In the comments section for my post on Mandisa’s Downfall, a reader asks me about my judgmental attitude toward Christians.
The question struck me as strange, as I don’t think of myself as having any issues with Christians at all. But as our exchange continued, it became increasingly clear to me that, at least in the mind of that one reader, the term I used — “fundamentalist” — equals “Christian.” To her, to speak of one is to speak of the other.
In the interest of clarity, let me affirm that I do, indeed, make a distinction between Christians and fundamentalists.
Christians, as a group, are increasingly difficult to define. The Christian faith is fragmented into hundreds of different denominations, or “flavors,” of Christianity. Even within each denomination, a bewildering range of contradictory beliefs co-exist. Within the Churches of Christ, for example, there are congregations (and individuals within those congregations) that rail against wearing shorts and drinking wine … and there are congregations (and individuals within those congregations) that wink at both.
Typically, Christians pretend to far more unity than they possess. In America, we hear lots of talk about “Christian values” and our heritage as a “Christian nation”. Smart people quickly realize, though, that, given the fact no two Christians embrace precisely the same beliefs, such terms are meaningless. Given the broad spectrum of beliefs that we clump under the Christian umbrella, it is virtually impossible to define what Christians, as a group, profess.
That said, when I use the word Christian, I’m referring, loosely, to any number of people who:
a) attach some special significance to the Biblical character of Jesus, also identified as “the Christ”
and who
b) make some effort to see the life and principles of Jesus reflected in their daily lives.
In short: I have no issues with Christians.
Fundamentalists, however, are a different kettle of fish. Fundamentalists:
a) have identified a set of beliefs or practices as “fundamental.” Fundamentalists draw a box around a set of core beliefs, defining these as essential. (If you point out the absurdity of this conclusion by asking questions such as, “But isn’t everything God said essential?”, you will not be allowed in the fundamentalist clubhouse.)
b) make their fundamentals a “test of fellowship.” If you embrace a fundamentalist’s fundamental beliefs, you’re “in.” If you reject anything on the list of fundamental beliefs, or add to that list of fundamental beliefs, or question the validity of having a list of fundamental beliefs, or question the authority of those who defined the fundamental beliefs, then you’re “out.”
c) see the world in black and white. The fundamentalist viewpoint is a perspective of extremes. Issues are black or white. Actions are right or wrong. Information is true or false. You’re saved or damned. You’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists. This approach provides fundamentalists with quick and easy formulas they can apply to religious arguments, but it also limits their ability to deal with the complexity of the real world.
d) mistake their own conclusions for “absolute truth.” While passing along their personal convictions, beliefs, and verdicts (usually without having been invited to do so), fundamentalists will often say, “This isn’t what I think; it’s what God plainly says.” It would be more accurate to say, “These are my own conclusions as to what God has to say about the matter,” but saying so would call too much attention to the fact that any “Truth” a fundamentalist preaches is, in reality, nothing more than his or her own opinion about what that Truth might be.
e) acknowledge human imperfection, but reject the idea that their own conclusions are subject to or limited by that imperfection. Fundamentalists pay lip service to the idea that “no one is perfect, but God,” but, ironically, they are supremely confident that their own conclusions are not subject to such imperfections. Fundamentalists prefer to ignore the reality that every human’s level of (or lack of ) education, humanity, and intelligence necessarily influences his or her ability to understand God’s will, because embracing this fact would force them to admit that all conclusions — including their own — are imperfect to some degree.
e) position themselves as completely objective mouthpieces of God’s point of view. Fundamentalists love to quote Scripture, because doing so fuels the fantasy that, “I’m not speaking; this is just the Word of God!” In doing so, they rather conveniently ignore the part they play in selecting, interpreting, and applying a passage of Scripture to the situation at hand.
f) claim God’s authority for themselves. The delusion goes like this: “Since I have a perfect (or, at least, adequate) understanding of God’s will, and since, when I quote Scripture, God is talking, then what I say and what I do is what God would say or do; therefore, when I speak or take action, I do so with Divine authority.” This is a pretty convenient delusion, especially in arguments, allowing fundamentalists to claim that anyone opposing them or their conclusions is, in fact, opposing God.
g) have a passion for external expressions of faith. These externals simplify the task of distinguishing the sheep from the goats. The sheep will conform to standards of behavior specified by the fundamentalist leadership: attending a certain number of services, engaging in certain public displays of faith, adopting certain political agendas, obeying rigorous dress codes, performing elaborate rituals. Goats won’t.
h) promote ignorance in order to perpetuate their beliefs. As a world view, fundamentalism can’t bear much scrutiny. As a result, fundamentalists actively oppose education and discourage critical thought. As one Dean of Education at one Bible College once told me, “Christian education is not a matter of teaching students how to think … we’re here to teach them what to think.” This approach has an added benefit for the leaders of fundamentalist groups: the more ignorant a population is, the easier it is to frighten and intimidate, and the less likely its members are to question authority.
Fundamentalism, frankly, is spiritually, psychologically, and mentally poisonous.
Because they are always one step away from the transgression that will nudge them across the line that divides saints from sinners, fundamentalists live a life of constant fear and self-doubt. Because their fantasies of righteousness set inhuman standards of perfection, fundamentalists tend to conceal or suppress their flaws, creating a culture of mistrust, shame, and secrecy. Because they are immersed in a culture that freely distorts or disregards information that calls the status quo into question, they lose the ability to engage in logical, rational dialogue.
Because fundamentalism holds that any opposing point of view must be held by someone deluded, dishonest, depraved, or evil (“Otherwise, they’d agree with God and me!”), fundamentalists do not hesitate to suppress critical thought, trample personal freedoms, or turn their religious conclusions into legislation designed to force non-believers into compliance.
Not all fundamentalists are Christians. There are fundamentalists in Islam and Judiasm. There are fundamentalists in the New Age movement and in Paganism (America’s fastest-growing religion, by some accounts).
Not all Christians are fundamentalists. There are, in fact, many Christians who, because they are aware that their perspectives are necessarily limited, readily embrace others with radically different points of view. Many Christians are willing to live by their own moral standards, respect the standards of others, and allow God to sort us all out as God pleases.
So, for the record: as employed here on MadeByMark.com, the terms fundamentalist and Christian refer to very different critters.
I’m opposed to fundamentalism with every fiber of my being. Christianity, though? Not a problem.
I am an ex-Fundamentalist Baptist.Grew up in the Fundamentalist Baptist Church. Changed to Assemblies of God at age 24.Best decision I’d made in years.Had a cousin living in the same town in Texas that was also Fund.Baptist. One hot day when it was about 105 degrees and he was mowing the lawn the preacher lectured him about wearing cutoff Blue Jeans to do yard work.
I am an ex-Fundamentalist Baptist.Grew up in the Fundamentalist Baptist Church. Changed to Assemblies of God at age 24.Best decision I’d made in years.Had a cousin living in the same town in Texas that was also Fund.Baptist. One hot day when it was about 105 degrees and he was mowing the lawn the preacher lectured him about wearing cutoff Blue Jeans to do yard work.
Though I share some of your concerns about the blurring of the distinction between “fundamentalism” and “Christianity,” I am more troubled by an insidious, and what I think to be a more dangerous, development in faith circles. As a pastor whose duties include Christian education, I am especially troubled by the creeping realization that for all our church talk in support of the Bible and the role it ought to play in the life of a believer, many of the faithful have actually pledged their allegiance to what they think the Bible says, or what they’ve been told the Bible says, with much lesser regard for what it actually says. A case in point: A week ago this past Wednesday, our adult Bible study class began a study of the Gospel Acording to John. As we have been studying Matthew for quite a long time previously, I used that first session to offer some insights into some of the features that are quite distinctive to John. My purpose was to help us focus on, and thereby give proper honor to, the unique way John tells the story of Jesus. As a homework assignment, I invited our class to first read the entire Gospel, and then, based on that reading, answer a single question: Who wrote John’s Gospel? While such a question may sound a little ridiculous on first hearing, my purpose was to assist our class follow a rather complicated path through the Gospel, and discover what the Gospel actually says about its author, instead of what we just assume it says. (For those who are interested, while the assumption that the Apostle John is the author of John’s Gospel does have some limited foundation within the text, it is much more ambiguous than is commonly imagined.) I was quite clear that the question was not designed to undermine anyone’s faith, or to question the authority of Scripture (both of which I greatly value), but was rather my attempt to help us focus more closely on what the Scriptures actually have to say. So this week we discussed various citations and interpretations, and I knew that I had probably ruffled a few feathers along, but I was very optimistic that I had made my point regarding the difference between actual Scripture on the one hand, and what others, including Bible study note editors, say about what the Bible says on the other hand. I was just about to dismiss our class last night when a very sweet, sincere lady innocently raised her hand and said, “Well, right here in my Bible it says that the Apostle John wrote the book bearing his name.” My heart dropped. Of course she was reading from some introductory notes in her study Bible, but she made no distinction between those study notes and Scripture. And when I offered that those notes were not the same thing as authoritative Scripture (which had been my point through the entire hour-long class), she could not understand why not. To her, if it was located between the covers of her Bible, it was all Scripture, and it was all authoritative. Now while this whole matter may seem a relatively harmless point of contention, my concern is that many times it is the very same people who give the greatest esteem and authority to the Bible who are lesser acquainted with what the Bible really says. My further concern is that this lack of foundation makes believers entirely too vulnerable when a preacher or teacher or other authoritative voice exaggerates or misstates the contents of the Bible. Now perhaps this is the long way around to my point, but even those who grant authority to the text often do so only with their lips, and not with their minds or their hearts. And these are many times the Bible’s only representatives to those who don’t know very much about the Bible or Jesus Christ! If we are going to be dogmatic about what the Bible says, we could at least do Scripture the courtesy of being well-acquainted with what the Bible says, and then, whatever our particular theology and understanding, honestly and fairly represent that to others. Thanks for the opportunity to vent.Your friend, Michael
Bless your heart…I love you.
You say you dont have a problem with christians but only with fundamentalists. I am a fundamental baptist and I strongly disagree with your statments. Not eveybody is a fundamentalist even if they say so. What it means is this- We believe the bible is the Word of God. We believe it from cover to cover. We do not add to it or take away from it. We believe and follow the parts we do not like. many people only take what they want from the bible due to their love for the world and not for Christ. The reason you do not like fundamentalists and only “christians” or people that say they are is because alot of people call themselves christians but are no different from the rest and you can relate to them.God has called us to Holiness! “Be ye holy for I am Holy” Some people dont like us because they have sin in their own lives that they do not want to turn from and because we preach and teach Gods word for what it is, it shines a big light into their lives and reveals the darkness. Jesus died for our sin not to cover it up! Look at the effects of sin on a persons life and you’ll see. The bible says:”Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?”(II Corinthians 13:5)If you Hate Gods Word so much I would consider doing this. Christ shines light into our darkness to show what is really in our hearts.
Dear Jolene,
I’m delighted to read that you believe the Bible “from cover to cover” and that you do not “add to or take away” from Scripture.
I note you quote II Cor. 13:5:
“Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.”
In the same post, you then:
a) proceed to tell me, a total stranger, why I don’t like fundamentalists, and
b) imply I hate God’s word (which I explicitly do not).
Even as you quote a Scripture about “examining yourselves,” you jump immediately to examining others.
In doing so, you provide a perfect example of how fundamentalists handle Scripture.
Greetings!
I am a Lutheran pastor and always looking for good online resources. Any chance you could get me an invite to try eBible?
Peace!Peter.
First, Good on ya, Mark! I wholeheartedly agree with you and am in danger of becoming a fundamentalist Mark Follower! 😉
As a Christian who is ashamed to call herself one because of the above issues, it is good to read that someone else sees the difference. Have you ever read “Stealing Jesus”? The author discusses many of the same issues, and even touches on the same issue the pastor above discussed. Commentary in the Bible is not the same as the Bible itself. Yet, that commentary, only about a hundred years old itself, has shaped the belief system of many Christians in this country and around the world in a dramatic fashion.
But, that is another discussion for another day. A friend of mine gave me your DaVinci Tarot for my bday and passed along this blog as an “Oh, by the way…” And I really enjoyed reading it. You said what I believe. I call them Church Ladies (though CLs usually want to make a project of you on top of all the above). But, it’s the same thing. Thank you for putting out there what many others think.
Rachel
Hey Mark, I just came out of fundamentalism, I grew up in it, and I realize that everything you’re saying is entirely true. Unfortunately, I can say that if I had read this a few months ago or before back to when I was 5 years old, I would’ve thought you were a “sinner” and were really were blinded, which I now can say is the exact opposite. You just said things for how they are… bluntly and truthfully, even respectfully.
In fact, I think that after throwing away my faith just to see what the truth was and finding God and Jesus all over again in a new way, I’ve proved, to myself anyhow, that Jesus wasn’t a fundamentalist himself at all… just his modern-day so-called followers have become this way.
Jesus railed against this kind of thought, which is why he detested the actions of the pharisees of his day… apparently they were legalistic and also more political, kind of like fundamentalist Christianity… only it was fundamentalist Judaism… like you said this stuff can spring out of any place in life it’s probably where Terrorists come from… some of them, if not most, actually believe they are doing God a favor.
Anyway… I agree with everything you said, and I think real Christianity, that is, someone who is really following the teachings of Jesus Christ and believes everything Jesus said about himself, would actually speak more in line with what you say, Mark… even if, perhaps, Mark, you are not a Christian. I would urge you to do some study of New Testament Scripture… of Jesus’ words, and see for yourself what I’m talking about. Because you might just have some stuff in common with him. Be careful to read different translations to get past the different MIS-translations that are probably evident in the most good intentioned versions. Or you could learn Greek but that’s a lot of work.
I think he would’ve commended your post if he were with us now… and then offered you Salvation. You say not all Christians are fundamentalists, which I agree with, especially as an ex-fundamentalist but not an ex-Christian.
I add to it… Jesus was against fundamentalism and far from it himself!
Thank you