Are Jehovah's Witnesses fundamentalists?

Advertisement

Viewed 1751 times

    Celestial posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 07:58:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 113 of 129
    Joined 2/3/2012

    I Googled the phrase and a Q & A from their official media web site appeared within the first few hits:

    http://www.jw-media.org/aboutjw/article32.htm

    Are you fundamentalists?

    While we have strong religious convictions, we are not fundamentalists in the sense that the term has come to be used. We do not believe that every passage in the Bible is to be interpreted literally. We do not pressure political leaders to promote a certain point of view, nor do we resort to demonstrations and violence against those who disagree with us. The Bible teaches Christians to be kind, good, mild, and reasonable—qualities that do not allow for the kind of fanaticism that is sometimes associated with fundamentalism.—James 3:17.

    ZeusRocks posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:18:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 130 of 204
    Joined 7/16/2010

    There are a few definitions of what a fundamentalist is.

    One definition is "strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles". If you went by that definition, then I would class the Watchtower Society as fundamentalists at least in some core teachings (not everything since they like to change their minds every so often).

    Phizzy posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:23:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 919 of 7235
    Joined 12/17/2011

    No, they do not have fun. Now, the mentalist bit.........

    Wizard of Oz posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:59:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 179 of 203
    Joined 2/19/2012

    Just before my wife and I became estranged, an ex witness wrote a book,"SEX in the SECT". I suggested that where there was smoke there was fire, but NO; "She must have done something to get disfellowed and is carrying a grudge. Jehovah's people aren't like that."

    FUN- DE-MENTAL

    I think that's a meaning for Fun of/with the Mentally Different. Yeah I've decided; They are Fundementalists orrite!!

    L'n'T.........woz

    breakfast of champions posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:54:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 1407 of 4000
    Joined 5/30/2011

    Yes, they are.

    And I love how when the dictionary doesn't provide a definition that fits their worldview, e.g. "generation" or "fundamentalist" they feel free to come up with their own. Pretty neat trick!

    M leavingwt posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:59:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 14062 of 14213
    Joined 6/16/2008

    They're a high-control group who believe the Bible is without error.

    M undercover posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:04:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 13083 of 13155
    Joined 9/25/2002

    I love how when the dictionary doesn't provide a definition that fits their worldview, e.g. "generation" or "fundamentalist" they feel free to come up with their own. Pretty neat trick!

    Yea... I've noticed on many of these FAQs that the WTS redefines the term (fundamentalism, only JWs to be saved, creation, etc) to whatever they want it to mean so they can answer in a way that puts them in a more positive light, yet never really answers the question.

    simon17 posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:17:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 425 of 723
    Joined 7/25/2009

    Easy test for Christian Fundamentalism:

    Do you believe the Genesis account is literal? If yes, then you are. If no, then you're not.

    JW's fall into a very weird in-between area and basically get stuck with the problems of both sides. They strictly believe some of the ridiculous stories to be literal (Flood real, man 6000 years old, Adam and Eve real people) but then randomly interpret some of it figuratively (Earth *could* be billions of years old, or at least "many thousands" lol).

    Diest posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:02:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 684 of 1701
    Joined 6/8/2011

    I would agree with what Simon Says.

    Knowsnothing posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:05:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 746 of 1269
    Joined 3/2/2011

    Disfellowshipping? Fundamentalists.

    Also, this statement is misleading:

    We do not believe that every passage in the Bible is to be interpreted literally.

    A fundamentalist does not mean you interpret every passage in the Bible to be literal. The key is which passages they interpret as literal, such as the impossible Flood.

    breakfast of champions posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:41:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 1408 of 4000
    Joined 5/30/2011

    Yeah, just clarify a bit on what you interpret as "literal". . .

    Flood, talking snake, etc. = literal

    Dragon, hallucinated beasts, etc. = not literal

    Oh yeah, I forgot. . .

    144,000 = literal

    mindseye posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:42:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 161 of 271
    Joined 3/13/2011

    I always went back and forth as to whether JWs are fundamentalists. There seems to be an obvious political element to most fundamentalist groups. JWs avoid this, as they don't vote, lobby, or protest to keep evolution and other things from being taught in public school. But using the wikipedia definition of Fundamentalism - a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines usually understood as a reaction against Modernist theology - I would definitely classify the Witnesses as fundamentalists.

    The term comes from an series of Protestant publications from the early 20th century called the Fundamentals. In addition to attacking 'evolutionism', higher criticism, and liberal theology, these early Fundamentalists also attacked the early Bible Students who eventually became Jehovah's Witnesses.

    skeeter1 posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:00:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 4089 of 5278
    Joined 12/3/2005

    I think fundamentalists try to live as close to possible up to an "ideal". We can have a Muslim fundamentalist, a Jewish fundamentalist . . how do those differ from a Christian fundamentalist? The don't. Just different ideals.

    The Jehovah's Witnesses are definately trying to live up to a perfect ideal. An ideal of a "True Christian"; complete with women can only wear dresses and skirts to the knees and 30 magic hours a month make you a blessed person for pioneering!

    So, yes, JWs are fundamentalist.

    Skeeter

    F blondie posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:13:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 33589 of 37613
    Joined 5/28/2001

    I think the WTS really hones in on the 24 hour creative day that some fundamentalists believe; but then the old 7,000 year creative day and the now ambigious thousands of years, is not much better.

    M undercover posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:19:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 13088 of 13155
    Joined 9/25/2002

    I think the WTS really hones in on the 24 hour creative day that some fundamentalists believe; but then the old 7,000 year creative day and the now ambigious thousands of years, is not much better.

    The WTS is in a pickle when it comes to creation. Creationists, the literal 6 day folk, make the WTS squirm. Because those people come off looking like loonies. The WTS doesn't want to be associated with that, so they denounce the Creationists as too literal and not taking science into account. Yet they conveniently overlook their own history of promoting 7,000 year long "days".

    What they hope no one notices is that in the course of millions and millions of years, there's not a big difference between the Creationists account of creation vs the WTS account. They're only separated by 43,000 or so years.

    F LongHairGal posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:17:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 2896 of 4034
    Joined 3/11/2005

    Celestial:

    I do consider them to be but they may not see themselves as such. They don't like that term and want to distinguish themselves from other christian sects. Even though they supposedly don't interpret every bible passage as literal, they are too changeable with their beliefs. They are like an amoeba that changes shape when it suits them.

    I once was friends with a man who called JWs part of "radical christianity". So, that about says it all.

    M JeffT posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:40:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 6058 of 7065
    Joined 6/4/2001

    Just about everybody that calls himself a fundamentalist these days will tell you that 2 of those fundamentals are a belief in the Trinity and belief in Salvation by Grace alone. JW's do not accept either one of these.

    Band on the Run posted Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:07:00 GMT(4/11/2012)

    Post 4840 of 9802
    Joined 12/18/2010

    There are so many ways of defining fundamentalism. Rather than describe their views, they are highly insulting to other fundies. They go further than I would. Someone did a study of Supreme Court's use of definitions in their opinions. They use about ten different dictionaries and the usage coincides with what strengthens their argument rather than a belief that any one dictionary, including the Oxford English, is the best.

    They are outside the Fundamentalist movement in the United States. They are outside every movement, however. We know their emphasis is on WT lit rather than the Bible. I would love to know the scriptures they do not take literally. It would be easier to exclude. I see only literal interpretations. Well-the prophecies give them free license.

    In my opinion, they are more fundamentalist than not fundamentalist.

    TOTH posted Thu, 12 Apr 2012 03:42:00 GMT(4/12/2012)

    Post 492 of 662
    Joined 1/9/2012

    Fundementalist implies that they have their beliefs rooted in some valid teaching or set of values and they stick to the basics of that teaching. Following the teachings of the wt does not qualify. IMHO anyways...

    M Witness 007 posted Thu, 12 Apr 2012 03:52:00 GMT(4/12/2012)

    Post 5346 of 5497
    Joined 8/28/2007

    They took the "Fun" out of "Funamentalist."

      Close

      Confirm ...