Fundamentalism: What it is, what it isn't. Who is or isn't a fundie?

[Wind Song]

This topic of fundamentalism came up on another thread and I think it deserves it's own thread. Fundamentalism is explained in wikepedia and I will go and get that link so that we are at least on the same page with the topic.

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":^[7]

• The inspiration of the Bible and the inerrancy of scripture as a result of this.
• The virgin birth of Christ.
• The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.
• The bodily resurrection of Christ.
• The historical reality of Christ's miracles.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism

[revelarts]

Thanks for getting a historical reference at least and not using the word in the derisive ways you have done over and over.

But Are you a BUDDHie?

Maybe i'll start a thread.
Buddhism: What it is, what it isn't. Who is or isn't a Buddhie?

do you think i can explain it?

[Wind Song]

Why don't you say what fundamentalism is to you, rev?

[Wind Song]

Buddhist fundamentalism shows it's ugly head in sectarianism. That would be one branch of Buddhism claiming it is superior to all others. It has happened in history that one form of Buddhism tried to outlaw, suppress and in some cases even kill those of another Buddhist sect.

The danger of fundamentalism is narrowness, IMO.

[Thunderknuckles]

I thought the title of this thread was about fundamentalism in general and not as it pertains to any specific belief?
In general, fundamentalism is the strict adherence to the fundamental principles of any belief system and is very intolerant not only to opposing views of other beliefs but intolerant to differing interpretations within the fundamentalist belief. Fundamentalism can be found within any belief system.

I am not a "fundie".

[Wind Song]

I thought the title of this thread was about fundamentalism in general and not as it pertains to any specific belief?
In general, fundamentalism is the strict adherence to the fundamental principles of any belief system and is very intolerant not only to opposing views of other beliefs but intolerant to differing interpretations within the fundamentalist belief. Fundamentalism can be found within any belief system.

I am not a "fundie".

Yes, the topic is fundamentalism in general. It can be found in all religions.

Fundamentalist Buddhism:

"In his recently published book Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist, scholar and former Buddhist monk Stephen Batchelor has argued against literalist interpretations of some core Buddhist teachings, namely, reincarnation and karma.

For Batchelor, the Buddha never taught anything of the sort; rather, reincarnation and karma are part of a larger Indian religious worldview, doctrines that became attached to Buddhism as it developed in South Asia, doctrines that we can leave aside and still confidently call ourselves Buddhists. In fact, he seems to want to jettison reincarnation and karma unceremoniously as the only way to preserve Buddhism in the modern world. Batchelor, one could argue, is a fundamentalist in his atheism."
http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Add...st-People.html

[KarlMarx]

This topic of fundamentalism came up on another thread and I think it deserves it's own thread. Fundamentalism is explained in wikepedia and I will go and get that link so that we are at least on the same page with the topic.

The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":^[7]

• The inspiration of the Bible and the inerrancy of scripture as a result of this.
• The virgin birth of Christ.
• The belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin.
• The bodily resurrection of Christ.
• The historical reality of Christ's miracles.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism

Thanks for the information. However, except for the first and last bullets, these are the tenants of the Christian Faith. Actually, the Nicene Creed outlines what Christians have to believe and still be Christians

On the first and last bullets, i.e. the divine inspiration of the Bible and the inerrancy of scripture. You said that it led to "narrowmindedness". I suppose that what some may call "narrow mindedness" would be called orthodoxy to others. The early church was plagued by a great many heresies, Gnosticism, Arianism, and so forth. Many of the so called "gospels" that were omitted from the New Testament are in fact the product of these heresies. I would claim that it is necessary to the faith to believe that that the scripture is inerrant. If you do not say that they are and that they are open to interpretation, you run the risk of allowing the passions of the day to dictate religious dogma. That is why the Church is often accused of being closed minded and not open to change. The Church is not a democracy and its beliefs are not open to a vote. You either believe in what the scriptures say is so, or you don't.

I doubt anyone would try to advocate that the Buddhists abandon their belief in reincarnation, the four noble truths and the eightfold noble path. If you did, you wouldn't be Buddhist, now would you? The same goes for Christians.

[KarlMarx]

Yes, the topic is fundamentalism in general. It can be found in all religions.

Fundamentalist Buddhism:

"In his recently published book Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist, scholar and former Buddhist monk Stephen Batchelor has argued against literalist interpretations of some core Buddhist teachings, namely, reincarnation and karma.

For Batchelor, the Buddha never taught anything of the sort; rather, reincarnation and karma are part of a larger Indian religious worldview, doctrines that became attached to Buddhism as it developed in South Asia, doctrines that we can leave aside and still confidently call ourselves Buddhists. In fact, he seems to want to jettison reincarnation and karma unceremoniously as the only way to preserve Buddhism in the modern world. Batchelor, one could argue, is a fundamentalist in his atheism."
http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Add...st-People.html

Seems odd that Buddha didn't believe in reincarnation when he was raised a Hindu andwas a Hindu ascetic before meditating under the Banyan tree. Not that I'm an expert on the subject, but didn't Buddha attain a state of Nirvana after he died? That is, he broke the cycle of death and rebirth? Guess not according to Mr Batchelor....

well, it's cold comfort knowing that atheists throw their barbs at other religions, too .. the one thing they seem to do best is try their hardest in not believing in anything!

[avatar4321]

As far as I'm concerned a fundamentalist Christian is merely one who wants to get back to the fundamental basics found in the Bible.

That isn't necessarily a bad position in my honest opinion. This world would be much better off if people actually lived the fundamentals of the Bible. Unfortunately, most don't, even those fundamentalists.

[tailfins]

I'm a Fundamental Baptist. I agree with all the points in the OP, but would modify it thus:

The inspiration of the Authorized 1611 King James Bible and the inerrancy of scripture as a result of this.

[PostmodernProphet]

obviously it's going to be difficult for you folks to discuss fundamentalism since you cannot agree what it is even while you think you have......

first it's defined by it's original Christian theological definition, then applied by the same person who proposed that definition to Buddhists, who I am quite certain do not believe in the "inerrancy" of the Christian scriptures....
then you have those using it in it's present day non-theological form, as well as one who argues inerrancy only applies to the biblical translations of a gathering of Latin scholars.....

[PostmodernProphet]

besides, nowdays I find the most common unifying factor of fundamentalists is their belief in the inerrancy of their ideas......

[tailfins]

obviously it's going to be difficult for you folks to discuss fundamentalism since you cannot agree what it is even while you think you have......

first it's defined by it's original Christian theological definition, then applied by the same person who proposed that definition to Buddhists, who I am quite certain do not believe in the "inerrancy" of the Christian scriptures....
then you have those using it in it's present day non-theological form, as well as one who argues inerrancy only applies to the biblical translations of a gathering of Latin scholars.....

You are thinking of the Latin Vulgate. The Authorized King James is specifically free of influence from the Latin Vulgate. Any "bible" influenced by the Latin Vulgate is an apostate "bible".

[tailfins]

besides, nowdays I find the most common unifying factor of fundamentalists is their belief in the inerrancy of their ideas......

I see that in the South. Many Southern churches worship Southern culture more than Jesus.

[Wind Song]

Just a small point I'd like to make. Hindu's believe in reincarnation, Buddhists talk about rebirth. They are different. Reincarnation implies there is something permanent like a soul with personality that reincarnates to another body. So what "goes" is closer to a Christian concept of an eternal soul.

Buddhists talk about rebirth. We are the only religion with teachings on emptiness. It is NOT an eternal soul with a personality that moves from one body to the next.

Buddhists talk about being reborn in one of the six realms of cyclic existence. This occurs until enlightenment. What is reborn? Consciousness and karma. Neither are solid, permanent or self-existing.

Consciousness doesn't have a personality.