I would like to ask posters here what they think Christian Fundamentalism is?

Question

First I think a Christian is a individual who has accepted Jesus Christ as thier Lord and Saviour and who is the Son of GOD creator of heaven and earth...
Is it fundamentalism to want a society that the Founding Fathers wanted?
A country that valued the family, the morals of decency rasing children to grow up and be productive citizens...

Protecting the institution of marraige, protecting the unborn from mainly young uninformed teens that think abortion is a way of birth control, teaching people to be responsible for thier actions, help people in need but don't enable them..Is this fundamentalism..if it is then I guess I am one...

Fundamentalism does not promote violence..Matin Luther King was a great promoter of this thought as a devoted christian..

BTW: What is hedonistic fundamentalism> Maybe that is what we have going on now...

Answer 1

It is a pathway to theocracy. NOT what the founding fathers wanted at all.

Answer 2

First of all, a definition to set the pace which is supplied by Wikipedia:

Fundamentalist Christianity, or Christian fundamentalism, is a movement that arose mainly within British and American Protestantism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by conservative evangelical Christians, who, in a reaction to modernism, actively affirmed a fundamental set of Christian beliefs: the inerrancy of the Bible, Sola Scriptura, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the imminent return of Jesus Christ.

While I agree with most of the statement, it's the part of it that I do not agree with: The inerrancy of scripture. It used to be a litmus test for a Christian to ask, " Is the Bible the inerrant word of God?" I would squirm when I was asked that. These days I do not.

I am firm in the proof that the Bible is NOT the inerrant word of God. I would admit that the Bible is the 'inspired' word of God, in that it was the inspiration of God which caused its conception.

Christian Fundamentalists still carry around that 'chip' on their shoulders, and of course by the admission that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, one must take it all as being equal, and that it is always fairly represented in English (being that it is in English that it is read where I come from).

Today I answer, " No, I believe that the Inerrant Word of God sat down at the right hand of the Father."

What I see in the Christian Fundamentalist doing is playing the strong hand. They tend to think that they can live a pleasing life that would impress God. They seem to think that they can live, " A Clean Christian Lifestyle." They seem to think that they can,"Make themselves better for God", as is the current bent in their study guides.

The problem that I see with that movement, is a trend towards Legalism, which is not helped by their insistence to reconcile James with Paul. This has been going on for at least decades, and is more akin to the Puritanical cults of the past. Except I would say, that James was the favored over Paul by the Puritans in many cases, as are many of those Christian movements which are devoting themselves to some of the laws of Moses.

To say that someone who is Christian who is not a Christian Fundamentalist, is then a Hedonistic Christian, would be to play into the hands of that mindset that I find dangerous to faith in Christ. Which is what we are supposed to have: Jesus in focus, not seeing if we can think that our lives are 'clean'.

Answer 3

Well, if you're gong to answer your own question, why are you asking us what WE think?

I'll just bet you'll pick as "Best Answer" someone who just parrots what you've said, too.


I think that religious fundamentalism is a reactionary defense of religion in the face of scientific materialism.

Before modernism, religions that had prospered served, among other things, to help people adjust to essential limitations, to accept things as they were. The mythical, mystical and ritualistic had given people a sense of the transcendent value of the past, a way to see the (slower) changes in the world as something that fit in with a "grand plan", and so were not alien.

But the changing world, the world that only looked forward, could not be served by that kind of religious thought. The Western world was breaking free of the previous limitations on development and discovery, and that affected everyone, including religious people. A new way of being religious had to be found.

Two things arose from that need: Fundamentalism and Pentecostalism. The first was an attempt to apply the rules of proof that work so well in scientific rationalism to religion (which only produces bad science and bad religion), and the second is a reactionary rejection of all rationalism.

Things don't develop in a vacuum. We never start with a "clean slate". What has gone before affects what happens now.

Modernism was the midwife for the very kinds of religious developments that the modern scientific community expresses such contempt for.

And, quite predictably, the more that fundamentalists are criticized, the more entrenched they become.

Anyone with a scientific mind ought to be able to see it coming. After all, Newton said it a long time ago.

"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction"


Religious truths are not like the proofs of scientific rationalism, but more like the intuitive insights of poetry or music or art. Conflating the two only results in bad science and bad religion.


But I don't think that it's going to go away, because a lot of people are threatened by modernism. There are people who, having accepted the scientific method as the only valid path to truth, feel that their most sacred values are being challenged, and who are motivated by fears, anxieties, and desires that are not unpredictable in the face of the modern (and largely secular) world. The "timeless truths" are now put under the microscope and found to be historically false or scientifically invalid.

And so they push back, and try to reclaim the truths of their religious texts by insisting on the literal, material factuality of the stories in those texts. And they become more entrenched in their positions because *they have thrown away* the value of mystic/mythic thought and accepted scientific rationalism where it doesn't belong; where, in fact, it actually destroys the value of religion.



It really is a bad idea.

The religions that are most likely to survive (without threats or other coercive recruitment techniques) are going to be those that adapt easily to scientific advancements, not those that find it necessary to promote ridiculous twisting of meaning in order to prove that the inaccuracies of their religious texts are factually valid. or perhaps those that place their emphasis on action rather than dogma (like Buddhism).

Answer 4

You ask a question so close to my heart. Labels of men mean nothing. I have been called fundy before and I am also called liberal, and called conservative, and also called evangelical, and I am only just me, one pserson. The worlds labels mean nothing to me.
To me a fundamentalist is also going to be a evangelical. from te worlds standards. Becuase if being fundamental means we stand firmly on the full word of God and do so withour fear or compromise, as Jesus did, then call me fundy, I am kool with that.
Being evangelical means teaching the truths of God to the world. ok IF you are truly a fundy doing all God says, you will take the gospel to the world.
It is only what God says that matters to me, and I know we must love Him enough to obey Him or we arent really His at all. God commands us to obey, He doent merely suggest it. So if we are truly fundy or evenangelical, truly Gods ppl, we will do all that Jesus did as we are comanded to do.
NEver heard the term hedonistic fundamentalism,but know it isnt of God. There is nothing hedonistic in God word . God is truth and love and knowlege and power. But of all He says , that doesnt contain any of the devils hedonistic stuff there. Darkness cant reside in the light of God. we all know that.
LAbels are only just that labels, that the devil will use to get us to go a certain way. WE dont have to receive them or use them ppl of God.
Just know we are a chld of God, and we are so in lov ewith Him that we will obey Him as He obeyed the father, and by the power of the cross, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, we are overcomers. not hepless little whinney Christians living like the world and saying I cant obey itss too had. Get over your bad self and hear what God has to say about this. Its not about you, its about Him. And He calls us to overcome to serve Him an lead others to Him, as well as our being able to receive the blessings He will send to us.
Passionate about this subject? Yep, I am passionate about all of Gods truths. No laodecia in this girl. nope. WE have a much higher calling....

Answer 5

Well your first flaw is in believing the lie passed around that the founding fathers were christian and wanted a christian theocracy. They clearly state they did not want that in fact article 11 of the treaty with Tripoli says exactly that.
The meaning of fundamentalism is a return to the fundamental beliefs. And yes is does promote violence against those who oppose your desire to turn the USA into a theocracy.
Religion is very adept as saying one thing and actually doing another.
You say you seek knowledge while ignoring most of what Jesus told you. You obey man instead of Jesus because you listen to your leaders instead of learning for yourself. You are gullible and will be lead into vicious acts of violence in the name of god because you have no ability to question.
That is the fundamentalist christian movement in the USA today.

Answer 6

I think it's a little preposterous to claim that the founding fathers didn't found the country that they wanted to found. They created the separation between church and state for a reason, to protect each from the other.

As for your statements about family, morals, productive citizens, please don't assume that those are strictly christian traits. I know you aren't aware of this, but the majority of the founding fathers were DEISTS and atheists, not chrisitans. They created the foundation our nation is built upon, not your religious leader that claims to know what the founding fathers really wanted. Learn about them from their own history, instead of from the christian version of their history. You'd be surprised at find out this nation is EXACTLY the way they designed it, and it's not who you think that is trying to throw it off balance.

Answer 7

People who think they know what fundamentalism is should read the definition given here:

http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~nurelweb/books/concise/WORDS-F.html

Answer 8

Annoying.

Answer 9

Hedonistic fundamentalism is extreme overindulgence--a gluttony of the church, if you will--Christian fundamentalism is the rebirth of the third reich, nothing less

Answer 10

the founding fathers wanted:

separation of church and state, and
freedom of religion

fundamentalists want the opposite.