Characteristics of Hyper-Fundamentalism

Kevin Bauder (Central Seminary) has a chapter in a book titled Four Views of The Spectrum of Evangelicalism in which he lists eight characteristics of hyper-fundamentalism. The book will be published by Zondervan but is (I think) not yet on store shelves.

They are: (taken from: http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2011/09/13/kevin-bauders-eight-characteristics-of-hyper-fundamentalism/

First, hyper-fundamentalists often understand fundamentalism in terms of loyalty to an organization, movement, or even leader. They equate the defense of the faith with the prosperity of their organization or its leader. Someone who criticizes or contradicts it is subjected to censure or separation.

Second, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes adopt a militant stance regarding some extrabiblical or even antibiblical teaching. [He sites KJV-onlyism as an example.] …When individuals become militant over such nonbiblical teachings, they cross the line into hyper-fundamentalism.

Third, hyper-fundamentlists understand separation in terms of guilt by association. To associate with someone who holds any error constitutes an endorsement of that error….

Fourth, hyper-fundamentalists are marked by an inability to receive criticism. For them, questioning implies weakness or compromise. Any criticism — especially if it is offered publicly — constitutes an attack….

A fifth characteristic of hyper-fundamentalism is anti-intellectualism. Some hyper-fundamentalists view education as detrimental to spiritual well-being…. Colleges, when they exist, are strictly for the purpose of practical training.

Sixth, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes turn nonessentials into tests of fundamentalism. For example, some hyper-fundamentalists assume that only Baptists should be recognized as fundamentalists…. One’s fundamentalist standing may be judged by such criteria as hair length, musical preferences, and whether one allows women to wear trousers.

Seventh, hyper-fundamentalists occasionally treat militant political involvement as a criterion for fundamentalist standing. During the 1960s and 1970s, anticommunism was a definitive factor for some fundamentalists. Its place has now been taken by antiabortion and antihomosexual activism. Most fundamentalists do agree about these issues, but hyper-fundamentalists make militant activism a necessary obligation of the Christian faith.

Eight and last, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes hold a double standard for personal ethics. They see themselves engaged in an ecclesiastical war, and they reason that some things are permissible in a warfare that would not be permissible in ordinary life. They may employ name-calling, half-truths, and innuendo as legitimate weapons. They may excuse broken promises and political backstabbing.

Hyper-fundamentalism takes many forms, including some that I have not listed. Nevertheless, these are the forms that are most frequently encountered. When a version of fundamentalism bears one or more of these marks, it should be viewed as hyper-fundamentalist…

Hyper-fundamentalism is not fundamentalism. It is as a parasite on the fundamentalist movement. For many years it was simply a nuisance, largely ignored by mainstream fundamentalists. Ignoring the problem, however, permitted it to grow. While statistics are not available, hyper-fundamentalists now constitute a significant percentage of self-identified fundamentalists, perhaps even a majority. They have become the noisiest and often the most visible representatives of fundamentalism. They may be the only version of fundamentalism that many people ever see.​

Would you agree, modify (add or delete) from the list of Bauder?

Would you consider he is accurate or inaccurate in his assessment of the 8 items and the conclusion at the end?

 

Are you familiar with Kevin Bauder and any of his thinking?

If you are, what can you share of your thoughts?

 

Here is a short list for you to start. Each would fit at least one of the items on the list.

Jack Hyles - FBC Hammond

Jack Schapp - FBC Hammond

Peter Ruckman - KJV only

Hortons - Pensacola Christian College

 

You are right.

Hyles has thousands of clones and unfortunately the type of fundamentalism that is held as the truth by that group has done much damage.

Unfortunately, very good people (pastors and missionaries) were/are carried away with such as the extreme teaches and continue the damage.

Schapp who is Hyles' son in law, Vineyard in Oklahoma City, Bob Gray in Longview, Tx, and many, many others continue the drumbeat contending that they are the true standard bearing ones and the rest are unsaved.

I am very grateful for very good university schools, that, although impacted and even perhaps at one time out of reaction swayed one direction or another by the extreme group, have generally held firmly in the trench of historic fundamental Christianity.

 

Hyles, Rice, Rolof, ... were all at one time trained in SBC schools, and pastored SBC churches.

Being SBC is no guarantee of not going to seed on some extreme view.