= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on The uniquely awful example of theism - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (169)
You need to define "fundamentalist" for us, then. Originally, it meant a liberal interpretation of Christianity that would admit anyone who subscribed to a short list of (then nearly-universally-held) fundamental doctrines.
It never meant a liberal interpretation of Christianity. It was defined by adherence to a shortish list of allegedly fundamental alleged truths, but the whole reason for its existence was that liberal Christians were starting to doubt or deny them.
(But "fundamentalist" these days is a term whose connotation matters more than its denotation, and I agree that anyone using it for any serious purpose needs to say what they mean by it.)