BEGINNINGS OF FUNDAMENTALISM - Late 19th century
"Mark T"
arose mainly within American Protestantism in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries by conservative evangelical Christians, who, in a reaction to
modernism, actively affirmed a "fundamental" set of Christian beliefs: the
inerrancy of the Bible, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of
substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the
authenticity of his miracles. This core set of beliefs was the "line in the
sand" drawn by conservative Christians as they battled against the rise of
rationalism, higher biblical criticism, and liberalism within Protestant
denominations.
The nature of the Christian fundamentalist movement, while originally a
united effort within conservative evangelicalism, evolved during the
early-to-mid 1900s to become more separatist in nature and more
characteristically dispensational in its theology. Most fundamentalists have
strongly opposed the Roman Catholic Church for theological reasons; in
recent years there has been limited political cooperation between
individuals in each group on certain social issues, such as abortion.
....
The term fundamentalist, in the context of this article, derives from a
series of (originally) twelve volumes entitled The Fundamentals: A Testimony
To The Truth. Among this publication's 94 essays, 27 of them objected to
higher criticism of the Bible, by far the largest number addressing any one
topic. The essays were written by 64 British and American conservative
Protestant theologians between 1910 and 1915. Using a $250,000 grant from
Lyman Stewart, the head of the Union Oil Company of California, about three
million sets of these books were distributed to English-speaking Protestant
church workers throughout the world.
...
The original formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to
the Niagara Bible Conference (1878-1897) and, in 1910, to the General
Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became
known as the "five fundamentals"[3]:
a.. Inerrancy of the Scriptures
b.. The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus
c.. The doctrine of substitutionary atonement through God's grace and
human faith
d.. The bodily resurrection of Jesus
e.. The authenticity of Christ's miracles (or, alternatively, his
premillenial second coming)[4]
In particular, fundamentalists reject the documentary hypothesis-the theory
held by higher biblical criticism that the Pentateuch was composed and
shaped by many people over the centuries.
........
Some fundamentalists have endorsed strict codes of conduct that prohibit
even moderate consumption of alcohol and tobacco, dancing, mixed bathing,
gambling, or engaging in secular cultural activities such as watching movies
or listening to rock and roll music.
........
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christians
para...@technicianheaven.com
this little bit of stuff:
you posted in alt.religion.clergy :
>Fundamentalist Christianity, or Christian fundamentalism is a movement which
>arose mainly within American Protestantism in the late 19th and early 20th
>centuries by conservative evangelical Christians, who, in a reaction to
>modernism, actively affirmed a "fundamental" set of Christian beliefs: the
>inerrancy of the Bible, the virgin birth of Christ, the doctrine of
>substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the
>authenticity of his miracles.
Nice theory anyway. Puritans were the fundamentalists of their day.
Each generation has had those of us who have desired to stick to the
truth of Christianity, avoiding the man-made heresies of liberals who
tend to be less discerning and more likely to fall for any false
doctrine as long as it sounds good.
>This core set of beliefs was the "line in the
>sand" drawn by conservative Christians as they battled against the rise of
>rationalism, higher biblical criticism, and liberalism within Protestant
>denominations.
Naah. You seem to be making this up as you go.
>
>The nature of the Christian fundamentalist movement, while originally a
>united effort within conservative evangelicalism, evolved during the
>early-to-mid 1900s to become more separatist in nature and more
>characteristically dispensational in its theology.
>Most fundamentalists have
>strongly opposed the Roman Catholic Church for theological reasons; in
>recent years there has been limited political cooperation between
>individuals in each group on certain social issues, such as abortion.
>
>
>The term fundamentalist, in the context of this article, derives from a
>series of (originally) twelve volumes entitled The Fundamentals: A Testimony
>To The Truth. Among this publication's 94 essays, 27 of them objected to
>higher criticism of the Bible, by far the largest number addressing any one
>topic. The essays were written by 64 British and American conservative
>Protestant theologians between 1910 and 1915. Using a $250,000 grant from
>Lyman Stewart, the head of the Union Oil Company of California, about three
>million sets of these books were distributed to English-speaking Protestant
>church workers throughout the world.
>
Interesting story anyway. Doesn't sound like the authors of the 94
essays did any homework when they wrote their essays though. . .but it
was a good way to spend money. . .I guess.
>
>The original formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to
>the Niagara Bible Conference (1878-1897) and, in 1910, to the General
>Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which distilled these into what became
>known as the "five fundamentals"[3]:
So the Presbyterians are supposed to have been the first
fundamentalists just because they decided to have a meeting to decide
what the "fundamentals" were (in their opinion)? I would be remiss if
I didn't mention that they would have spoken for themselves only, and
not for anyone else.
>
> a.. Inerrancy of the Scriptures
> b.. The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus
> c.. The doctrine of substitutionary atonement through God's grace and
>human faith
> d.. The bodily resurrection of Jesus
> e.. The authenticity of Christ's miracles (or, alternatively, his
>premillenial second coming)[4]
>In particular, fundamentalists reject the documentary hypothesis-the theory
>held by higher biblical criticism that the Pentateuch was composed and
>shaped by many people over the centuries.
>
>........
>
>Some fundamentalists have endorsed strict codes of conduct that prohibit
>even moderate consumption of alcohol and tobacco, dancing, mixed bathing,
>gambling, or engaging in secular cultural activities such as watching movies
>or listening to rock and roll music.
>
>........
>
>From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christians
>
Wikipedia has demonstrated over the last couple of months that ANYONE
can plug ANYTHING into it, MODIFY IT IN ANY WAY, and change it at the
whims of any unknown and unqualified writers, any time.
Last week it was shown that several congressmen had rewritten what
wikipedia had said about themselves, leaving out the bad parts that
had been there before. Of course wikipedia didn't have any "new
version" notes for each article. It just presented each article as
though it were "true."
Wikipedia does not claim to be any kind of "authority," on any
subject, nor should it. It is written by anyone who thinks he/she
should write anything, qualifications or understandings
notwithstanding.
Perhaps you should find some other sources to do your "research" with.
Something more authentic.
parakaleo