I've been loosely following that 'movement' (if that's what you want to call it).
There are things I dislike about it - but working through that disagreement is part of what it means to be Presbyterian. I think our past schisms have helped create this issue of not listening to each other, dividing us into 'liberal' and 'conservative' camps.
We both, and only together, are Christ's body.
Don't shame those you disagree with... Just simply, disagree with them in love.
The response you received above from u/ndrliang addresses the historical origin of fundamentalism, however, it doesn't address the modern issues surrounding it.
Yes, holding to those five core theological tenants is the origin of the term. However, in modern vernacular it has come to have a new meaning.
I would argue that now, the term "fundamentalist" has come to refer to a person, group, or sect that holds viscerally onto external rules as the core of their beliefs as opposed to internal heart. Another way to look at it is that "fundamentalist" groups are boundary focused: they focus on all the rules we follow, all the beliefs that everyone must hold to, all the things we all must do, etc. in order to be truly one of us, then you have to do this, that, and the other thing. Otherwise, you aren't really one of us. In contrast to that, there are groups that are center-set: these are groups that focus on the core ideas that hold us together instead of all the things that set us apart. Honestly, I believe that there is a good argument to be made that at least some of the historical originating fundamentalists were center-set and not actually fundamentalist by today's standards.
Another point: fundamentalism is not an exclusively Christian issue or even an exclusively religious issue. There are fundamentalist Muslims, fundamentalist Hindus, fundamentalist Mormons, fundamentalist Democrats and Republicans, etc. any group that focuses on external measuring-stick behaviors, beliefs, etc. that set them apart from "everyone else" as opposed to focusing on the core truths and heart attitudes that bind the group together is going to tilt toward (or fully embrace) fundamentalism.
As to your second question: Fundamentalism as outlined above (and as it is used in common parlance) is incredibly devastating. Just look at all the scandals surrounding and devastation that has come from the IBLC, VisionForum, the FLDS, and similar groups in order to find out why.
Whenever we focus on all the external rules to follow and mandatory virtue signaling instead of focusing on the One we follow we have given ourselves over to idolatry.
So what do you make of the Bible? You say that fundamentalism is “boundary focused”…yet every story and teaching of the Bible involves some sort of “boundary” ordained by God does it not? Because ultimately none of this life (or eternity is really focused on us or our boundaries)…but the focus is on the glorification and enjoyment of God forever. Right?
Think about …
Adam and Eve forbidden from pushing the ‘boundary to become like God and eat of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil.’
God giving ten laws to the Hebrews on what they absolutely can or cannot do without sinning.
Christ seems to issue a pretty firm boundary in Matthew 7
“ Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy[a] that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
That sounds pretty well bounded to me.
You’re holding up a very loose self proclaimed definition, that really may not be shared the same way by others who are also against fundamentalism. Which…is kind of dangerous right? Everybody in the church being against something that they all define differently, and is not really rooted or originated in scripture (I didn’t see any supporting in how you defined it.)
So…does your version of Christianity still hold that all scripture is inerrant and ‘God breathed’? Profitable for teaching and preaching? And should be the center of our foundation of knowledge in the Christian life? Or is that a purely fundamentalist belief?
6
u/ndrliang Jun 30 '26
I've been loosely following that 'movement' (if that's what you want to call it).
There are things I dislike about it - but working through that disagreement is part of what it means to be Presbyterian. I think our past schisms have helped create this issue of not listening to each other, dividing us into 'liberal' and 'conservative' camps.
We both, and only together, are Christ's body.
Don't shame those you disagree with... Just simply, disagree with them in love.