Let me be frank; my goal in this post is to inform you that “fundamentalist” and “fundamentalism” are pejorative terms and connote things with which I hope many of us would not want to associate. Therefore, to those whom it applies, unless you want to associate with the things these terms connote, at best I would like to convince you to stop calling yourself a fundamentalist; at minimum I’d like you to at least realize what your doing if you choose to call yourself a “fundamentalist.”
Introduction
But let’s start out by getting a few things straight.
First, some of you reading this will find what I’m about to say quite obvious, so obvious that you’ll be taken back that I am even addressing this. You may even look down on me for writing this post because in so doing I am seemingly acknowledging that I have some sort of connection with individuals who call themselves fundamentalists (why else would I bother to write this?). If this is you, I just ask that you try to be understanding.
Second, in writing this post I fully realize I’m going to offend some people. Let me assure you, this is not my goal or intention; but I write this post knowing thats it’s going to happen (and apparently I’m okay with that). So, let me make it clear that I’m not intentionally trying to be offensive. Nonethless, the content of what I am about to say or show you (i.e., the audio below) will offend some. But sometimes one of the kindest things you can do is inform someone that their pant zipper is down or that they have a piece of spinach between their teeth. I guess you could say, friends don’t let friends call themselves fundamentalists. … Hello, friend.
D.A. Carson
Now, what Carson says in this clip I’ve been saying for years. So, I’m not presenting anything new. I guess my hope in sharing this audio is to demonstrate that this isn’t just my opinion; as you’ll see, Dr. Carson affirms what I’m saying as well. And in case you think the two of us are just in a fog, I would add that my experience both growing up in evangelicalism (generally) and currently attending Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, a self-proclaimed “broadly evangelical” seminary, affirms that this perspective is quite the consensus outside of self-proclaimed fundamentalism. In other words, we’re not alone. What Carson says (and what I’m saying) is not some pessimistic marginal minority view. … I suppose you can watch the news and see for yourself.
Original link now void.
Now some of you, having heard that, are surely offended and maybe even mad. Let me assure you, if you call yourself a fundamentalist but don’t fit that description, Carson is not saying that everyone who calls themselves a fundamentalist is characterized by these things. He’s saying that these things characterize what people think of when they think of a fundamentalist. From his perspective, people who don’t fit this description would obviously not call themselves a fundamentalist. So, don’t take his words as a personal assault or something.
A Totaled Vehicle
Let me end with an illustration I’ve used many times before.
The term “fundamentalism” is like a vehicle that over time, much wear and tear, and several minor accidents has met the “end of the road” (no pun intended). It’s undrivable. It’s unrepairable. It’s totaled.
Now when you have a totaled vehicle, as long as you intend to keep on driving, you don’t insist on sitting in your totaled vehicle pretending like it’s as good as new; you buy a new car (given your finacial capability of purchaisng one). Now, buying a new vehicle doesn’t imply that your previous vehicle wasn’t a fantastic car in its day. Maybe it was! Maybe it was the best thing on the block. But, it’s just not what it used to be. Neither does buying a new car mean that you’re compromising and giving up driving altogether (my analogy is breaking down). You’re just moving on and buying a new car that can actually get you where you need to go.
A similar thing has occurred with the term “fundamentalism.” Unless one has grown up in fundamentalism and is still heavily engulfed in its culture, when one hears or uses the word “fundamentalism,” it doesn’t mean what it use to. Further, it connotes things it didn’t connote originally. Being called a fundamentalist is not a good thing anymore. It’s become a pejorative term. And I’m not talking about being a so called “man-fearer” and compromising when our culture finds genuine Biblical truths to be offensive. Not at all! I’m saying “fundamentalism” has come to mean things with which I hope most of us would not want to be described.
I realize that for some people, “fundamentalist” is still good description. Some people genuinely fit the bill (e.g., Westboro Baptist Church or the Hyles-Anderson type churches). If that’s you, then I guess this post isn’t for you. But for those of you who don’t fall within these ranks and yet still call themselves fundamentalists, I ask you to reconsider.
Kirk E. Miller 
My only contention is that wasn’t it always a pejorative term? Aren’t many in fact? Such as “Anabaptist?” (Devil’s Advocate).
LikeLike
If we understand “pejorative” as a derogatory term expressing contempt or disapproval, I don’t think “fundamentalism” has always been a pejorative term. No.
As Carson hints at, Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism originally described the same group of Christians, although the two terms carried a different emphasis.
The term “fundamentalism” seems to have emerged from the booklet series entitled “The Fundamentals” (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fundamentals) written in reaction against the modernist movement and its negative affects on Christianity. Those who advocated that the doctrines proposed in these booklets were essential (fundamental) for Christianity to remain true Christianity (see Gresham Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism) seem to have adapted the name “fundamentalist,” given what they advocated.
It may be that other people began calling them “fundamentalists” in a pejorative sense because of these booklets. But I’ve never understood or heard it advocated it that way.
I think the term took a down fall beginning roughly in the 1950’s or so (I’m not entirely sure when) when Fundamentalism began to be understood in terms of the “culture” and taboos it advocated.
Although many self-proclaimed fundamentalists would like to retain the name in its original sense (an honorable ambition) this no longer seems possible (therefore, a foolish ambition).
LikeLike
The term “fundamentalism” is indeed different in meaning than it once was. I hold to a very traditional set of doctrinal beliefs but would never identify myself as a “fundamentalist”. This is why: to me “fundamentalist” is a term that brings to mind someone who has made secondary things first. This being said, secondary things may be important and well worth defending. The Gospel must be ever at the forefront. “Fundamentalists” bash “evangelicals” over being “gospel-centric”. I for one am “gospel-centric” while at the same time I value and protect improtant secondary issues. I will seperate from those who embrace ungodly living as a Christian; yet seperation is not a sport for me. The term “fundamentalist” conjures up an image of someone muttering angry words against those who aren’t King James only or who might make the mistake of raising their hand in worship; these are those who get caught up on women wearing trousers or the use of an upstroke on a guitar.
That being said, for those who still define themselves as “fundamentalists” I try to use a little care in how I view them. For some, especially the older or those of a certain upbringing, they may simply mean that they embrace traditional doctrine. If I can tell this about them by how they live and speak I let it go just as I let my elderly relative use antiquated meanings of other words without scolding them. However, for those who are of the sort that fit the stereotype in my mind, I just don’t fellowship with them. It is on the account of folks of this kind that the stereotype exists.
Thank-you for an interesting post. I appreciated the audio of Carson’s that you shared. Words hold power to form men’s thoughts for good or for ill, we must take care how we use them.
LikeLike
Exactly. And this post isn’t intended to “scold” anyone for calling themselves a fundamentalist because they desire to adhere to the essential historic Christian truth-claims. This post is more of a warning. I’ve become aware that many self-proclaiming fundamentalists are simply not aware of how non-fundamentalists (e.g., evangelicals, secular media, liberal scholars) use the word. In light of this ignorance (i.e., not being informed and aware of this usage), it’s only kind of us to let them know. We’d hate to see well intentioned individuals unknowingly brand themselves with a scarlet letter, so to say.
LikeLike
I would agree.
LikeLike
I sat through a preacher boy class where I asked the teacher (the president of the college) a question about calling yourself a fundy when the rest of the world views the term by a different definition. The teacher all but ignored my question and went on to give his outdated definition of the term. He then said, “if this is the definition of fundamentalist, and you will commit to hold true to these fundamentals of the faith please stand with me to symbolize your commitment!”
When you are immersed in a Christian culture that defines itself and ignores public perception, you are making yourself irrelevant, and you are limiting the scope of your effectiveness. Thanks for posting this articles, even if it will most-likely be either ignored or raged against. That’s generally the result of truth, I guess.
LikeLike
I sat through a preacher boy class where I asked the teacher (the president of the college) a question about calling yourself a fundy when the rest of the world views the term by a different definition. The teacher all but ignored my question and went on to give his outdated definition of the term. He then said, “if this is the definition of fundamentalist, and you will commit to hold true to these fundamentals of the faith please stand with me to symbolize your commitment!”
When you are immersed in a Christian culture that defines itself and ignores public perception, you are making yourself irrelevant, and you are limiting the scope of your effectiveness. Thanks for posting this articles, even if it will most-likely be either ignored or raged against. That’s generally the result of truth, I guess.
LikeLike
Yes, if it was a matter of defending the essential truths of Christianity, we would dare not abandon them. But when it comes to the mere word “fundamentalism,” there’s nothing pious or dutiful about tying to preserve it. Too many people have made an unbreakable connection between the word and what, in their own perception, they think it represents. So they struggle to abandon the term because they think this is coequal to abandoning the faith itself. It’s quite unfortunate, historically ignorant, and culturally foolish.
LikeLike
I remember that one, Aaron….that was an interesting day. And can I please state that I was forced to lead us in the awful song every week…
LikeLike
Well, it is some what ironic that I am going to respond to this post. If it is “I” who is going to be the voice from the other side, than let it be.
I do and will always refer to myself as a fundamentalist. And for a good reason. But before I address this good reason, let me say that some of the reasoning behind abandoning the term “fundamental” or “fundamentalist”, one should look at the term “Christian”. How can anyone hold to calling themselves a Christian when we have so many false doctrines claiming the very virtue of chrstiandom? You can’t, at least not from a worldly perspective. You say you are a Christian and you are labeled immediately. So what it comes down to is what type of Christian are you? Where does your doctrine come from? What label or term do you use to simply describe your fundamental Christian beliefs? Is it Mormonism? Maybe one of many other “Christian” organizations that fall under the umbrella of Christianity.
I realize that this post is talking to fundamental Christians who should re-evaluate the use of the term in general. I say “NO”! We stand on the fundamental values of Scripture. And if someone is ignorant to what fundamental doctrine of scripture is, than by all means allow them to sit down and share the gospel with them.
My primary concern is that modernism is moving full steam ahead. We are all to quick to compromise instead of standing for the “TRUTH”. And don’t give me that old song and dance routine about the meanings of words change over time. Gods word and his fundamental laws that he has shared with us stand firm for the past 6000 years. Those of us who value the truth of the word of GOD, will not compromise our faith our love or any of the terms that have expressed a true and perfect God and his fundamental ideologies that we find in His word the BIBLE.
Now if indeed the Bible is a little to forceful for some folks, than I say they need to humble themselves before the WORD OF GOD. They better find a way to see the fundamental character of GOD in scripture. Because if you don’t fear Him, you don’t know Him.
I saw one comment about the gay movement and how fundamentalism today is a form of hatred towards gays. This is a lie and one that should not be propagated any further. Anyone who says that Fundamental Christians don’t love all mankind is a liar. I am a fundamentalist, and I love all mankind. Need I mention them all? NO, I don’t need to. Now don’t take me wrong, I hate humans actions and detest what they preach and propagate. But there is a soul inside that lost person that can only be reached by some fundamental LOVE-FAITH and HOPE. Because they don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.
I can go on, but I am not going to. For those of you who are true fundamentalist and stand firm on your faith of the word of God. Don’t compromise. Stand firm and educate. Reach people with the Truth. You are a Christian Ambassador to the Creator of the Universe. AMEN TO THAT.
LikeLike
Right on @[100001246896948:2048:Tom Moran], I agree.
LikeLike
Tom, I don’t know how to say this without it coming across as arrogant, but your argument makes very little logical sense. Your sentiment might be accurate but your argumentation is not.
LikeLike
Tom, there’s a reason I said, “my goal in this post is to inform you….” I am not here to argue. There’s not really much to argue about. It’s a reality, whether or not you recognize it such.
But sure, let’s beat a dead horse:
Most people recognize that “Christian” is a broad term encompassing many mutually exclusive beliefs. Fundamentalism is a very small minority movement that consequently has much more meaningful definition.
The issue addressed here in the post isn’t abandoning the fundamental truths of Christianity. Absolutely not (you apparently have misunderstood this!) My point here is about abandoning a word… just a word. It’s not special. It’s not intrinsically attached to any doctrines(!). it’s just a word.
Words do change, e.g., the change in the meaning “gay” over the past decades.
Thanks for your thoughts.
LikeLike
If it is just a word, then why not abandon the “WORD” Christian.
LikeLike
Fundamentalists make me smile.
They are like people in the South who wave Confederate flags. People who know that they have lost their war, but refuse to admit it, and live in dissension everyday because of it.
Now reevaluate how to address the new culture and modernism and step back into reality. Please. The flag of fundamentalism is an allegiance and an idolatry of a time in history. A very short, mostly forgotten time.
Many stripes of Christianity hold to the Fundamentals, without using the term. Just as there are many who still hold to many views of the Confederate South, without holding onto the flag.
LikeLike
In some contexts, people call themselves “a follower of Christ”, instead of a “Christian”.
LikeLike
Tom, as I said, “Most people recognize that ‘Christian’ is a broad term encompassing many mutually exclusive beliefs. Fundamentalism is a very small minority movement that consequently has much more meaningful definition.”
Plus, “Christian” is actually used in the Bible (Acts 11:26).
And as Josh said, some people are noting the danger in using the word “Christian” as it may connote a sort of nominalistic religiosity, and are preferring “Christ follower,” which denotes meaningful discipleship.
LikeLike
I am a fundamentalist. I grew up in and still am in that culture. (I don’t know about “heavily engulfed”, however. You might include me in that, but phrasing it that way seems to adds negative connotations of your own.) I totally understand that the term can have negative implications to many people.
Labels can always be misconstrued. You’re a modernist or liberal? Heretic. Evangelical? Compromiser. Christian? Bigot. Pro-life? Woman hater. Pro-choice? Murderer. Believe homosexuality is sin? Intolerant homophobic idiot. Islamic Fundamentalist? Terrorist. Yankees fan? Band-wagoner.
We still have to call each other something. In the circles I am in, the term that works best is still fundamentalism. I would not walk up to a stranger and introduce myself that way. Nor would I walk up to a stranger and say I’m a Baptist. Or even a Christian. All of those terms need more definition, but I will still accept all of them.
[I do realize that at the start of this comment, I virtually walked up to a bunch of strangers and introduced myself as a fundamentalist, and then later said I wouldn’t do that. Context always makes a difference.]
At some point the term fundamentalist may continue to change to the point where I will no longer use it. The same could be said of Republican or Baptist. I don’t believe that day is here yet for fundamentalist. I don’t think your article proved that day is here already. You say in your response to a different comment that it is reality, not something to argue about. Well, I guess I’m arguing about whether it’s something to argue about then. 🙂
LikeLike
I appreciate your comment. It is thoughtful and an honest attempt to address the situation.
A few replies may be helpful:
I assure you that I was not trying to intend any negative connotations with the words “heavily engulfed.” I was simply trying to convey the sense of being very much influenced by the thinking pervading this subcultural, to the exclusion of being aware of other subcultures’ perceptions. I think this was fair way to express this; but you can disagree I suppose.
You do well to recognize that your use of the term fundamentalist to describe yourself is contingent on the individual(s) to whom you are speaking. This is great; it hits at the principle which is foundational to the argument that I am making in this post. You note that context makes the difference. You recognize that your use of the term is relative to the perception of your audience. That’s great.
This brings up a good point; it all depends on to whom you are speaking. So, when you say, “I don’t believe that day is here yet for fundamentalist,” I imagine you would recognize (at least your argument assumes this) that it’s not here in one sense but it is here in another sense. In other words, you recognize that “this day” has not arrived for the fundamentalist community (for of course their perception of the word is not a negative one).
But my post wasn’t exactly addressing this. I was addressing the latter sense in which “that day” is already here. What I mean is, that day is already here in regards to generally everyone but the fundamentalists. Therefore, although the term still “works” within the fundamentalist camp, as you noted, I think that fundamentalists at large would do well to stop identifying themselves as such, for the reasons you apparently conceded, the reasons I identified in this post.
And so, you’re right when you say, “I don’t think your article proved that day is here already.” That wasn’t my point in this post, so yes. To demonstrate the development of the term in our society and document that development would take a thesis. So, I guess I’m just coming to you and trying to inform you of something that the rest of America sees as obvious. If you disregard it, I think it’s to your own harm. It’s not exactly something about which to argue just because you challenged it. Sorry.
Again, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I hope you graciously considering my response.
LikeLike