Historically, the term has its genesis only about 100 years ago, when there was push-back (first in the United States, and later elsewhere in the English-speaking world) against what was seen as creeping liberalism resulting from the various schools of Biblical Higher Criticism. The debate was joined in a series of 90 essays grouped unde the name “The Fundamentals, A Testimony to the Truth,” published over 5 or 6 years by the Bible Institute of Los Angeles (now Biola University).

I suppose even more generally, today’s fundamentalists are identified far more by their dogma than their doctrine, although they are often loathe to tell the difference. In this, K’s comments are spot on, though very illustrative of the definition creep I mentioned earlier. “Fundamentalist” has become just one more pejorative with which to tar and feather otherwise devout Christians. It’s the schoolyard taunt of the carelessly undereducated. And worse, has become a generalist term for anyone of any belief system who insists that their faith is uniquely intended for mankind. At one time, Christian fundamentalists were pleased with the term as it created the very seperation they sought from “worldly Christianity.” Today, it’s been co-opted from the Christian vocabulary into popular culture and is so entrenched in the latter that Christians are wise not to apply it to themselves in the public square unless they have a bit of the martyr conplex about them.

Thanks for the brain-stretch, Chris!