From what I've gathered from African immigrants who I've known personally, Christian fundamentalism is also thriving on that continent.
Fundamentalism certainly doesn't represent all religion, but it's solidly part of the religious mainstream.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How is Fundamentalist Protestant Christianity an Outlier?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Fundamentalism certainly doesn't represent all religion, but it's solidly part of the religious mainstream.
I have heard it put this way, that the rise of fundamentalism in the West is symptomatic of the implosion of the middle. Think of it as the shock waves rising out from the center of a big rock being dropped into a pond. Down goes the middle, up come the fundamentalists, making violent waves as the shock of the middle collapsing disperses out to the shores. Eventually the amplitude or the height of the waves lessen as everything settles. We can only hope.
No set of beliefs are representative of religion "as a whole."
Religion is diverse. No single data point is representative of the entire distribution.
That being said, it seems to me that fundamentalism is squarely in the mainstream, and I'd say it's fairly close to the "average" of the religious spectrum.
It's just that judging the entire distribution based on the average generally isn't a good idea.
I would rather see it as a waste product that falls out of the mainstream. It's not really part of it, even though came from it. It smells bad for a reason. You're not supposed to eat that stuff.
The fact that you don't like fundamentalism doesn't mean it isn't very popular.I would rather see it as a waste product that falls out of the mainstream. It's not really part of it, even though came from it. It smells bad for a reason. You're not supposed to eat that stuff.
What does popularity have to do with anything? Does that make it valid?
I don't know what you are calling fundamentalism, but it's called that to distinguish it from the mainstream. Not sure how you think that represents the mainstream.
No, but it does make it mainstream, for better or worse.
Pretty every religious tradition has a name to distinguish it from other traditions.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
It's possible I may have misapplied it as it seems that you may be mode correct than I because it "sounds" more familiar. It's been around three decades since I read something along this line and, heck, I can't remember what ate three days ago!
OTOH, he may have said or wrote similar things more than once. Either way, thanks for the correction.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Sorta reminds me of his criticism of some Christians, namely that they "elevated the man but forgot his message"-- or something like that.
Do you? It means what is considered normal. Fundamentalism is not considered normal. It's called fundamentalism to distinguish from the mainstream. Right? Mainstream Christianity is in fact not fundamentalist.
Fundamentalism is not a tradition, nor considered traditional religion. It's not mainstream. The mainstream is traditional religion. Fundamentalism is a reactionary response to the changes within mainstream. That is why is was spawned off from it.
Then it's not fundamentalism if it's mainstream. They are not distinct from it, as they are the mainstream. Yet, we all recognize fundamentalism as different than the mainstream. Hence, this thread. Surely, there is a radical difference between your average Presbyterian minister and congregation, and a Pat Robertson, isn't there?
I agree. However it is one group amidst many in Christianity. It doesn’t and can never represent Christianity as a whole even though it may assertively claim to do so. In all likelihood it appears larger than it is because of a vocal minority.
OTOH there is an equally vociferous group amongst those who have no Christian identity who vilify Christians and religion as a whole by undue focus on the obvious failings of the fundamentalists.
The mainstream or middle of Christianity certainly has been in dramatic decline over the last few decades where I live. As I highlighted in a recent thread, in New Zealand our 2018 census recorded a decline in the number of Christians from 48 to 37% in just 5 years. OTOH those who have no religious affiliation have increased from 42 to 49%. While this has been the trend since the 70s the decline is accelerating despite the best efforts of mainstream (Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian and Methodist) Churches.
I didn't say it was the majority. It's not; worldwide, the majority of Christians are Catholics.
I'm saying that fundamentalist Protestants are a sizeable enough minority that they're within the mainstream of Christianity. They're certainly more mainstream than liberal, moderate Protestants.
Which is silly. Criticisms of the Catholic Church - which every tithing parishoner had a role in enabling, no matter how tolerant their personal beliefs - are more on point as a criticism of Christianity in general.
The mainstream according to who?
One definition of mainstream is
“a prevailing current or direction of activity or influence”
Definition of MAINSTREAM
I doubt that Protestant fundamentalism is the prevailing current or direction of activity or influence within Christianity where I live. I’m not sure that it is in the North America.
Liberal and Protestant Christianity is stronger numerically where I live.
I suspect to answer the question we need to quantify in some way. Other than measuring the number of adherents of a particular belief how do you propose we do that?
Its a tricky problem as fundamentalism within Christianity isn’t represented by any one denomination. Many Christians despise fundamentalism as it portrays Christianity negatively.
I would presume that when fundamentalism becomes a dominant stream within Christianity it will become even more divided and lose larger numbers than. Maybe we’re there already?
It would be interesting if the polls included increases in these fundamentalist groups ranks at the same time you see the middle collapsing and atheism increasing. These groups that are big into making converts tend to swoop in to prey upon the vulnerable. And as the mainstream churches flounder and fail, those affected by that are targeted by these groups, who show them how they were not the true church to begin with, and if they join them, then they'll get to heaven.
But the real thing they are offering that appeals to the vulnerable, is the sense of belonging to a family. The cultic nature of these, creates that sense of "family" for those disenfranchised by their own religious families falling apart as others drifted away. The belief structures are created tightly, particularly authoritatively presented, which members bind themselves to each underneath.
As a personal aside to support what I am saying, it has been a life's mystery to me personally about myself, how it is I ended up in my early 20s in one of these groups I am describing above, which resemble groups like the JWs in their own particular ways, born at that same period of time in American history. I am a rational person, and grew up raised by a father who was solidly Modernistic in thought, spiritual but not religious. A mother who was culturally Christian, Episcopalian background, who may have gone to church a total of 8 times while I was a kid, on holidays or other occasions. They were very open minded and accepting of differences in others. It was not a religious household with religious training for us growing up.
How is it I would end up in one of these fundamentalist cults? It didn't last for too long, maybe 5 years? After wrestling with this question, since my views today are quite a bit more beyond what I used to believe, or at least tried to believe, I think I have the reason for it. A family. While my family was relatively financially capable, as well as good intelligence and education, and unconditional love from both of my parents, I had a sibling who developed emotional and psychological problems while I was growing up. It hit at such a time as it disrupted the normal developing relationships between a child and his parents. It disrupted that. It disrupted many facets of my life during that time, in school, with friends, with my own happiness in life.
Then I had a spontaneous Awakening experience when I was 18, as the result going through a deep existential crisis for myself at that point in life. It was facing that existential Void, and entering to and through it that opened up Reality to me. For the moment, of course. Now I could see Life, but I was still that broken kid who had a lot to deal with coming out of that. Add to this, that vision of Light to reach to as Home. And it truly is that for me, as my past 4 decades since that has been to come Home to that.
But in that early search to come Home, to find God as I had touched and tasted That. I was encouraged to talk to Christian minsters, and none of them had anything that remotely talked to that experience. At least not for me at that time. And it was when I encountered one of these "We have the right answers, and they're all wrong" groups, that something resonated for me, strangely enough.
What it really gave me was a family. It gave me structure. It gave me a sense membership. That was the core emotional pull of it, aside from the promises they gave me that I could know God, as I had experienced it before. What I discovered though, even in those very first few months while I was happily taking it all in as much as I could hold, is that that "unity" we had, which they proudly quoted from scripture, was based upon common beliefs. It's like we were the people of the red flag, versus those who rally around the blue flag. It was based upon agreeing with each other theologically. That's not really love, I could recognize, but I did not want to acknowledge because I was getting something out of it emotionally for myself.
So that rather long, and fist time I've ever shared that before post, is to understand sympathetically what it is for people who are looking for family, and how these groups like this tend to target and swoop up the vulnerable, are picking up those like me who fell through the cracks in a family life. The same thing would apply to their church family, which is what traditionalism offers people. When the traditional church fails, the home is disrupted and people experience real genuine loss, as I did in my life growing up.
Did I gain some good from it? Sure, and I don't wish to throw out the baby with the bathwater. But that baby in the bathwater, was always me to begin with.