Fundamentalist

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by antiaging, Dec 9, 2007.

  1. antiaging

    antiaging
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    0
    A fundamentalist is a christian that believes in the fundamentals of the Christian faith as defined in the New Testament. [Based on the conservative protestant movement started in 1910, to oppose modernism.] Modernism was an attempt by liberals, to reconcile the teachings of Christianity with the findings of science, especially evolution.

    A fundamentalist believes:
    The inerrancy, infallibility and literal truth of the bible.

    The virgin birth and complete deity of Jesus Christ.

    The physical ressurection of Christ and all dead.

    The atoning sacrifice for the sins of the World, by Jesus' death on the cross.

    The second coming of Christ in bodilly form.

    The way I look at it, the real believers are the fundamentalists.
    If these are the fundamentals of the Christian faith, then this is what Christians are supposed to believe.
     
  2. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    That's too simple a definition.

    Written as it is, I would be considered a fundamentalist. :eek:

    But Fundamentalism is not just believing in the fundamentals!

    IMO, it has become a ridged, sepratist movement, almost pharisaical in it's beliefs concerning translations, personal actions and preferences.

    Many of the early fundamentalists that definded the movement would be (and are) ostracised by those who consider themselves fundamentalists today.

    Rob
     
    #2 Deacon, Dec 9, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2007
  3. steaver

    steaver
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    9,005
    Likes Received:
    82
    This world has a sad way of consistantly redefining terms. This is why I just stick to Christian since this term originated from the scriptures and is forever defined by the scriptures. The world my try and does try to redefine Christian in their own minds, BUT we have the scriptures to forever prove them wrong!

    God Bless! :thumbs:
     
  4. trustitl

    trustitl
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Messages:
    735
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the following speaks to this issue. It might not on the surface, but see if you can follow my thought:

    James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; 3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool

    In every group there are certain things that can elevate you within that group. If you are a good old boy, wearing a NASCAR hat and chewing Skoal will help. Listening to come country music is also a must.

    In the hood the right kind of coat, shoes, and the way you talk sets you apart. Listening to gangsta rap is also a must.

    Most fundamentalist groups have their own wardrobe, lingo, and music. I know this is a generalization and that is my very point. I am sure you are saying "I'm not one of those'. Why we would want to take on these man-made labels continues to amaze me.

    When Paul addressed the Corinthian church he had to alert them to this very issue. Being known by anything save Christ is of no value. It is much easier to find the "best" group or label and put it on, but we need to be willing to put on Christ, and Him alone. This sound simplistic I know, but consider it and see if you can see how the body of Christ has been hurt by this.

    "He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."

    "Ye are Christ's and Christ is God's".


    Deacon is right: " it has become a ridged, sepratist movement, almost pharisaical in it's beliefs concerning translations, personal actions and preferences."

    That is not to say that you are or any individual fundamentalist is. But the meaning of words change and when we take on a label we need to be willing to see what it means to people. I even struggle with the term "Christian" because it is a lable that implies certain things that are not true about me. We will all be known by our actions anyway no matter what label we are called.

    I think it is a sign of our imaturity that we want a label applied to us. Look at teenagers. They are often looking to labels on clothes, sports teams, or music groups to define themselves. It works so they keep doing it. But in reality they are merely exposing that they need something to stand on other than who they are.

    "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

    I am not calling you immature because I don't even know you. I am addressing an issue that concerns me and I feel needs to be addressed.

    God bless.
     
  5. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, Welcome to BB, anitaging! :wavey:

    That list is a good one. Only thing is, right now "fundamentalism" is being associated with radical Islamic terrorism, too!

    And the extension of that inference and by a minority of Christians' practice thereof is that we "judge" the world rather than go forth to save the world.

    I think this is why the label "evangelical" has been substituted for "fundamentalist" of late.

    I do believe in unity of the body first around the Spirit (Eph 4:3) through salvation and then centered on our "knowledge and faith of Christ (Eph 4:13) of which there are certainly those truths you point to and some would include many more as we attain to the measure of the stature of Christ.

    Thanks for opening the topic. God bless you.

    skypair
     
  6. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    The definition of Fundamentalist given in the
    Opening post is in my 1976 Dictionary.
    It came from a set of books sent free to
    many pastors about 1910-1920 called
    THE FUNDAMENTALS.

    About 1985 'fundamentalist' became to
    mean those of any of the book religions
    that adhere strictly to their book.
    Constructs like "Fundamental Muslim
    Cleric Anarchist Leader" became possible.
    (how could a Muslim be Fundamentalist
    under the definition that includes this:
    "movement within American Protestantism" ?)

    About 1995 the meaning of 'Fundamentalist'
    = 'bigot of any kind' came into being.

    This all seems totally phony to me, but much
    like what Rush Limbaugh calls the 'drive-by media'.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    sidenote:
    I consider myself a Fundamentalist using the definition
    given in the OP. However, I belong to
    a local church that is a member of the Southern Baptist
    Convention /SBC/.

    I get some literature from the Conservative Baptist
    Fellowship /HQ is in my town/ -- individuals can be
    members of the CBF. Individuals can NOT be members
    of the SBC - only churchs, associations (frequently
    a couple of US counties), State Organizations, etc.
     
  7. Melanie

    Melanie
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,779
    Likes Received:
    5
    In the Catholic Church there is a term of Cafteria Catholics...those of a liberal, modern persausion who select the things that suit and ignore the things they do not like.......
     
  8. Jillian

    Jillian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen to that.

    Oh and fundamentalists dont support unity with ROME!
     
  9. Jillian

    Jillian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not all are liberals...

    Some of them reject things they know are nonsense like indulgences and Purgatory.

    Some arent liberals, some are proto Protestants at home watching Charles Stanley.
     
  10. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    >The inerrancy, infallibility and literal truth of the bible.

    This is inferred by some but not taught in the Bible.

    "Literal truth" obviously not correct. The trees of the field will not clap their hands. The mustard seed is not the smallest seed. A seed does not die before it sprouts.
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    "Fundamentalists" are sometimes confused with those who reject all but "the 1611 King James" as if Paul only spoke English -- rather than also speaking Greek... ;)

    But it is FAR more applicable to find the BROAD division along the lines of the OP to include the following.

    Fundamentalist --
    1. Believes the Bible is trustworthy and without error.
    2. Accepts the book of Genesis as factually accurate in details.
    3. Accepts the miracles of the Bible as "factual".
    4. Insists on a sola-scriptura test for all doctrine.

    That alone will result in a rift right down the Christian church center pew a mile wide.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  12. Jillian

    Jillian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not a KJV onlyist, or a Ruckmanite that declares the KJV as new revelation.

    But I do know there is a problem with those who followed false Bibles translated by Hort and Westcott and the NIV is so horribly translated it takes many parts out.
     
  13. FriendofSpurgeon

    FriendofSpurgeon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2003
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    36
     
  14. trustitl

    trustitl
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Messages:
    735
    Likes Received:
    0
    FOS
    As stated before, I think that's why a lot of churches moved away from "fundamental" to "evangelical" though that term is so broad it can now mean almost anything.


    Even in the group under this more palatable name there exists "standards". It is the nature of organizing around anything other that the TRUTH. Both of these groups have a lot of truth, but they add to it and it becomes a work of man.

    I Cor 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
     
  15. FriendofSpurgeon

    FriendofSpurgeon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2003
    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    36

    Sorry -- don't understand what you are saying.
     
  16. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Rippon here . You need to visit the Bible Versions/Translations forum sometime . You are in need of some education regarding the NIV translation and the subject of W&H . And , you had better be careful about uttering nonsense about "false Bibles" . That can rightly get you in trouble here -- fair warning .
     
  17. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Wow. To a real fundamentalist who grew up in the movement starting in 1951, there are so many misconceptions all ready in this thread that it's hard to know where to begin.

    (1) Fundamentalists do not just believe a set of fundamental doctrines. We stand for them and fight for them. If simply believing a set of doctrines was enough, leading evangelicals like Billy Graham, Francis Schaeffer, etc. would not have taken pains to say they were not fundamentalists!

    (2) Evangelical and fundamental are not synonyms. Fundamentalism is considered by church historians to be a branch of evangelicalism.

    (3) None of the fundamentals included the preservation of Scripture. The verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture was the stand fundamentalists took until the late 1970's, when the preservation issue started heating up. Therefore, as a self-appointed historian of fundamentalism I don't consider it to be a fundamental. (I knew personally many of the early leaders of fundamentalist, starting with my grandfather John R. Rice, one of the original fundamentalists. Don't force me to start dropping names! :smilewinkgrin: )

    (4) Many fundamental groups do not mandate the KJV. (See #3.) Examples: Fundamental Baptist Fellowship, Bible Presbyterians, GARB, IFCA, etc.

    (5) The IFB movement (independant fundamental Baptist) is not the only type of fundamentalist out there. Many non-Baptists are fundamentalists.

    (5) In fact, there are many differing groups of IFBs, and even within the group they do not agree on issues such as the KJV: FBF, BBF, GARB, SBF, WBF, IBFI, etc.
     
  18. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Too many generalizations here, friend. Fundamentalism is a lot bigger and less defined than you appear to think.

    Actually, virtually all fundamentalist groups focus on the Gospel very strongly. That is why among evangelical missions, the only group increasing annually in the number of missionaries being sent out. (I can prove this for Japan by the JEMA missionary directory, if not the rest of the world.) And again, the great majority of books being published on personal evangelism nowadays are written by fundamentalists. Check out the Sword of the Lord Publ. catalog sometime--book after book on evangelism.

    Exactly. People who call themselves evangelical now believe in such heresies as annihilationism, open theism, etc.

    P. S. I call Spurgeon the prototype fundamentalist. Are you aware of the Downgrade Controversy?
     
  19. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    If it is "God-breathed" (Greek theopneustos) as the Bible claims to be, then it is not merely inferred to be inerrant and infallible, it is taught to be.
    Fundamentalists typically hold to the historical-grammatical method of interpretation (as do conservative evangelicals). This means that yes, we usually interpret literally unless the meaning is clearly symbolic or metaphorical or a simile. Your examples of the mustard seed or the death of a seed therefore are irrelevant, since they are clearly symbolic and/or hyperbole.
     
  20. Palatka51

    Palatka51
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    JJ, You are so correct in all of your above posts and I personally want to thank God for your reasoned dissemination of fundamental faith. Your posts have calmed down the spirit of wrath that was building in my heart toward the attacks of the foundational faith where with I came to know Christ as my Savior,
    1. Hearing of the Word of God through the KJV
    2. Response to the Word by repentance.
    3. Believing in the death, burial and resurrection of the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth for remission of my sins.
    4. Obeying the call of the Holy Spirit to go into the world preaching the Gospel to all creatures.
    5. God's Grace, that helps me understand that even though folks may look different and respond unlike I have, may experience this wonderful Grace through Jesus Christ our Lord as well.
    How can anyone attack what can not be broken?
     

Share This Page

Loading...