Mostly on my mothers side. And wouldn’t you know that they all can trace their roots back to where else but Germany. I guess they didn’t get the memo.

Fundamentalist to me just says, There is but one way and that is Gods way which just so happens to also be my way and please go away son, ya bother me!

1) Sola Scriptura – the notion any scripture should be interpreted foremost in terms of other scripture (which is problematic, if in fact, Paul writes against ‘James’).

2) The view that modern translations of the Bible, interpreted in terms of modern conservative Christianity (with little else other than the use of a convenient ancient language clarification or general cultural cue) are adequate for understanding the Bible.

3) Harmonizations of multiple authors’ accounts of events – even if they require fabulous narratives that are not actually found in the Bible – represent the the best understanding of the events under discussion, because contradictions caused by real errors in reporting would not have been allowed by God.

4) If rational and empirical investigation lead one to a conclusion about a subject is at odds with (understood in terms of 1-3, above) Biblical pronouncements on that subject, then either a) the Biblical account must be harmonized (even at the risk of violence to the authors’ original intent), or b) the rational and empirical investigation must be considered flawed.

5) … Most importantly… if moral reasoning about an issue leads one to a conclusion at odds with Biblical pronouncements (understood in terms of 1-3, above), then either a) the Biblical account must be harmonized (even at risk of violence to the authors’ original intent), or b) the moral reasoning must be deemed flawed.

As examples… 4a) would be represented by the re-interpretion as allegorical passages that represent an ancient cosmological view of the heavens being a dome with windows that release rain.

4b) would be represented by “Scientific Creationism” – denying the rational/empirical result.

5a) would be represented the soft-peddling of moral statements about the value of slaves in both the old and new testament.

5b) would be represented by the fundamentalist response to the advancement of gay families.

I may be painting with too broad a brush here… I understand that there are conservative/Evangelical churches that do not follow classic “Fundamentalism” as it was conceived at the turn of the last century, yet who share most or all of these traits. But I’m talking about how I understand the word, and these are the areas that stand out to me.

Items 1 – 3 on my list are not “bad things” from my perspective… I think that this kind of fundamentalism may cheat believers out of a deeper understanding of their holy scripture, but it doesn’t really harm anyone. I feel much the same way about items 4a & 5a. The real problems I see stem from items 4b & 5b, because they tend to create political movements that seek to dumb down the public school curriculum and undermine real morality.

Personally I really enjoyed the book and it has made rounds through my entire family.