by calvert on 13 Nov 2008, 00:52
The term "fundamentalist" had its origin in the early 20th century, when the more liberal, European approach to Biblical interpretation ("Neo-Orthodoxy") was coming into conflict with more conservative, traditional approaches. A group of religious leaders drew up a list of the "fundamentals" of Christianity, basic doctrinal tenets that they felt could not be compromised without undermining the Gospel. These included original sin, the atonement, the virgin birth, the verbal, plenary inspiration of Scripture, and a number of other doctrines. (A literal seven-day creation was not part of this list, but this group certainly would have subscribed to that view of Genesis I & II.) This group called themselves "fundamentalists" - as in, people committed to the fundamentals of Christianity.
The term is generally used today, principally as a perjorative term, to describe (at least in regard to Christianity) any Christian group or sect that, in secular parlance, "takes the Bible literally." This in itself is a distortion of the Fundamentalist approach to the Bible, which is essentially to read the text literally where context, literary form and linguistics would so indicate, and to take it otherwise where those same factors would suggest another approach. For example, you will not find any "Fundamentalist" who, when the Psalmist writes that the hills "clap their hands," would interpret that as literally meaning that the hills have sprouted hands and are giving God a round of applause. That is because the Psalms are poetry, with their own interpretive constraints. Similarly, the Parables are not interpreted literally because, in Hebrew tradition, they never were. On the other hand, when the Bible records that, "Jesus wept," that is taken literally, because the context so indicates. (It should also be noted that a great many "Fundamentalists" do not subcribe to the idea of a literal, 7-day creation.)
The term "Evangelical" also has its origins in early 20th century America. Generally, it denotes Christians with a strong emphasis on missionary outreach and evangelism and usually, but not invariably, a conservative approach to Biblical interpretation. In modern usage, the terms "Fundamentalist" and "Evangelical" have come to be used synonymously, at least among secularists. This is not accurate. While it is fair to say that all "Fundamentalists" are "Evangelicals," the reverse is most definitely not true. Within the Evangelical community one finds a fairly wide variety of views on various doctrinal matters. Also, most Evangelicals tend to be non-denominational, however, one finds plenty of Evangelicals (as defined above) within all the major denominations, including Catholicism.
It should be noted that virtually all of the major institutions of learning in this country were founded by men who would be described today as "fundamentalists," as were many if not most of the leading jurists, politicians, statesmen, educators, and intellectual leaders in the U.S. up through the early decades of the 20th century. "Fundamentalists" were also behind every major charitable and social outreach effort in this country (and in England) in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The abolition movement, in England and in the U.S., was driven almost entirely by "fundamentalists" (who, as contemporary secular parlance would have it, were seeking to "impose their religious views" about slavery on the rest of the country). It is an unarguably true statement that, were it not for very activist "fundamentalists," slavery would have been around a lot longer than it was, both in this country and in England. So, what is today described as "fundamentalism" (but which is more accurately described as traditional, orthodox Christanity) has a fairly impressive pedigree.
