Characteristics of Hyper-Fundamentalism

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by agedman, Jan 10, 2012.

  1. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    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?
     
  2. drfuss

    drfuss
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    This should be a very interesting thread. I agree with his descriptions.

    Are there also hyper-conservatives?

    Many Christians consider themselves both fundamentalists and conservatives.

    Would these descriptions also apply to hyper-conservatives?
     
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    This appears to belong on the Fundamental Baptist Forum. There are enough cat fights on this forum!!!
     
  4. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    Are you familiar with Kevin Bauder and any of his thinking?

    If you are, what can you share of your thoughts?
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,215
    Likes Received:
    1,318
    I agree with Brother Kevin's descriptions of what he calls "Hyper-fundamentalists" but what we here on the BB usually refer to as Xers.

    The only thing I would question is his assertion that the Xers may constitute the majority of fundamentalists. They may represent a significant percentage of Baptist fundamentalism but not fundamentalism across denominational lines.

    Brother Kevin teaches at the Seminary I attended back in the 70s prior to his arrival. He is a man of deep understanding of ecclesiastical history and current structure of the many facets of fundamentalism.
     
  6. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    I could use some more educating about this.

    Who are some people whose names I might recognize that would be classified as hyper-fundamentalists or Xers?

    I once had a good friend, a theological liberal, describe me as conservative, but not fundamentalist, because I wasn't mad at anybody.
     
  7. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those who call themselves "fundamentalists" today typically don't even know what the term means, nor where it came from.

    The term came about c. 1900 when a set of, then pamphlets were distributed as an apology against higher criticism. These were made into a set of books defending the faith.

    Now we have those who think fundamentalists are those who preach against issues of the day v. Bible preaching, women and pants, haircuts, what they deem as worldliness, swimming together (public bathing), and use a text and tantrum style of "preaching" &c. This is not what a true fundamentalist is.

    Perhaps they should rename themselves wackos.
     
    #7 preacher4truth, Jan 10, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 10, 2012
  8. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    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
     
  9. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are they all also 'KJV Only?"

    As THAT seems to be the binding glue to the new Fundementalist movement in churches!
     
  10. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,548
    Likes Received:
    212
    Yes, typically, they all ascribe to King James only.

    Hyles is dead. Schaap preaches some weird junk every once in a while. Ruckman? I had a Mormon lend me a book by Ruckman once; it only took a day to read and give back notes on where Ruckman was wacko. Can't speak to Hortons.

    Y'all forgot to add Phelps to that list.

    And then there's the other fundamental list, that includes people like John R. Rice. But we don't have anything bad to say about Rice, so he generally gets left out of the conversation.

    Don
    An independent fundamental baptist who prefers the KJV
     
  11. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    So sad, that the Fundementalist movement from past Century got "hijacked" by "Chjristians" like that group!

    once meant and stood for solid biblical doctrines/practices, but now stands for having right version only pretty much!
     
  12. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,548
    Likes Received:
    212
    Depends on where you go. Since my salvation, I've remained an IFB; I've been in all types of IFB churches. I've run across Southen Baptist churches that never joined the SBC, stand on the KJV only, and are more IF than a lot of IFB churches. I'm currently a member of an IFB church where suits and ties are considered "unusual." I've been a member of an IFB church that considered Hyles the "ideal to ascribe to"; and I've been a member of IFB churches where Hyles was frowned upon for standing on standards more than the Bible. (yes, my membership has changed several times over the years, thanks to job-related moves)

    Fact of the matter is, whether it's catholics, or muslims, or IFBs, we have to be careful about using generalities. I know catholics who espouse the same exact beliefs we baptists do; I've had a roman catholic chaplain admit to me that we (baptists) got that infant baptism thing right. Islam, for the most part, reminds me exactly of catholicism: there are a lot of people who profess to be one, but only a few that actually practice it. I knew a muslim who went to the mosque every week, but would show you which drawer he kept his bottle of Scotch in, and which TV channel to watch arabic pornography (I never took him up on it)...and this was in a muslim country.

    You got a lot of folks laying claim to the titles; the hard part is cutting through the chaff and finding the ones that actually are.
     
  13. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    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.
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,213
    Likes Received:
    192
    Don't include Fred Phelps in there. He is not an IFB by education, theology or positions espoused. He is a Hyper-Calvinist "Old School" Baptist rabble rouser, originally ordained by the SBC, who doesn't even deserve the title "extreme fundamentalist."
     
    #14 John of Japan, Jan 12, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2012
  15. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    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. :)
     
    #15 agedman, Jan 12, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2012
  16. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,213
    Likes Received:
    192
    Here's the difference. Rice was blackballed by the Texas Convention. Don't know how Roloff left the SBC. But both men became independent Baptists by name and identity. Fred Phelps has never identified with the IFB movement, but specifically calls himself "Old School Baptist," Primitive Baptist. He has never supported IFB schools, missions or fellowships.

    Furthermore, though there are IFB Calvinists, Hyper Calvinists have never been welcomed or at home in the IFB movement, going back to the scandal when an evangelist preached the five points in a Sword Conference (early '50's I believe) without telling John R. Rice ahead of time he had changed his position. (To preach in a Sword Conference you had to stick to evangelism and revival as your topics.)
    Now that's true! :thumbsup:
     

Share This Page

Loading...