs]

I don't associate being fundamental with the above quoted list. I see that more as legalism.

 

:iagree:Legalism is the don't play cards or go to the movies, etc.

 

I am definitely a fundamentalist. I always wonder how people can choose to believe some parts of the Bible (who say they are Christians) but not believe other parts. How can you choose? Do you have some knowledge that is above God to choose which parts of His Word are to fit to your life and which parts of His Word He really didn't mean:confused:

[lionfamily1999]

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

snip

 

I don't associate being fundamental with the above quoted list. I see that more as legalism. Though I do know of ultra-conservative fundamental churches who do believe the above. Being fundamental, to me, is all about what we believe about Jesus, God, and the Bible and what we do with that, not about extraneous rules that are not specifically mentioned int the Bible.

I wonder if non-fundamental means those that believe that Christ is not the only way?

Ohhh!!

 

When she said "Carmen," I thought she meant the opera!:lol:

I assumed......... uhoh......... let's hope I was right ;)

[milovany]

I always wonder how people can choose to believe some parts of the Bible (who say they are Christians) but not believe other parts. How can you choose? Do you have some knowledge that is above God to choose which parts of His Word are to fit to your life and which parts of His Word He really didn't mean

 

I think it has to do more with interpretation -- I doubt there are any Christians who would say that they only believe "some parts of the Bible". But there is often more than one way to interpret what a Scripture says or means, and so when people observe or hear of different practices it might look to them like they're only obeying "some parts of the Bible" when what's really happening is the two people might be interpreting the Scriptures differently. What do you think about that? I have no idea what specific types of things you are thinking about (and it's probably best not to go into specifics since that would likely quicken the locking of this thread ;)), but perhaps that addresses what you are wondering about?

[Jean in Newcastle]

:iagree:Legalism is the don't play cards or go to the movies, etc.

 

I am definitely a fundamentalist. I always wonder how people can choose to believe some parts of the Bible (who say they are Christians) but not believe other parts. How can you choose? Do you have some knowledge that is above God to choose which parts of His Word are to fit to your life and which parts of His Word He really didn't mean:confused:

 

I don't consider myself a fundamentalist. But I do believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God in the original Greek. I don't use only the KJV because I believe that some other Greek manuscripts are closer to the original. I also believe that the Bible uses figures of speech, poetic language etc. so that the Bible needs to be interpreted in the context of which it was written (but many fundamentalists believe that too.)

 

There are many people who believe that the Bible isn't inerrant but is still good for teaching us lessons. I personally don't believe that the Bible represents itself that way. But the way you asked your question would undoubtedly make many people who believe that way angry, because it seems to imply that they believe that way because they are stupid. And I don't believe that either.

[milovany]

I wonder if non-fundamental means those that believe that Christ is not the only way?

 

I don't think so since I'm not fundamental (or Protestant) yet I believe Christ is the only way to God.

[....]

Thanks!

 

Are there Fundamentalist Lutherans??

 

Hmmm... Boy, is this going to be a weird conversation. :D

 

We're very traditional Lutheran (Missouri Synod), which means we are religiously conservative (but not in a social way - like we wear jeans to worship service, you can dance or drink alcohol within reason in your personal life). By religiously conservative, I mean in a sense that we are not allowed to have women pastors, a lot of our pastors live at the church, we sing the liturgy, our denomination is pro-life, we practice infant baptism, our worship services are very traditional and I think our worship services resemble Catholic services more than anything else...

 

My parents are Fundamentalist Baptist and their services in no way even remotely resembles ours (in fact, my Dad hates Lutheran church services - every time we've invited him, he has all sorts of "issues" with the liturgy/sermon) :tongue_smilie:...a lot of their beliefs are different too. For example, almost all the women wear dresses/skirts to church service (Jesus actually says that it does not matter what clothes you wear) and alcohol is completely forbidden...but my parents are Pro-Choice, which seems to be a really weird contradiction to me, but OK...:001_huh:

 

Hmmmm...now I'm not so sure what Fundamentalist means... Maybe it's one of those weird labels that no one understands. :D

 

Maybe I need more coffee to understand the definition... :tongue_smilie: This reminds me that I haven't called my parents in a couple of weeks...better go do that. :hat: he he

[Lovedtodeath]

 

....I do believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God in the original Greek. I don't use only the KJV because I believe that some other Greek manuscripts are closer to the original. I also believe that the Bible uses figures of speech, poetic language etc. so that the Bible needs to be interpreted in the context of which it was written (but many fundamentalists believe that too.)

:iagree:

[Jean in Newcastle]

I wonder if non-fundamental means those that believe that Christ is not the only way?

 

 

 

Well, you couldn't be fundamental if you believe that there is more than one way to eternal life than belief in Jesus Christ. But fundamentalists are a sub-set of those who believe that. Clear as mud?

[lionfamily1999]

I don't think so since I'm not fundamental (or Protestant) yet I believe Christ is the only way to God.

The definitions of fundamental that have been put up, though, seem to refer to all Christians, or at the very least most. So, I'm trying to figure out what fundamental is by learning what it isn't........ If that makes sense.

[lionfamily1999]

Well, you couldn't be fundamental if you believe that there is more than one way to eternal life than belief in Jesus Christ. But fundamentalists are a sub-set of those who believe that. Clear as mud?

Fundamentalists are a sub-set of people that believe there is more than one way? Or did you mean fundamentalists do not believe that, but that does not mean that all Christians who don't believe there is more than one way are Fundamentalists?

 

:lol:

 

I'm sorry, this is so confusing as to be funny.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Fundamentalists are a sub-set of people that believe there is more than one way? Or did you mean fundamentalists do not believe that, but that does not mean that all Christians who don't believe there is more than one way are Fundamentalists?

 

:lol:

 

I'm sorry, this is so confusing as to be funny.

 

The second - I think:confused:

 

Fundamentalists are a sub-set of people who believe that Jesus is the only way.

[lionfamily1999]

The second - I think:confused:

 

Fundamentalists are a sub-set of people who believe that Jesus is the only way.

Ok. When I read it the first time I thought..... Fundamentalists do not believe Christ is the only way???

 

This thread has me wondering if fundies are like the "them" that people are so scared of, but can't seem to actually identify.

[milovany]

NM

Edited March 12, 2010 by milovaný

[Melinda in VT]

I am definitely a fundamentalist. I always wonder how people can choose to believe some parts of the Bible (who say they are Christians) but not believe other parts. How can you choose? Do you have some knowledge that is above God to choose which parts of His Word are to fit to your life and which parts of His Word He really didn't mean:confused:

 

Where's the fireproof suit?

 

It's not that I think I am above God and am choosing which parts of His word fit my life. It's that I am not convinced that the Bible is the inerrant word of God.

 

(And before anyone quotes scriptures that "prove" the Bible is the word of God and is inerrant, let me say that I don't find that very convincing. Those scriptures are only proof if I already believe the Bible is inerrant.)

 

The Bible rings truest for me when viewed as the record of people's encounters with God throughout time and their attempts to make sense of those experiences. I think sometimes they got it right. And sometimes they got it wrong.

 

And although I realize the above makes me non-Christian to most of you, I am a member of a Christian church and attend regularly. These are issues I continue to explore within a Christian tradition.

[sassenach]

According to *that* definition, I'm a fundie, though I tend not to think of myself as such. I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

The IFB church school I went to growing up is a good example. I was a preacher's kid and still not conservative enough for them. I hid in my car during lunch so I could listen to Carmen (gasp).

 

If fundamentalist means someone who believes in the actual historical truth of Scripture, the Nicene Creed, and the Apostles Creed, well, I guess count me in.

 

Yep, yep and yep. That would be my definition, too.

[Angel]

let me try multiple quotes instead

[Angel]

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

 

This list is what I think of as legalism more than fundamental. Though there are those ultra-conservatives out there. I don't say that to make fun. Some of the best preachers I've heard have been ultra-conservative.

 

I wasn't talking about this (below) list.

* The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

"

 

 

Just wanted to be clear! ;)

 

I made my first multiple quote post :party:

[milovany]

I made my first multiple quote post :party:

 

:D

[Liz CA]

 

...but my parents are Pro-Choice, which seems to be a really weird contradiction to me, but OK...:001_huh:

 

 

 

Wow! Baptist and Pro-Choice does seem somehow a contradiction in terms, however this may be their personal belief.

When we attended a Baptist church (for a very short time, dh could not stomach it) the largest issue at the time seemed that there would never be a guitar or a set of drums included in the worship service. Dresses for women were the norm, however, I showed up frequently in pants...as I said we were not there for long. I am not saying they are way off the mark but their priorities were just not ours.

[Laurie4b]

I wonder if non-fundamental means those that believe that Christ is not the only way?

 

I assumed......... uhoh......... let's hope I was right ;)

 

The original meaning of fundamentalist was to distinguish them from biblical liberals who had a looser view of the biblical text. So "Christ is not the only way" might be a part of it, but it's really another view of Scripture.

 

The social/cultural part may or may not go with the theological part.

 

My in-laws, for instance, did not all their kids to play sports, attend the prom, watch TV, listen to popular music, etc. Their theological beliefs don't differ much from ours except in the way they apply certain things practically in terms of lifestyle. (We do all of the above.)

[Jayne J]

In an effort to lighten things up I'll attempt a definition:

 

Regardless of what Wiki, or any other site may say, a fundamentalist is any Christian with whom you disagree because they are too strict in some way. (i.e. the "no" crowd, wherein "No" applies to something you allow.)

 

A non-fundamentalist Christian is you. And anyone who agrees with you on most things.

 

A Liberal Christian is anyone with whom you disagree because they are too loose on some vitally important issue.

 

Lest I be misunderstood, this is all said tongue-in-cheek.:D:D

 

1John 2:9-11

[Laurie4b]

See the Wikipedia article I linked above. I'm an Orthodox Christian and don't ascribe to these; so I'll leave defining/describing them to someone who does! ;)

 

ETA: I'm editing myself so much today!! Busy, busy. I saw the "sola scriptura" one listed and that's the one I no longer ascribe to in the Wikipedia list. Sorry I over generalized! My apologies!

 

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

So which of the above do Orthodox Christians not believe? The article you linked didn't really address specific theology, just church continuity.

[Laurie4b]

In an effort to lighten things up I'll attempt a definition:

 

Regardless of what Wiki, or any other site may say, a fundamentalist is any Christian with whom you disagree because they are too strict in some way. (i.e. the "no" crowd, wherein "No" applies to something you allow.)

 

A non-fundamentalist Christian is you. And anyone who agrees with you on most things.

 

A Liberal Christian is anyone with whom you disagree because they are too loose on some vitally important issue.

 

Lest I be misunderstood, this is all said tongue-in-cheek.:D:D

 

1John 2:9-11

 

Actually, I think that may be pretty accurate! :tongue_smilie:

[milovany]

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.

* The virgin birth of Christ.

* The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.

* The bodily resurrection of Christ.

* The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

 

So which of the above do Orthodox Christians not believe? The article you linked didn't really address specific theology, just church continuity.

 

That's what the ETA was intended to address (see above). The items on this list are things Orthodox Christians believe.

[Peela]

I always had a vague notion, as a non Christian who has mixed with Christians over the years through homeschooling, that Fundamentalists were the ones who felt it was their duty o try and convert you...so, in a conversation, it doesnt take long before they are talking about their faith "at" you or their kids are actualy trying to "save" your kids on the way to teh drama class. Wheras other Christians may be various forms, some more restrictive in their beliefs than others...but they wont actively try and convert you.

I have one friend who has long hair like all the other women in her church, and only wears dresses even though she lives and works on a farm...and when questioned, her beliefs are quite exteme to me...but, she doesnt believe in converting people and she is very down to earth, and her son and my son are best friends and she doesn't appear to be concrned about the heathen influence, and her son doesnt try to convert my son.

All very unscientific but I felt, subjectively, that the fundamentalists were the ones that wre "in your face" more than the others...and I don't mean to be disrespectful to them at all, because I dont fel disrespectful toward them, but more, thats just part of their beliefs, to try and convert you. So, thats a subjective perspective from a member of the ignorant secular population.

[lionfamily1999]

Wow! Baptist and Pro-Choice does seem somehow a contradiction in terms, however this may be their personal belief.

When we attended a Baptist church (for a very short time, dh could not stomach it) the largest issue at the time seemed that there would never be a guitar or a set of drums included in the worship service. Dresses for women were the norm, however, I showed up frequently in pants...as I said we were not there for long. I am not saying they are way off the mark but their priorities were just not ours.

 

This is so funny to me, because I'm part of a Baptist church and the women there all wear pants. I've seen them in dresses for special occasions, but it's not the norm at all. While the church does seem to be strictly Pro-Life, nearly everyone watches and enjoys tv, our youth group has skate nights (with music!), and our youth pastor plays the guitar for our praise and worship. And it's Southern Baptists........ hmm. Oh, and there's no ban on drinking, except for the pastor.

The original meaning of fundamentalist was to distinguish them from biblical liberals who had a looser view of the biblical text. So "Christ is not the only way" might be a part of it, but it's really another view of Scripture.

 

The social/cultural part may or may not go with the theological part.

 

My in-laws, for instance, did not all their kids to play sports, attend the prom, watch TV, listen to popular music, etc. Their theological beliefs don't differ much from ours except in the way they apply certain things practically in terms of lifestyle. (We do all of the above.)

So, if I believe the Bible literally then I'm a fundamentalist, even if my preferred atire is limited to jeans and a t-shirt?

In an effort to lighten things up I'll attempt a definition:

 

Regardless of what Wiki, or any other site may say, a fundamentalist is any Christian with whom you disagree because they are too strict in some way. (i.e. the "no" crowd, wherein "No" applies to something you allow.)

 

A non-fundamentalist Christian is you. And anyone who agrees with you on most things.

 

A Liberal Christian is anyone with whom you disagree because they are too loose on some vitally important issue.

 

Lest I be misunderstood, this is all said tongue-in-cheek.:D:D

 

1John 2:9-11

I think this is the best definition yet (and closest to what I've seen).

I always had a vague notion, as a non Christian who has mixed with Christians over the years through homeschooling, that Fundamentalists were the ones who felt it was their duty o try and convert you...

See and this makes me think that urpedonmommy should go fix the wiki definition with her own, because this seems like another definition very similar to hers. Peela, I'm not trying to attack, it's just that your definition does sound very much like the aformentioned definition ;)

 

From my readings I think all Christians are supposed to do that. Whether or not we do... well.....

[TravelingChris]

I have to say that the original five fundamentals listed were ones I could agree with when I was a Catholic and I can still agree with as a Protestant. It seems to me that definition only distinguishes most Christians from a group of people who call themselves Christians but often don't believe in one of those (sometimes they are not trinitarians, sometimes they don't believe that Jesus is God, sometimes it has to do with what they believe about the Bible). I may be wrong but Unitarians, Jehovah's Witnesses, and LDS are a few groups that would not adhere to those five principles. It may be that in the early 1900's there were big disputes about these things. As many have pointed out, now the disputes center less on fundamentals but on peripherals like what type of music to have at worship or which version of the Bible to use, not whether the Bible is true or not, or whether Jesus was really the Son of God or not.

[Kathleen in VA]

Not to throw a wrench in the works but legalism is not the belief that you should not do certain things (smoking, drinking, dancing, playing cards). Rather, it is the belief that by abstaining from these (or other) things (or by doing other "good" things) you can earn your salvation. Legalism generally means that you are trying to earn your salvation by keeping the law. Only Jesus Christ ever kept the law completely - no one else is capable of doing so. That is why it was only Jesus who could pay for our sins on the cross. It is his atonement that accomplishes our salvation, not our works.

 

That being said, some people abstain from certain behaviors or do others (such as wearing a head covering or giving money to the poor) because they believe that is what Christ would have them do. It is in response to His love that they make decisions about what to do and what not to do - not to earn salvation. For example, the Bible says that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit so some people choose not to smoke for that reason. Not smoking is simply their way of obeying God. My mother was a Christian but she was addicted to nicotine and died of lung cancer. She tried to quit many times but was never able to do so. I wish she hadn't smoked for her own health, but she trusted in Christ's payment on the cross for her sins and I don't believe her smoking kept her out of heaven.

 

Jesus said, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." Obedience to God's word is how we show Him we love him but it does not accomplish our salvation. Only Jesus could do that.

 

I don't think anyone would accuse someone of being legalistic if they said they refused to murder or rob people. Those are just acts that most Christians can agree are unacceptable in light of God's word. The problem arises when one Christian's conscience is more sensitive than another's. For example, one Christian might see drinking any alcohol at all as sinful while another sees drinking in moderation to be acceptable. The Christian who chooses to abstain from all alcoholic beverages is seen as being "legalistic" because they draw the line sooner than the Christian who believes moderation is ok, but actually, unless one of them sees their behavior as meriting favor or salvation from God, neither is being legalistic. They are just each obeying the dictates of their own consciences and should be allowed to do so without being called names. It is between them and God.

[Melinda in VT]

I may be wrong but Unitarians, Jehovah's Witnesses, and LDS are a few groups that would not adhere to those five principles.

 

Actually, when I was LDS (i.e., birth to 30), I believed all of those, as long as you add "as far as it is translated correctly" to the first point.

[LibraryLover]

k

Edited March 13, 2010 by LibraryLover

[Crimson Wife]

So, if I believe the Bible literally then I'm a fundamentalist, even if my preferred atire is limited to jeans and a t-shirt?

 

This is what I personally think of when I think of a "fundamentalist Christian". Someone who takes a literal interpretation of every single word in the Bible, rather than saying that some passages may be true in an allegorical sense. Christian theologians have been debating for nearly 2 millennia how to read Scripture so there's no point into going into specifics here...

[OnTheBrink]

According to *that* definition, I'm a fundie, though I tend not to think of myself as such. I tend to think of fundies as the "no funnies." You know...

 

No dancing.

No card playing.

No pants.

No make-up.

No secular music.

No mixed swimming.

No secular friends.

No secular tv.

 

The IFB church school I went to growing up is a good example. I was a preacher's kid and still not conservative enough for them. I hid in my car during lunch so I could listen to Carmen (gasp).

 

If fundamentalist means someone who believes in the actual historical truth of Scripture, the Nicene Creed, and the Apostles Creed, well, I guess count me in.

 

I think the only thing my church takes a stand on is the dancing thing, but the stand it takes is that there's no dancing at church. If you want to boogie at your wedding reception, have it somewhere else. People have, and they're always well-attended. Those who don't want to dance don't have to!

 

On the other issues, they're all considered issues of conviction. Wanna wear pants, make-up and play cards? Fine. It's only a problem if you tell someone who believes those things are wrong that they're wrong for thinking so. And vice versa. We try not to major on the minors much. ;)