First, hyper-fundamentalists often understand fundamentalism in terms of loyalty to an organization (IBLP), movement, or even leader (Bill Gothard). 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 adamant stance regarding some extrabiblical or even antibiblical teaching. [Seven steps to prosperity, courtship, girls wearing only skirts. etc.] …When individuals become adamant 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. (Young people being sent away or outcasted for thinking and disagreeing with an extra-biblical stance)
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, or must be controlled by the standards of the leader or organization. (Verity)
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 is the modern equivalent of pharisaical spiritualism. Most tenants of Hyper-fundamental teaching are good thoughts or ideas that are blown far out of proportion. These rules, laws and methods of living are not bad in and of themselves; the problem though is when the the theology behind them. Theology is everything. How a person (or organization) views G-d will define their Methodology (what that person or organization does and how they live). Hyper-fundamentalism, by its nature, misses the theology of the Gospel. We are saved by grace, not by any ammount of right living or works. Having standards is great, but we WILL fail those standards, and even if we do not, we are still damned outside of the sacrifice of Yeshua. Grace alone through faith alone.
