Excellent article, and I couldn’t agree more.

Those who would have themselves believe that they have not changed would do well to consult the expertise of those whose opinion is objective, whose view is not clouded by their own desires or self-worth and who would be most able to see the flaws that would prove one’s self-assessment to be mistaken and misguided self-promotion.

Just like the frog in the pot set at low and then increasingly hotter settings resulting in the boiling of the frog - when we undergo change, often times it is so subtle and elusive in our own sight to see that we presume to be unchanged when in fact we have undergone significant change.

Just as those who would profess to maintain the “fundamentals” of the Christian faith who see no problem with the seeker-sensitive. emergent, etc… movements within Christianity - an outside perspective and unbiased opinion would be the best at giving a proper assessment on whether or not one has upheld in their beliefs to the very fundamental “fundamentals” of the FAITH.

My apologies but such a post deserves just such a response.

In Christ Alone,
Bill

So we’ll put you in the ‘still fundamentalist’ category, Bill?

In Christ Alone as well,

(though I admit that I haven’t consulted the expertise of one whose opinion is objective, whose view is not clouded by my own desires or self-worth and who would be most able to see the flaws that would prove that my own self-assessment to be mistaken and misguided self-promotion.),

Todd

PS—Actually, Bill… I think you have given a good illustration of why many people not only shy away from; but RUN from the word ‘fundamentalist’. 

Just where would one get an ‘outside perspective and unbiased opinion’ to get a proper assessment on our soul’s position?

Just my opinion though, brother (and I do consider you my brother even if it’s not recriprocated).

The frog in the boiling pot is a great example for both schools of thought on this, Bill.  In my experience, there is not a more “closed to the outside opinion” group than traditionally conservative fundamentalists.  To even open one’s mind to a deferring opinion is often seen as herecy or at least liberalism. 
I would also like to say that my point is not to debate or argue over the right or wrong of fundamentalism, but to state per the topic why I am no longer a “fundamentalist”.  I obviously have issues with the label and the perception of it, or I would still be one.  Bill, thank you for your honest response.  God bless. 

In Christ.

danny

I grew up Catholic, and came to Christ in college, so had very little exposure to fundamentalism.

I started attending an evangelical church and evangelical Bible study, and was introduced to fundamentalism much later.

The question I have for my fundamentalist brothers is this: just what are the fundamentals? 

My experience has been that in my discussions with those who are fundamentalists, we find we agree one hundred percent on the essentials of the faith.  The departure comes mostly on the issues of the “hows” of holy living and reaching the world for Christ, subdivided into issues of clothing, music, evangelistic and worship styles.

Brian

I remember well the day, during the 2000 election debacle in Florida.  I was watching a news clip with a new Christian friend I’d made working on an initiative to connect churches with projects designed to improve the standard of living for families living in our urban communities (my interest in the initiative should have been a clue that my fundamentalist armor was tarnishing).

I made a very sarcastic and derogatory comment about Al Gore and what he was putting the country through.  It absolutely never occurred that I might have been trashing “her” candidate.  He was and I was.

There was incongruity for me because I knew her to be a solid evangelical Christian (based on doctrine).  I knew that her heart broke about the teen pregnancy and abortion rates – it was part of what drew us to the same project.  She’d told me about the testimony of a young man on a recent Sunday who had come out of the gay lifestyle.

I had to do much thinking about where my assumptions came from and how these assumptions affect the way I’m living out my faith.  I realized that I’d come to wear my commitment to the “fundamentals” of the faith like a badge, something I felt proud of.  No matter how I tried to rationalize it, I couldn’t escape the fact that pride is perhaps one of the most despicable sins I could be guilty of.

Since then I’ve tried to distance myself from Christian activity which would be labeled one of the “fundamentalist issues.” I do so because I know my weakness and I don’t like the pain involved when the HS has to purge pride from my life.  Obviously pride could surface if I start to wear the opposite badge, but that has not been a temptation yet.

I still vote Republican (usually) and align philosophically with the fundamentalist camp, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at my ministry activities or some of the people I choose to hang with.

Wendi

Not a “fundamentalist” and never have been. Grew up in a church with no creed but the New Testament and continue to move closer to Christ as the fundamental focus of my life and heart and find a lot of other issues to become less and less important.

And by the way the frog in the kettle is a myth that needs to be put to bed. (Sorry Barna) But scientest have proven that God’s creatures, even the frog, are smarter than we are and will get out of the pot before they boil. (http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.htm) Maybe we all could learn something from that reality.

Wow, based on your credentials and the knowledge we’ve gained this past week… I believe that I can say with confidence that I doubt that you are a Christian!  OOPS that wasn’t what I meant to say.... what I really meant was that :

Our ROOTS are important.  Just not nearly as important as what God wants to teach us and do in us through His Holy Spirit TODAY.  Most of the issues I have with “card carrying whomevers” occur when they tout their heritage instead of how they have recently seen God’s grace at work in and around them.

BTW, I say that as a recovering “_____.” (omitted to protect the church that I grew up in)
Peace.

Frogs aside, I’ll share my over-priced two cents’ worth....  I didn’t grow up in what I would call “classic fundamentalism,” though I’m probably only one generation removed from it.  I don’t consider myself a Fundamentalist, though I seek to hold to the fundamentals of the Christian faith.  Up until the last few years, I called myself an Evangelical; more recently, I have begun to distance myself from Evangelicalism - though not from evangelical thinking.

So how do I differentiate between Fundamentalism and fundamentals?  Or between Evangelicalism and evangelical beliefs?  Capitalized, I think the terms have come to mean an adherence to a particular group’s set of standard beliefs; almost a membership in a particular body, be it a denomination or something less formal.  Non-capitalized, they terms merely provide a way of generally characterizing my line of thinking. 

It seems to me that the Fundamentalism of the past century or so could easily be described as legalism, as some of the comments here have attested.  I see certain key figures in Evangelicalism moving the same way.  In both arenas, we are becoming known more for what we are against than for what we are for.  I think that’s a tragedy, and it is the main reason for my rethinking how I identify myself to those outside the Christian faith (and even to some inside).

Many Fundamentalists would suggest that certain behavioral norms are fundamentals of the faith - “don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t chew...don’t go with girls who do.” I don’t buy that line of thinking.  I do, however, hold to certain fundamental truths about the Bible, about Jesus Christ, about how I am to live ... and about my role in proclaiming the name of Jesus to the world (that’s where the “evangelical” side comes in). 

I love the lines, “in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things grace.” The big question is, what are the essentials?  I would hope to keep that list as short as biblically possible.

Wendi, I appreciate what you wrote and your sensitivity to your friends.  It’s sometimes hard for us in the Evangelical community to figure out how a Christian could possibly be a Democrat!  We would do well to recall that the thinking of today’s conservatives was once considered quite liberal.  Jesus himself was a liberal - go figure!

You wrote, “I’ve tried to distance myself from Christian activity which would be labeled one of the ‘fundamentalist issues.’” Is abortion a “fundamentalist issue”?  From some of the other comments on this page, I don’t think there would be a lot of agreement on that question.  I’m not convinced that that is a fundamental issue of faith, considering that it isn’t even mentioned in the Bible (which is not to suggest that God doesn’t care - I believe absolutely that he does).  But if you are passionately opposed to abortion, if God has put that on your heart, should you avoid pro-life/anti-abortion activity merely to avoid offending your friends - Christian or non-Christian - who disagree with you?  I don’t think so.  In fact, I think that would be contrary to God’s will, which suggests that we should not live our lives to please people.  You might, however, consider HOW you express your opposition to abortion (or any other “fundamentalist issue”.  Maybe instead of carrying around posters with pictures of fetuses and the message “abortion is murder,” you would help out in a crisis pregnancy center. 

Our calling is not to avoid offending people, nor is it to shove our religion down their throats until they gag.  It is to love them, call sin sin, and point them to Jesus Christ.

Kent writes [The meaning has not changed in the way many would have you believe my friends.]

Here’s an excercise, go out onto a street corner and ask 10 passers-by what they think the word “fundamentalist” means. I dare say you will NOT get the classic definition. I would argue that you’re correct, Kent in that the DEFINITION has not changed. But the MEANING… that is dependent on what the HEARER attaches to it, and that meaning is VERY different in the ears of the average person in our culture than the classic definition. It’s something we have to deal with.

I’m not talking about what we SAY, I’m talking about what others HEAR. (Perhaps the problem in our communication on this has been, to put it a tad ironically, the “meaning” of the word “meaning")

Did Jesus change his words based on the “meanings” that would be attached by his hearers? I suspect he did and that’s why he told parables instead of preaching theology more directly so often. (We can’t know for sure, since we have his words recorded in Greek, not in the “language” he spoke in to His hearers… still inspired by the way, still the Word of God, of course...)

There is a pretty good discussion of what Fundamentalist Christianity is, by the way, for those curious to define our terms better, at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity

It is a SHAME that the negative “meaning” attached to the word has become the meaning that the man on the street associates, but it is, again, the world we live in.

Randy,

Off topic, but we should have discussed this at some point.

I liked the idea of Jesus hanging out with Daniel, too, though I thought the show was insultingly lame overall, theologically, culturally… and… just really weak writing… (the scene with the funny book titles was HILARIOUS!) But didn’t you think the gentle non-threatening INCREDIBLY caucasian Jesus was ridiculous? (definitely not a fundamentalist either --the character, I mean...)

Randy –

You wrote: You might, however, consider HOW you express your opposition to abortion (or any other “fundamentalist issue”. Maybe instead of carrying around posters with pictures of fetuses and the message “abortion is murder,” you would help out in a crisis pregnancy center.

To which I answer: EXACTLY!!!

You also wrote: In both arenas [Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism], we are becoming known more for what we are against than for what we are for.

To which I again answer: EXACTLY!!

Fundamentalists get so angry about the militant activity of the gay rights or pro-choice advocates, but I think they (as a group of people as has been defined here) are equally if not more militant.

Once I heard Phillip Yancey tell of a jail interview with a prostitute who had been arrested for selling her toddler for sex in order to get drug money.  The woman appeared to be appalled at her own behavior but trapped in a life she sensed no escape from. Yancey asked her, “Have you ever thought about going to church to meet some people who might help you?” She replied, “Why would I go to church, I already feel terrible?  I don’t want to feel worse.”

By identifying with the too frequent methods of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists, I think I might risk chasing off the very people I want to reach.  That is a risk I’m unwilling to take. 

So like you . . . I’m distancing myself from the methodologies, but not (generally) from the principles of life lived through a biblical world view.  On another post I told about my sister who had an abortion at 16 and, when she was trying to find an answer to the burden of guilt she could not bear - - - she stumbled into a church with a bulletin insert picturing a murdered fetus (hers – in her mind) and the words “abortion is murder.” Those methodologies will NEVER be in my arsenal for reaching broken and hurting people, because I find no scripture to support Jesus using similar methods.

Wendi