re: #271 Naso Tang

To be honest, I have little interest in knowing exactly how those who claim inerrancy know it because I know that they can’t possibly be inerrant. If they want to have their definition of fundamentalism different from the common usage, they can do so because that is what theology is about; creating recursive terminology.

However, as I have already said several times, I understand why you say ABB was not a fundamentalist Christian; he is just a fundamentalist extremist.

(Is the latter a redundant term?)

The common usage comes from all those items linked, not the other way around. Just because commoners don’t know that doesn’t negate the fact.

Additionally, you might be interested in Martin E. Marty’s The Fundamentalism Project (your local library probably has them), but if you think that stuff I linked is long and tedious, you really won’t like The Fundamentalism Project. It’s another academic venture that looks at all religious fundamentalism, not just the Christian version.

“Fundamentalist extremist” as redundancy? Perhaps. Except all fundamentalists are not extremist, not all extremists are fundamentalists. And ABB is not a “fundamentalist”.

That Venn Diagram thing, again. lol