Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It

[Navidad]

37 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

You can posts links to Wikipedia here.  Documentation is encouraged  

But I'm sure you can see why we are confused, and don't grasp the subtle differences that you are aware of.

Thanks, I have posted the link to the site. I understand most of what the author is saying, but it is an astonishing cornucopia of terms and concepts. Someone did a lot of work on this. It is a shame it is almost impossible to decipher. 

[Navidad]

11 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Most of the Evangelicals I have encountered have been fundamentalists then. I might have horrible luck.

Well, yeh! That is what I have been trying to say on this forum since 2017! Ha! It is most likely a truth, because our Fundamentalist friends make it a point to seek out and approach members of the LDS Church wherever they can be found! Pageants and Temple Square  are such places!

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Thanks, I have posted the link to the site. I understand most of what the author is saying, but it is an astonishing cornucopia of terms and concepts. Someone did a lot of work on this. It is a shame it is almost impossible to decipher. 

Also isn’t reformed fundamentalist a bit of a contradiction in terms?

[InCognitus]

25 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Also isn’t reformed fundamentalist a bit of a contradiction in terms?

Maybe it's similar to someone who is a "reformed alcoholic"? 

[Navidad]

I have noticed something in my readings over the past few months. I find LDS folks using the term "fundamentalist evangelical" more often. I wonder what the source of that is? I don't remember seeing that term at all in years past. I use the term "conservative Evangelical" often because the Evangelical community, on its own a continuum. The other day I think I mentioned in a thread I had also read the term "mainstream fundamentalist." I like the beginnings of what may be an interest in being more careful and more specific about identifying those in the non-LDS Christian community. At the same time I am seeing the term "neo mormon" with greater frequency. Interesting stuff! 

Edited August 27 by Navidad

[Calm]

57 minutes ago, Navidad said:

. I find LDS folks using the term "fundamentalist evangelical" more often. I wonder what the source of that is?

I have never encountered that I recall over the years of online and offline encounters someone was an antimormon and Christian who hasn’t called themselves Evangelical, but fundamentalist/Fundamentalist.  From what I have heard among LDS, this is typical.  My guess is the other Saints, like me, want to distinguish between the Evangelicals who are not constantly challenging our Christianity and those who are while still respecting the rights of those claiming to be Evangelicals.  It may not be technically accurate, but I believe most people would understand what we are talking about.   Perhaps not though.  

[BlipBlap]

On 8/27/2026 at 3:19 PM, Navidad said:

I have noticed something in my readings over the past few months. I find LDS folks using the term "fundamentalist evangelical" more often. I wonder what the source of that is? I don't remember seeing that term at all in years past. I use the term "conservative Evangelical" often because the Evangelical community, on its own a continuum. The other day I think I mentioned in a thread I had also read the term "mainstream fundamentalist." I like the beginnings of what may be an interest in being more careful and more specific about identifying those in the non-LDS Christian community. At the same time I am seeing the term "neo mormon" with greater frequency. Interesting stuff! 

The "neo" or "new Mormon" thing, to be blunt, is cope.  "You just keep changing your doctrine" is a fallback used by critics who were generally not familiar enough with our doctrine in the first place, so when corrected, they fall back onto that refrain.  I suppose the only real "new" thing is the willingness for younger members to more strenuously pushback against the nonsense.  The article in the OP even points out that many critics of the LDS church, when faced with an actual learned member, tend to have a great deal of difficulty 

As for "fundamentalist evangelical", that could be just people using words for negative connotations without paying attention to what they actually mean.  There are probably people that identify as such too if you asked and some that are without knowing it.  The actual fundies emphasize literalism, so they're often a punching bag for the political left and anti-Christians who point to them as a "typical Bible-thumping uneducated hick".  Due to this, "fundamentalist" is used as a slur.  Now while some/many are likely to be Bible-thumping uneducated hicks, not all of them are going to be such.

"Evangelical" is used in the same way as the "Christian fundamentalists" are a subset of and came primarily from evangelical Reformed Protestant churches.  Take the Wikipedia link how you will:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_fundamentalism

[BlipBlap]

On 8/24/2026 at 6:54 PM, The Nehor said:

Also isn’t reformed fundamentalist a bit of a contradiction in terms?

It is, but you'll find that the "Reformed" churches aren't exactly short on contradictions.  See ol' Doug Wilson and his "only orthodox Christians should be able to vote" while being a Calvinist.  He just needs to hope that a conservative Catholic or Eastern Orthodox doesn't get into power because he'd be seen as a dirty heretic too.

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, BlipBlap said:

Take the Wikipedia link how you will:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_fundamentalism

The Wikipedia article has its strong and weak points. One that I find fascinating is found footnoted in footnote 66. It is a New York Times article that seeks to answer why Fundamentalists Love Trump. This is not a political article, so I copy a small portion for your reading enjoyment:

"It makes no sense until you understand that the true distinction between fundamentalism and mainstream beliefs isn’t what fundamentalists believe but how fundamentalists believe. As Richard Land, a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, once told me, “Fundamentalism is far more a psychology than a theology.” That’s why, for example, you can have competing Christian fundamentalisms, competing Muslim fundamentalisms and secular movements that possess fundamentalist characteristics.
I grew up in a church that most would describe as fundamentalist, and I’ve encountered fundamentalism of every stripe my entire life. And while fundamentalist ideas can often be quite variable and complex, I’ve never encountered a fundamentalist culture that didn’t combine three key traits: certainty, ferocity and solidarity. Certainty is the key building block. The fundamentalist mind isn’t clouded by doubt. In fact, when people are fully captured by the fundamentalist mind-set, they often can’t even conceive of good-faith disagreement. To fundamentalists, their opponents aren’t just wrong but evil. Critics are derided as weak or cowards or grifters. Only a grave moral defect can explain the failure to agree.That certainty breeds ferocity. Indeed, ferocity — not piety — is a principal trait of every truly fundamentalist movement I’ve ever encountered. Ferocity is so valuable to fundamentalism that it can cover a multitude of conventional Christian sins. Defending Trump in 2016, Robert Jeffress, the pastor of First Baptist Dallas, an evangelical megachurch, explained, “Frankly, I want the meanest, toughest son of a gun I can find. And I think that’s the feeling of a lot of evangelicals.”Yet certainty and ferocity are nothing without solidarity. It’s the sense of shared purpose and community that makes any form of fundamentalism truly potent. There is an undeniable allure to the idea that you’re joining a community that has achieved an understanding of life’s mysteries or discovered a path to resolving injustice. As angry as fundamentalists may feel, at the same time, there is true joy among comrades in the foxhole — at least as long as they remain comrades.
I’m reminded of an infamous quote by Mike Huckabee, a former Baptist pastor, regarding the necessity of loyalty. Explaining Trump’s hostility toward Ron DeSantis, Huckabee said, “I think there are two virtues — loyalty and confidentiality. Be loyal to the people who helped you and learn how to keep your mouth shut.” Again, that’s not piety. It’s solidarity. When you recognize the psychology of fundamentalism, fundamentalist Christian enthusiasm for Trump makes considerably more sense. His fundamentalist supporters are certain that he is fulfilling a divine purpose. They are ferocious in their response to opponents, especially those Christians they believe to be weak or squishes. And they experience great joy in their motivated, activist solidarity. But the keys to fundamentalist success are also the source of its ultimate failure. Certainty, ferocity and solidarity can combine to create powerful social and political movements. They can have a steamrolling effect in institutions because their opponents — almost by definition — have less certainty, less ferocity and less solidarity. We’ve seen this phenomenon in both secular and religious spaces across the political spectrum. A small number of extremely confident and aggressive people can turn an organization upside down. Political activists who possess fundamentalist intensity can push through resistance — at least until their inherent intolerance creates sufficient backlash to trigger real opposition. 
That’s how fundamentalism fails. Certainty, which gives so much purpose, ultimately struggles in the face of complex realities. Ferocity, which allows fundamentalists to bully and intimidate opponents, also limits the ability to win converts. And solidarity, which creates community, can become stifling, as it encourages conformity and punishes those who raise good-faith questions."

These three traits: certainty, ferocity, and solidarity do indeed characterize Fundamentalism wherever it is found and in whatever faith it is found, whether LDS, Baptists, Methodists, Islam, or Judaism. I think this part of the article is very well written. While still confusing Fundamentalism as a branch of Evangelicalism, it certainly examines the psychological roots of Fundamentalism wherever it is found. All I would add is that it might clarify that it is characterizing a group or organizational psychology more than an  individual psychology. I would love to read your thoughts on it. best, Navidad
 

[Emily]

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

I’m reminded of an infamous quote by Mike Huckabee, a former Baptist pastor, regarding the necessity of loyalty. Explaining Trump’s hostility toward Ron DeSantis, Huckabee said, “I think there are two virtues — loyalty and confidentiality. Be loyal to the people who helped you and learn how to keep your mouth shut.” Again, that’s not piety. It’s solidarity.

It sounds like something the Godfather would say, or Gadianton, or Cain.

[Navidad]

9 hours ago, Emily said:

It sounds like something the Godfather would say, or Gadianton, or Cain.

Yep!