Should We Abandon The Term ‘Fundamentalist’?

Reminder that labels are about only 3 millimeters thick

I commented on the actual article, so I won’t retype everything I wrote (although I’m sure it deserves some editing). I will say that the label “fundamentalist” is going to be ours whether we want it or not. And by “ours” I mean Believers whom many that are members of this site would NOT even think to classify as a fundamentalist. Christians who affirm a Biblical view of sexuality, among other things, are fundamentalists in the eyes of our pluralistic society. There is an article on Salon that speaks to this.

[John E.]

I commented on the actual article, so I won’t retype everything I wrote (although I’m sure it deserves some editing). I will say that the label “fundamentalist” is going to be ours whether we want it or not. And by “ours” I mean Believers whom many that are members of this site would NOT even think to classify as a fundamentalist. Christians who affirm a Biblical view of sexuality, among other things, are fundamentalists in the eyes of our pluralistic society. There is an article on Salon that speaks to this.

It’s not about “offense”, it’s about meaning:

• To the non-Christian it means something that you don’t want it to mean
• To the theologically astute it may have meaning but when you are communicating with people at that level there are more precise ways of explaining one’s position.

Slight exaggeration: Huguenot has more meaning than Fundamentalist

[Jim]

• To the non-Christian it means something that you don’t want it to mean
• To the theologically astute it may have meaning but when you are communicating with people at that level there are more precise ways of explaining one’s position

I don’t believe that to the non-Christian it means something that I don’t want it to mean, generally speaking. To the ex-fundy who has an axe to grind the term is probably weighted with specific connotations that I would prefer to not be saddled with. To be honest, though, I’m not overly concerned with the opinions of ex-fundies. I do believe that for most of the non-Christians who use the term pejoratively, the connotations are mainly things that I hope and pray that I have the courage to truly exhibit and boldly proclaim; things like speaking God’s truth into the face of secular opposition, belief in the virgin birth of Christ, the inerrancy of Scriptures, and the Divine punishment in Hell that awaits those who refuse to bow their knee to King Jesus in repentance.

Admittedly, this is purely anecdotal (does hard data and research exist in this area?), but having been raised in a KJVO home, I was taken aback when in my early 20’s I was finally able, as an atheist, to separate from my upbringing and live in and of the world and the world rarely defined and saw things in the ways that I was told they did. The pagans that I came in contact with didn’t differentiate between the church my dad pastored and the churches that my dad separated from. The term “fundamentalist” was used to mean Christians who actually believed that the Bible was inspired and preserved by God and believed things like the miracles actually happened. Up until a couple of years ago I was a professional theatre artist, and, as a new Christian, I was at the time dismayed to find that if I attempted to articulate the Bible’s teachings on sexuality, I was labeled a fundamentalist. As I mentioned, outside of ex-fundies, I have rarely heard the label applied in ways that I find pejorative. My fear of man rears its ugly head at times and I recoil at the label, but, with God’s grace, I’m learning to accept that more often than not when I’m tagged with the label “fundamentalist” that means that I am a committed follower of King Jesus.

I’m not necessarily arguing that we should embrace the term, although I’m puzzled by a seeming rush to discard it. I am arguing that we are probably not going to get to have a say in the matter anyway, and that at times the term represents in the minds of the world the very things that Jesus asks of me.

So friends - I know many of us struggle with the term fundamentalists - in large part because many who call themselves “fundamentalists” are in reality “hyper-fundamentalists.” I could (and have) used other terms to describe these ….. individuals. In my taxonomy I think I called them Type A+ fundamentalists. This is why when people ask what kind of a Christian I am - I typically respond by saying “I’m a conservative Baptist type.” 99 out of 100 people are good with that answer. The one person that needs more info I might add - “you know - I don’t drink - I don’t dance (actually I can’t dance - my feet don’t work like that).”

Historically anyone who was committed to a literal and authoritative Bibliology and a militant belief in Christological and Soteriological Orthodoxy - You were called and you were in fact - a fundamentalist - even if you didn’t like the terms. An example is Machen. Machen really didn’t like the term but was viewed by friend and foe as one of the leading fundamentalists of his day.

What about today? - November 2013? Well any of you who are committed to an orthodox view of Scripture, Christ, Salvation, etc……in today’s environment both within and without evangelicalism - are more often than not going to be viewed as a fundamentalist, I don’t care if you like the term or not. It doesn’t even matter if you don’t use the term - historically if you are orthodox and militant you are a fundamentalist - that is especially true if you repudiate any form of ecumenicalism. That’s why even though MacArthur says he’s not a fundamentalists the whole world of evangelicalism would view Mac as not only a fundamentalist - but perhaps the posterboy of fundamentalism today.

I know the Type A guys want to say you have to be as militant and separatistic as them to be in the club - but they own such a small little corner of the ecclesiastical cosmos - it really doesn’t matter. The vast majority of evangelicals and Bible-believing Christians that are historically aware will view you that way (ie - fundamentalist). To my earlier post after post after post after post on type A, B and C fundamentalism - let me say it again - even if you consider yourself a very “liberal” or “left-wing” fundamentalist you have to remember that when compared to the bulk of evangelicalism here and abroad - you are still very, very conservative - and you will be viewed as a fundamentalist no matter how much you (or your type A brothers) say you aren’t.

That’s just the way it is - until our collective evangelical/fundamentalist experience is dramatically changed by some event or string of events that displace the effects of the early fundamentalist-modernists wars which created a fundamentalists/evangelical unity - which eventually cracked - which now is being healed - at least to some degree.

a thought or two - from the shadows of the cacti!

Straight Ahead fundamentalists one and all!

jt

By the way - to “John E” - Welcome to the SI round-tabled campfire John E. I loved your post and am looking forward to reading more from you. What a thrill to hear of your coming to faith - even after growing up under the gospel, running away from God. The fact that you have come full circle and now embrace our Lord and the gospel is a benediction! I love your spirit and frankly think you will make a fantastic fundamentalist! God bless you brother!

Straight Ahead!

Joel Tetreau

I’m ok with others who use it, I’m just saying it doesn’t work for me.

I’m not a super evangelist but I try. I work with many internationals (India, Liberia, Kenya), and many typical US folk.

The term “fundamentalist” does not compute for these people.

Appreciate your post. It articulates my own thoughts very well.

Thank you for the welcome, Dr. Tetreau. I’m more of a lurker than a poster, but I’ll try to be a little more active in the conversations. Over the past couple of years, many of the postings on this site have been a source of edification for me.

Jim, if I may be so bold as to mirror you – I’m ok with others who don’t use it, I’m just saying it works for me.
As I stated, the “evidence” behind my thoughts are anecdotal (along with an article on Salon, but a Salon article probably deserves to be discounted a priori because it’s an article on Salon), and I do not know how people respond to the term “fundamentalist” in the area where the Spirit has placed you to be a Gospel witness. From my perspective and in my current context, many who eschew the label “fundamentalist” do so out of a misguided desire to be accepted by the world in order to be a better Gospel witness. The world will never accept us and I’ve had to learn that the hard way. By God’s grace, I’m finished apologizing for being a Christian who actually believes that God is who He claims to be in His word and that He will bring to pass those things that He says He will – judgment of sinners and all. In the eyes of most around me, that makes me a fundamentalist. So, I am a fundamentalist.

Fundamentalist may not be the primary identifier… We haven’t used it when working with our Karen folks that I can think of. At the same time, if I have someone ask me if we are a General Conference/Converge Worldwide church (another prominent Baptist group here in MN), or if I have a missionary calling, the term is a helpful distinction, especially if they might not be familiar with the MBA (an association our church is affiliated with).

Side note: our church is considering if the term “Regular Baptist” has an advantage in distinguishing us from some of the more extreme associations we would desire to avoid.

Very telling. Without realizing, it, when I spoke to my sister the other day (who is unsaved) I described myself as an “evangelical Christian,” because that is automatically taken to mean “conservative” in our culture today.

I didn’t say, “I’m an fundamental Baptist” for reasons already mentioned here.

I didn’t say, “I’m a conservative Baptist,” because that gets us into a discussion on denominationalism. I don’t want to discuss Baptist vs. Presbyterian vs. Methodist - I want to discuss the Gospel. Those issues are important, but they come after the Gospel.

On the whole, I would say that “fundamentalist” is not so much a label to claim, but more a philosophy to actually live out. It also depends entirely on who you’re talking to. To the unsaved, I’m just an evangelical. To a fellow Christian, I’m a fundamental Baptist.

I was curious, so I hopped on over to Maranatha’s website and reviewed their definition of “fundamentalism.” Here is an excerpt:

The fundamentals of the faith have historically been defined as those beliefs that are necessary to the biblical doctrine of salvation combined with a high doctrine of Scripture, so that we have an inerrant record of those doctrines. Fundamentalism as an idea is absolute allegiance to those doctrines united to a willingness to defend those doctrines and to separate from those who deny or contradict them.

Perhaps my favorite part is this delicately crafted sentence:

We also reject the attitudes and actions of fundamentalists who elevate tangential and eccentric teachings to the level of the fundamentals of the faith and separate over them.

[TylerR]

We also reject the attitudes and actions of fundamentalists who elevate tangential and eccentric teachings to the level of the fundamentals of the faith and separate over them.

I liked this sentence as well. The question is, “What is a tangential and eccentric teaching over which some people separate?”

Maranatha has chosen to separate from Baptist churches who have guitars in their services and who decline to have “Baptist” in their church name.

Maranatha has not chosen to separate from King James Only supporters.

Everyone applies their delicately crafted statements differently….

One man’s eccentric teaching is another man’s fundamental.

Consider music, eschatolgy, polity, dispensationalism, church names……

Sometimes the essentials for fellowship are also seen as reasons for separation.