From Your Perspective, What Is A Fundamentalist?

[R. S. Martin]

A fundy is someone who will lie about any event in order to promote lying works and wonders. A fundy is the most savage immoral person Christianity ever puked out. They don't make good Christians and they don't make good humans either. A fundy is the rotted offal of a religion pretending to be its perfume. Their only purpose in life is to sew discord between those who believe in Christianity and those who do not by laying blame for the evils of the world on the shoulders of nonbelievers.

 

A very apt description of what I've seen of the creator of this thread.

 

In keeping with your description he will be sure to deny having done anything worthy of such a description. That will only prove your point.

 

Given that I have predicted it, he may use more sophisticated methods of lying and denying but it will be there in the end. I'm getting fed up with his mind-games of dodge the issue and may just quit responding one of these times. Time will tell.

[Deva]

Technically fundamentalism refers to christians who interpret the Bible for the most part literally. They are the creation science, young earth people. They say things like 'God said it, I believe it, that settles it." The Bible is considered the word of God. For them there is no such thing as "situation ethics." They take a narrow view and think that ethics is confined to Bible believers. For this reason they post the 10 Commandments on courthouse walls and take extreme positions on ethical issues. Of course they believe in such things as sin, judgment, the atonement, a literal heaven and hell, the Trinity, etc. If it is not in the Bible, such as modern science, it cannot be true.

 

But I have come to understand that fundamentalism is a particular way of seeing the world which goes beyond these specific christian beliefs. It is a tendency to see only black and white, right and wrong, true and false, with no in-between ambiguity tolerated. Its a person who can't live with uncertainty. A person who cannot look at evidence dispassionately with an attitude of wanting to understand. Also, often a person who accepts authority in an unquestioning way, whether christian or nonchristian.

[Evolution_beyond]

Someone who takes the bible literally and/or is very militant in their religious views

[Grandpa Harley]

Basically an arse who comes in and tells us all we're all sinners who deserve hell...

 

So, that would be the OP

[R. S. Martin]

Basically an arse who comes in and tells us all we're all sinners who deserve hell...

 

So, that would be the OP

 

Gramps, you got Kleenexes and stuff? This kid's going to get all bleeding heartish and ask when he ever condemned anyone to hell. Or maybe it's a she. Or an it.

 

EDIT

Profile says Male.

[Grandpa Harley]

Basically an arse who comes in and tells us all we're all sinners who deserve hell...

 

So, that would be the OP

 

Gramps, you got Kleenexes and stuff? This kid's going to get all bleeding heartish and ask when he ever condemned anyone to hell. Or maybe it's a she. Or an it.

 

EDIT

Profile says Male.

 

Think Widdums will get as pissy as he did when I called him a rapist after he called me a sinner?

[R. S. Martin]

Basically an arse who comes in and tells us all we're all sinners who deserve hell...

 

So, that would be the OP

 

Gramps, you got Kleenexes and stuff? This kid's going to get all bleeding heartish and ask when he ever condemned anyone to hell. Or maybe it's a she. Or an it.

 

EDIT

Profile says Male.

 

Think Widdums will get as pissy as he did when I called him a rapist after he called me a sinner?

 

Didn't see that one but probably. Has a habit of getting pissy.

 

Couldn't believe it. He claims not to be fundy. Yet the link took me to Christianity Today, which I know comes out of Princeton Seminary. Which is birthplace of North American fundamentalist theology. I'm studying the nineteenth century Princetonian theologians and it's like watching the supernovas develop before my eyes. They're changing the centuries old Westminster Confession of Faith ever so slightly and claiming not ever to develop a new idea--and priding themselves in their loyalty to tradition. But they're doing it in order to defend the Bible--as though truth couldn't stand on its own. They've lost faith in the Holy Spirit to do its own work, according to Ernest Sandeen, and they've vowed to defend the Bible or die in the attempt.

 

Atheists are evil--not to mention stupid. Morals and true knowledge come from god--as nature and common sense tells us (according to Hodge).

 

THAT's the nest out of which walkie-talkie comes out of and he's asking why we call him a fundie. Go figure!

 

I wonder why he's not responding to this thread anymore.

[acorn]

I've noticed that the term "fundy" has been used around here quite a bit, and it has been attached to me as well, which to be honest I find rather odd. Perhaps are views of what a fundamentalist is are different. I'd like to get your take, and perhaps take it a few different places from there.

 

I dont see how anyone can read the Bible literally, and defend it. Half of the NT are letters written in different veiws for different purposes. I saw your thread about different denominations as well. Paul touched on different subjects more strict than some; because of the status of those churches he was writting.

 

I like the definition later in this thread of fundamentalism. You have to be open minded about the Bible, looking in all aspects; as the Bible as many gaps and gray areas. History is history, Walk.

[acorn]

Yikes! Ok, sorry, here's the link you were wanting. Color me ignorant on that one I guess, but I enjoy the jump from not knowing about copyright laws to I obviously can't be a true Christian. You really know me.

 

As for saying what my beliefs are, I didn't know that in a thread that I started talking about what "fundy" means to you that I had to give a full outline of what I believe. Nor did I know that you claiming that I am "elusive" (which I honestly took no offense toward) meant that I had to do the same. Right now, all I'm doing is getting your take on what a "fundy" is in your eyes.

 

I scored 63.

[florduh]

I took the test as if I still believed. I scored 32. I was an ignorant asshole fundy. And now there's nobody to forgive me!!!!!!!

 

- Chris

[Evolution_beyond]

I answered the quiz according to what I believe now (though obviously for some questions I had to make some allowances for concepts that I don't believe in anymore and answer as if i did believe in them)

 

I scored 78%. Wow! Get me, I'm so progressive.

 

Actually, on reflection my answers wouldn't have been that different when I believed - though some of them might be.

[R. S. Martin]

Changing my tone here a bit, Walkthehawk. I want to thank you for the link to the hermeneutics page and I am sincerely grateful for it. I am doing my thesis on fundamentalism. A major part of it is on Charles Hodge, one time president of Princeton. I'm having serious problems making my argument as strong as I want to make it. This website has given me much-needed information. I found it just now. So thanks for the link.

 

Also, Chris, I just did what you did and took the test for what I believed when I was a Christian. It was really tricky because I was a pretty confused person--couldn't really believe since I could never find the evidence everybody else claimed to have but not believing was not a choice for me. Also, the options to choose from in the test did not exactly match the theology or tradition I come from, and there was no "other" option. My score was 53.

 

One thing that kept it so low was that on quite a number of items I checked the box for "the holy spirit tells me directly." In my mind, that's code for "I do my own thinking" or "I don't trust/wait around for authority." Part of the problem was, I read stuff in the Bible that they never preached on. I was looking for answers and couldn't wait around for them old preacher-guys to tell me. In my opinion, that is far-left liberal or progressive, but for the test they make it far-right conservative. Naturally, the score is skewed but you can't mess with computerized scores so there! My score should probably be 83.

[florduh]

Also, Chris, I just did what you did and took the test for what I believed when I was a Christian. It was really tricky because I was a pretty confused person--couldn't really believe since I could never find the evidence everybody else claimed to have but not believing was not a choice for me. Also, the options to choose from in the test did not exactly match the theology or tradition I come from, and there was no "other" option. My score was 53.

 

One thing that kept it so low was that on quite a number of items I checked the box for "the holy spirit tells me directly." In my mind, that's code for "I do my own thinking" or "I don't trust/wait around for authority." Part of the problem was, I read stuff in the Bible that they never preached on. I was looking for answers and couldn't wait around for them old preacher-guys to tell me. In my opinion, that is far-left liberal or progressive, but for the test they make it far-right conservative. Naturally, the score is skewed but you can't mess with computerized scores so there! My score should probably be 83.

 

I was a bigger fool than thou, probably still am.

 

- Chris

[hereticzero]

Fundies hate beavers.

[R. S. Martin]

I was a bigger fool than thou, probably still am.

 

- Chris

 

Depends what defines a fool.

[godlessgrrl]

I've noticed that the term "fundy" has been used around here quite a bit, and it has been attached to me as well, which to be honest I find rather odd. Perhaps are views of what a fundamentalist is are different. I'd like to get your take, and perhaps take it a few different places from there.

 

My mind holds three definitions of "fundamentalist".

 

First, a Fundamentalist (with a capital F) is an individual who belongs to a denomination derived from or descended from the American Fundamentalist religious movement of the early 20th century. The movement rejected what it saw as a developing modernism at the time, and sought to "get back to the basics" of Xianity, if you will. There are a number of Fundamentalist denominations, but a major common theme is biblical inerrancy and a rejection of higher textual criticism.

 

Second, a fundamentalist (with a lowercase f) is an individual of any group which adheres strictly to doctrine. Usually this is a religious thing, but it doesn't have to be; all that's really required is for the group in question to have a set of written rules, a holy book, or some kind of party dogma which all members must follow.

 

Thirdly, a fundy (or fundie, plural fundies) is an individual whose adherence to doctrine is so legalistic and so controlling that, whenever given the choice to act in accordance with the spirit vs. the letter of their chosen doctrine, they will choose the letter every time; and when given the choice to act doctrinally sound vs. to act loving, they will choose doctrine over love every time.

 

All three tend to be legalistic, controlling, close-minded, conservative, and spiritually abusive. They also tend to shut down or restrict education and learning, as well as ignore reality, where such things conflict with their chosen holy doctrines.

 

Every once in a great, great while I will encounter a Fundamentalist (capital F) who acts with common sense and compassion. I can count the number of such folks I know of on one hand, however. I have never encountered a fundamentalist or a fundie who acts in anything other than a legalistic, arrogant manner, however.

 

Those are my personal working definitions, for whatever it's worth. Your mileage may vary. Batteries not included. Any opinions bearing any resemblance to other opinions, living or dead, are purely coincidental. Void where prohibited. No running by the pool. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

[R. S. Martin]

I've noticed that the term "fundy" has been used around here quite a bit, and it has been attached to me as well, which to be honest I find rather odd. Perhaps are views of what a fundamentalist is are different. I'd like to get your take, and perhaps take it a few different places from there.

 

My mind holds three definitions of "fundamentalist".

 

First, a Fundamentalist (with a capital F) is an individual who belongs to a denomination derived from or descended from the American Fundamentalist religious movement of the early 20th century. The movement rejected what it saw as a developing modernism at the time, and sought to "get back to the basics" of Xianity, if you will. There are a number of Fundamentalist denominations, but a major common theme is biblical inerrancy and a rejection of higher textual criticism.

 

Second, a fundamentalist (with a lowercase f) is an individual of any group which adheres strictly to doctrine. Usually this is a religious thing, but it doesn't have to be; all that's really required is for the group in question to have a set of written rules, a holy book, or some kind of party dogma which all members must follow.

 

Thirdly, a fundy (or fundie, plural fundies) is an individual whose adherence to doctrine is so legalistic and so controlling that, whenever given the choice to act in accordance with the spirit vs. the letter of their chosen doctrine, they will choose the letter every time; and when given the choice to act doctrinally sound vs. to act loving, they will choose doctrine over love every time.

 

All three tend to be legalistic, controlling, close-minded, conservative, and spiritually abusive. They also tend to shut down or restrict education and learning, as well as ignore reality, where such things conflict with their chosen holy doctrines.

 

Every once in a great, great while I will encounter a Fundamentalist (capital F) who acts with common sense and compassion. I can count the number of such folks I know of on one hand, however. I have never encountered a fundamentalist or a fundie who acts in anything other than a legalistic, arrogant manner, however.

 

Those are my personal working definitions, for whatever it's worth. Your mileage may vary. Batteries not included. Any opinions bearing any resemblance to other opinions, living or dead, are purely coincidental. Void where prohibited. No running by the pool. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

 

You get an A+ for that essay, Gwen.

[walkthehawk]

From my perspective, I see fundamentalism as someone who takes everything very literally, which many of you have said. I think though with that also comes a very legalistic behavior. There is a strong correlation, from what I have experienced, between that heavy literal translation of Scripture while also holding to a lot of things like not drinking any alcohol, do not read any fantasy literature, no tattoos, etc. So when I was thrown into the "fundy" camp, that is what through me off, because there are many things that the Christian community would see about me that would have them call me anything but a fundamentalist.

 

For example, I do drink alcohol. Though I do believe it is a sin to get drunk, I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says that drinking alcohol is bad. I love fantasy, and love playing Magic the Gathering. I don't mind people getting tattoos, though I myself don't have one. Though I believe God certainly could have created the world in seven days, I don't think that is necessarily what is being said in the creation story. I'm friends with a pagan and an atheist. Matter of fact I think they would both claim that I am one of their better friends. We have had plenty of debates about worldviews, and I don't hold back on what is true (and yes I believe it to be true, or else what the heck is the point of believing it), yet after all this time we are still friends. Am I conservative in a lot of my theology? Absolutely. Do I think everything has to be taken in a literal translation? No. For example, Jewish tradition would say that how they use numbers was more symbollic of something that literal like the Greek worldview.

 

I guess some of the explanations that I have received from people about what a fundamentalist is would end up pegging me as a "fundy". I do hold to what I believe very strongly. I'm not going to give in to someone's argument just because they don't see any "proof". If I disagree with you, I'll tell you, just as you would me. It would take quite a bit of convincing to have me change my mind, just as it would you. I will listen to any respectful given argument about an issue.

 

As to why I took so long for me to post, I generally don't get home til really late in the day, and I can't access this website from where I work.

[florduh]

Well, Hawk walker (how does one walk a hawk?) it turns out I was more of a Fundy than you are.

 

From your information, I wouldn't say you fall into Fundy territory, but you are a passionate believer. In my Christian days I probably would have considered you a little weak in the faith!!!

 

- Chris

[MonolithTMA]

Hi walkthehawk,

 

You sound very much like the kind of Christian that I used to be, and I would have never considered my self a fundy, even though I believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God. I certainly didn't believe in beating people up with it, though I would defend it in discussions and was considered to be a decent apologist by some of my friends. When I started reading and posting here I was a Christian, though I never managed to get the apologist tag, and had to have the yellow squiddie thing explained to me when folks mentioned it to me. I don't remember how I found this site. It may have been while doing research for the blog I was writing questioning my faith. It took me a very short while to come to the conclusion that God was no longer real to me, and in fact even though my faith in him was very real, he was not, at least not in the way the Bible said he was. I now know that the way I "saw God" in my life was the same way people see shapes in clouds or in wood grain. If you want to see something strongly enough you will. Now, having cast Christianity aside I am free to really look for truth without a book telling me where I'm allowed to look. It's pretty exciting and refreshing.

 

So, I'm not going to be calling you a fundy unless you start telling me I'm going to hell because I don't believe like you. When I was a Christian I believed in hell, but saw it more as a choice people make, to be with God or not. If God exists, I'm pretty sure he or she is bigger and more profound than anything we could ever fully understand.

[Grandpa Harley]

He's all ready said we all deserve Hell... spaniel lick-turd of a demon worshipper...

[florduh]

He's all ready said we all deserve Hell... spaniel lick-turd of a demon worshipper...

 

I find the Hell thing distasteful as well, but that alone isn't enough to earn the label of Fundy. Still crazy, illogical and rude, but not Fundy. For that monicker we need the Rapture, Homosexual Dogma, Creationism, and a host of other crap.

 

- Chris

[Grandpa Harley]

Naaa... can one be 'almost' alive... calling me a sinner means 'Fundy asshole who can die in pain'...

[SWIM]

I will listen to any respectful given argument about an issue.

 

Well, this is either a total lie, or you have never really looked for "respectful" arguements.

 

http://godisimaginary.com/

 

Read that, at least some of it. And I would like to hear your opinion.

 

There are so many, not only respectful arguements, but EXTREMELY logical arguments that xtianity is total bull.

 

Prove to us how "open minded" you are, I dare you to read that whole site, reseach the data till your heart's content, and come back here and tell us you see "no problem" with xtianity.

[R. S. Martin]

I dunno but I tend to agree with Gramps on this. I've looked at a wide spectrum of Christian beliefs. I know some people in real life who might turn into enemies if they knew my definition of fundy and for this reason I am extremely hesitant to present one. But in my mind, based on what I've observed from faith statements online and testimonies, etc., the literal hell doctrine divides the christian community not only theologically but also psychologically in terms of how they think and how they relate to "outsiders." That is pretty profound.

 

That is where I draw the line of fundy.

 

Monolith said:

 

When I was a Christian I believed in hell, but saw it more as a choice people make, to be with God or not.

 

I have a very serious problem with that belief. I see absolutely no difference between it, and saying, "You're going to hell for not believing the right things."

 

They are one and the same thing so far as I can see.

 

You might as well say, You can choose whether or not to be gay. You can choose whether or not to believe in God. You can choose whether or not to have sexual appetites. Etc.

 

There are things I cannot choose. I cannot choose how I will have been born. If logical investigation dictates that there is no god, I cannot choose whether or not to be with a nonexistent god. But the fundy presumes the right to tell me I choose not to be with God.

 

That, to me, is outrageous and offensive in the extreme. Respect is not even a distant alien; it does not enter the picture.

 

Now compare this with Christians who think this life is all there is. I tell them about my nonreligious status. I think I'm telling them a major bit of information. They blink, gulp, and go on as though they are thinking, "What's the big deal? Why did she even tell me that? How is it relevant?"

 

There is no shifting of gears, no subtle hint of pity, nothing. It's just another bit of information in an already full schedule.

 

That is why I think the hell doctrine is so profound as to merit defining fundamentalism. It may not have had that status a century ago but by today it does. Perhaps we owe this to twentieth century existentialism in psychology, theology, and philosophy.