You might be a "fundamentalist" if ___

I think because of Islamic terrorists being called 'fundamentalists' the term will eventually phase out among Christians, as fewer Christians will say 'I am a fundamentalists' as the media demonizes the term, more and more. The term probably has its original real meaning in the U.S. and that partially related to the conservative right in American politics. In this sense a fundamentalist is just an American evangelical who always votes conservative. (How they will vote with a Mormon running the conservative seat must be a real dilemma. I guess that virtually guarantees Obama will have a second term).

The reality is Evangelical and Fundamentalists have a huge overlap. They all believe in the inherency of scripture, salvation by faith, respect for the reformers, belief in a literal devil, new birth or personal conversion, belief in miracles, the virgin birth, resurrection, second coming of Christ, etc.

The difference in my view is that Fundamentalists, or the extreme right, will be less ecumenical than evangelicals and denounce sin more publicly. Possibly seem to cranky. Fundamentalists will seem more 'negative' as they have less patience for liberal movements such as feminism, gay rights, evolution or some guys new fancy view of the Bible, especially a new documentary on A&E that question traditional biblical views on the Bible. The man still more or less runs the family, women should not dress to sexy. Conservative views and values color theological application everywhere. Of course no abortion. Home schooling is probably more popular among the conservative right. People should not expect handouts if they are not willing to work hard! There is possibly a more stoic connotation among the far right. The subject of hell is more common among the fundamentalist, with an emphasis on its eternity and literal suffering. There is less patience for philosophy and hardly any interest in that at all. All of these conservative elements may be found among evangelicals, but it is more rigid on the far right.

The media often lumps evangelicals and fundamentalists together as 'just fundamentalists', as they do not see the slight differences that make fundamentalists proud to imagine themselves as more ruthlessly Cross-centered, and evangelicals proud to imagine themselves more loving and open-minded, they all just seem like pig-headed and stubborn Christians who take the Bible literally.

In the end, I do not think for the most part we can really distinguish between them, but those on the most conservative or liberal ends of the spectrum will probably disagree. Therefore there still is some meaning to the terms.

Personally I seem to fit the profile of fundamentalist in many ways, but I am not dispensational, love Christian Rap and Rock music and so I am probably somewhere in the overlap where evangelical meets fundamentalist and everything else is a blur.

This is due to fundamentalist having acquired a notion for "a guy with all the right answers" amongst some groups. No one wants to be labelled as fraudulent.

My personal belief is that the labeling is misapplied by the media, Churches, and individuals.

I refer to the Dictionary:

often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching.

Any Church that literally interprets the Bible is by definition a fundamentalist movement and/or Church.

You might be a fundamentalist if …

… you're mean.

The term fundamentalist has a broader usage even beyond Christianity or even Theology in some circles. I've been hearing some people (tending towards the liberal end of the spectrum) trying to label Al Qaeda as Islamic fundamentalists. The not-so-transparent idea is that if terrorists are fundamentalists, then eventually people will associate fundamentalists with terrorists. Its already a perjorative, especially on the left.

Even John Piper and his followers have been quoted as saying "Evangelicals are really just nice fundamentalists"

… you're just a strong traditionalist.

It makes sense to label anybody who has a strict faith and a seeming intolerance for change as a fundamentalist. Fundamentally, the term originates from a movement called "The Fundamentals" whose sole purpose was to rollback the liberal critiques and scholarship of the late 1800s.

… you know who Francis Turretin is.

A belief in Biblical inerrancy, perspecuity, and sufficiency are all pretty much tied in with the connotation of fundamentalist. Grant you, these are techinical terms differentiating between certain theological points of view, but in the end, if you know who Turretin is, you're probably a fundamnetalist.

This is going to be a difficult, if not impossible question to answer to everyone's satisfaction for precisely the reason you say it should be defined. It's bandied about so much, not only by the press, but by just about everyone,that I doubt there is a universally accepted definition.

There are, however, certain characteristics that could be listed that Fundamentalists share in general. Even there, there is not universal agreement. Not all "fundamentalists" agree with all tenets, and plenty of those tenets are shared by those who would not identify themselves as Fundamentalists.

I don't think we can throw a list of absolutely unique individual fundamentalist beliefs, as most of the beliefs are shared with non fundamentalists.

Rather, Fundamentalism appears to being defined as a recognizable combination of beliefs and traits.

I wouldn't normally just throw a list out there without backup, but this is a unique question, and the format of the question does lend itself to just presenting a list of traits that can fill in that blank. So here goes:

• Belief that the Bible is the divinely inspired, and therefore inerrant and infallible Word of God.
• Belief in the doctrine of Sola Scriptura
• A strong tendency toward Biblical Literalism
• Reject the notion that fallible man has any authority over infallibe Scripture
• Belief in salvation by grace through faith, and not of works. (Sola Fide)
• Belief in a literal Hell
• Evangelical in nature

The above three are held to to such a degree that we also, in general: (In other words, the following are not definitive Fundamentalist qualities, but rather commonly held, but not universal beliefs based on the above three qualities.)

• Have a general disdain for any extra-Biblical teachings. We see them as man "adding to" the Scripture.
  • We don't discount all extra-Biblical teaching, however. If the teaching can be backed up by applying Biblical principles, as in it's implied by the Scriptures, or in line with the teachings, we will generally accept it, or at least not denounce it.

The following may or may not be as commonly held, but in my observation:

• We have a tendency to be Creationists, and in particular young-earth Creationists. (Literal reading and rejection of fallible man's scientific understanding can override God's clear word. Yeah, that's been debated ad-nausem on the site, but I'm not defending it here, just listing it.)
  • We have a tendency to prefer traditional Hymns like "Amazing Grace", "How Great Thou Art" to more contemporary Christian music.
  • And in general we see "Christian Rock" as an oxymoron.
• At least in the U.S.A., we tend to be conservative in our politics.

• As a result of our belief in the strict interpretation of Scripture, the belief that Christ is the only way to avoid an eternity of suffering in Hell, we tend to come off as "pushy". We refuse to shut up and stop witnessing, and annoy our loved ones, relatives, friends, and total strangers in our attempt to get them to see their need for salvation.

  This earns us the labels as being pushy, rigid, legalistic, zealots, judgmental, and a whole host of synonyms. (Even though that's now how we see it.)