Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax1.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!stim
From: stim@fluke.UUCP (Randy Stimpson)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Jerry Falwell and Reagan
Message-ID: <1333@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Dec-85 12:40:24 EST
Article-I.D.: vax1.1333
Posted: Thu Dec 19 12:40:24 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Dec-85 21:57:24 EST
References: <866@whuxl.UUCP> <1979@akgua.UUCP> <438@whuts.UUCP>
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 62

In article <438@whuts.UUCP> orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:

>> Tim,
>> your continued use of fundamentalist to mean both evangelical and
>> fundamentalist needs some correction.  I wish you would research
>> the terminology you are using and elucidate the differences for us
>> as I don't have the time right now.
>> Thanks,
>> Bob Brown {...ihnp4!akgua!rjb}

Fundamentalist has both broad and narrow denotations.  In the broadest sense
it refers to those Christians which believe the Bible to be infallible or a
least have a very conservative approach to the scriptures.  This definition
includes most evangelicals.

More and more though fundamentalism is taken to mean the Electronic Church
(which many fundamentalist deeply regret), and those that totally embrace the
materialistic and militeristic ideals of right wing america -- so much for
not being "conformed to the pattern of this world", Romans 12.

The distinction between Evangelicals and Fundamentalists is diminishing.
Pre-civil war Evangelicalism was quite distinc from Fundamentalism. They were
without doubt social activists.  Finney (an Evangelist) practically equated
social action with repentence.  The Evangelicals were the driving force behind
the abolition of slavery.  They were actively involved in smuggling slaves
though the underground railroad  -- they practically were the underground
railroad.  One Evangelical college even boasted that they had never lost a
free slave to the athorities.

Paradoxically the Evangelicals even spearheaded the feminist movement.

Fundamentalists generally tended to condone slavery at that time and were not
equated with social activism.

[tim sevener]
>is invalid to talk of "all fundamentalists".  Actually there
>are many fundamentalist Christians who totally disagree with
>the policies supported by Falwell, including Billy Graham.
>Sojourners magazine is a Christian magazine which also includes
>articles by Billy Graham and other fundamentalists as well as
>various Christian denominations which take a stand against
>war and violence by both West and East, both right and left.


While there are fundamentalist that contribute to Sojourners this is not to
say that they are fundamentalist.  Many of the refer to themselves as
"X-fundamentalist" of "new fundamentalist."  

It's actually kind of hard to put your finger on what kind of Christians the
Sojourners are.  They seem to attract Christians from liberal, conservative,
fundamentalist, evangelical, and catholict traditions; and other things like
menonites, quakers, pentecostals and who knows what else.  I think they would
most closely identify themselves with pre-civil war Evangelicals.  They
generally refer to themselves as radical evangelicals -- after the tradition
of Finney, or as belonging to the new abolisionist (of nuclear weapons)
movement.

They are definately one of the most interesting Christian groups out there.
Wall Street Journal reported them as having an "influence on U.S. policy in
great disproportion to there numbers."

Randy Stimpson