1. Hypo-fundamentalism abdicates biblical dogmatism and promotes an ever-growing Inclusivism in theological issues. Although Hypo-fundamentalism may not accept false doctrines as true, they are tolerant and accepting of those holding various degrees of false doctrine. Therefore, they seek to redefine biblical Separatism. This was the sin of Peter and Barnabas at Galatia (Acts 15:1-6 and Galatians 2:11-12).

2. Hypo-fundamentalism has a corrupted view of Ecclesiology. Failing to make distinctions regarding dispensational transitions, they adopt the Kingdom Age view of the Church and adapt that view into the Church Age. This corrupts such texts as Ephesians 4:1-16 from a local view of the Church (Ecclesiology) to a universal or mystical view of Ecclesiology within all of the ambiguity of what defines modern day Christianity. Hypo-fundamentalism increasingly accepts varying degrees of Reformed Theology often beginning with Calvin’s Soteriology and the willingness to accept, or tolerate, Reformed views of Eschatology and Ecclesiology.

3. Hypo-fundamentalism rejects the preservation of God’s inspired words and accepts and adopts Eclectic Textual Criticism as their model of Eclectic Reconstructionism of the Bible. Although they claim to believe in the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the autographs, they do not believe they have the preservation of those inspired words in any apograph or group of apographs. Although they usually reject Dynamic Inspiration of the Originals, in their view of preservation, they then practically can only accept Dynamic Preservation because they can never be confident their reconstructed texts have the exact preserved words from the originals.

4. Hypo-fundamentalism rejects militant opposition against doctrinal heretics and promotes an ongoing dialogue with them as opposed to separation from them – apposition rather than opposition. In apposition there are varying degrees of allowed “fellowship” (ambiguously defined) so as to gender ongoing discussion rather than following the biblical mandate: “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject” (Titus 3:10).

5. Hypo-fundamentalism accepts ever-increasing degrees of Soteriological Inclusivism and Soteriological Reductionism. These varying degrees extend into Lordship Salvation, Monergism, Predestinationism or Predeterminism, Easy Believism, Only Believism, even into the Crossless Gospel extremes. Although there is ongoing discussion regarding these variations, they continue in varying degrees of cooperative ministry within the dialogue.

6. Hypo-fundamentalism seeks cultural relevancy above personal sanctity. This exists on numerous levels. However, on whatever level it exists it is sacrificing God’s supernatural and enabling grace for the world’s “friendship” (acceptance). This is another level of apposition – the belief that ministry to a culture is done as part of that culture rather than separation from that culture by establishing a local church counter-culture within the culture. Hypo-fundamentalists seek to obfuscate the line of demarcation that separates the believer in his being “in the world” (John 17:11), rather than “of the world” (John 15:18-19 and 17:14).

7. Hypo-fundamentalism seeks to avoid being viewed as religious fanatics at almost any sacrifice to true Biblicism. This is manifested in the extreme by introducing contemporary Christian Rock Music into worship services and the toleration of practices such as Contemplative Prayer, tongues speaking, social drinking, pre-marital sex, and general worldliness in dress and entertainment. Many hypo-fundamental churches no longer require abstinence from the use of alcohol and refuse to make social drinking a test of fellowship. Sin is spoken of in generalities rather than specifics. Their common word expressing distaste for these tests of fellowship is the word Legalism as defined contrary to biblical norms

8. Hypo-fundamentalism adopts the Right and Left terminology of Centrism while always viewing themselves as being the Center. Their word for this is balanced – meaning only their defined allowances of deviations from their center. All to the right of them are dogmatic hypers, and therefore rejected as unmovable. Everyone to left of them are potential friends. True Biblicists see no right or left when referring to biblical Truth. True Biblicists see only right and wrong.

9. Hypo-fundamentalism favors varying degrees of multiplicity of elder rule that leans more towards Presbyterian Polity in Board administrated churches rather than Congregation Polity administrated under the leadership of a godly Pastor/Elder/Bishop. In many cases, this is theological reaction against the apparent abuses of ungodly Pastors/Elders/Bishops, who “lord over” God’s people. Abuses give no mandate to abandon established biblical precedents. Rather, true Congregational Polity should biblically correct these abuses through confrontation and reproof. Hypo-fundamentalists think they have a better way than God’s way.  – Guest Author: Lance Ketchum

Set in “stone” standards in math, chemistry, physics, etc. are “absolutes”. We count on them consciously or unconsciously every moment of every day. However, when it comes to “SCRIPTURE”, we balk at the FINAL ANSWER [THE FINAL AUTHORITY] all the time. There MUST be a “final answer”. There has to be one final “supreme court”. You cannot have two opposing FINAL AUTHORITIES! The “words of God” often inhibit us from following our fleshly desires – our carnal natures – SO we try and find a more “modern”, up-to-date version. “It’s easier to understand” is our reasoning! Right! Like we don’t understand the “thee’s” and the “thou’s” of the King James Bible!! And, oh, Tiglath-Pileser’s name is going to be different in the newer version!! Right! I suppose it’ll be changed to “TIGGY!” The King James Bible was written, by the way, when words meant something!

Example: Why would you name your son after a toilet? [John] Why would you name your son after someone who solicits a prostitute? [John] Oh, you say, he was named after the Apostle John in the New Testament! Hummm!!! I never would have known!

The English Language has “degenerated” over time. That is an observation that has so many examples that it need not be debated. English reached its apex of meaning years prior to the printing of the King James Bible. I believe, by faith, the King James Bible translators of the Holy Scriptures were “guided by the Holy Spirit” to choose just the right English word in their eclectic translation. When I come to the Scriptures, I believe I have been given by God, the “words of God” that He intended for me to have – preserved in my English language – with inspiration. There are no errors, no mistakes, no contradictions.

When I hold a King James Bible in my hands, I have in my hands the words of God, preserved with inspiration. [Psalms 12:6-7] Those words are infallible, inerrant, inexorable, and indestructible. God said it well using the Apostle Paul to pen I Thessalonians 2:13, “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” If you come to the Bible with doubt – well – “Huston, we’ve got problems!”

People that have any training at all – have been taught mostly by self-proclaimed scholars. They are “taught to say, ‘It is just a translation!’” What does THAT mean? Well, to the vast of majority of them it means that “IT” [their “bible”] is not the “Original Manuscripts”, “Autographs”, or “Writings” of the holy men of God. What do they mean by THAT? They are implying that the translation you have has “mistakes” in it. They don’t think God can translate! Mercy sakes! Any verses in the New Testament from the Old Testament were translated from Hebrew or Aramaic! God can TRANSLATE! On the day, of Pentecost the Apostle Peter spoke in tongues and the message was translated by GOD, the Holy Ghost into 17 different languages at the same time!! God can translate! If you are saved, you are a translation!? Paul wrote, “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:” [Colossians 1:13] God can translate! I pray He has translated you!! Just Thank God – HE CAN TRANSLATE!!! AND HE HAS!

“Translations all have error in them”, they say. The translations are not “inspired” like the “Originals” authors were inspired they say. Well, news flash – those whom God used to pen His Scriptures were NOT inspired!! The WORDS God used and gave to them to pen WERE INSPIRED!

Most folks are taught to say almost every time, “Yea, hath God said . . .” just like Satan in Genesis 3. “Which “bible” do you like,” they say? “Which “bibles” do you read,” they say? They do not believe for a minute that they have the absolute “words of God” in their hands! What saith the Scriptures? “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. [Heb. 11:6] May I conclude that He that cometh to God’s Word MUST believe them – those words!!?! “God is not a man, that he should lie; . . .” [Numbers 23:19]

The “Final Authority” in the minds of modern translators [all 260 some odd new versions in English over the last 130 years] is some, long, since lost “Originals” to which no one can actually appeal. However, they say, “we” do have copies of some ancient Greek Manuscripts that if you know the ancient Greek you can seriously decipher the original meanings of what God was trying to say. Sounds like a new “priesthood” to me!

Pastors, teachers, self-proclaimed scholars, Greek & Hebrew professors, modern translators and publishing houses are clambering for naive buyers to purchase their latest packaged, money making, cash cow. “Just wait!” “There more!” In another six months they will come out with another version that finally, almost, has gotten it right! [No translation is perfect – you know!! – they say] And the naive, ignorant, gullible, untaught believers, and the public, will purchase the next perversion that minimizes sin, deifies man, humanizes Christ, waters down the Blood, air conditions hell, [hades] casts doubt on Creation, explains away the miracles, questions the Trinity, etc. etc. etc.

You need to stick with the archaic, black- backed King James Bible that God has used these past 400 years!

From the beginning of time, Satan and his forces of evil have sought to obfuscate the narrow way that defines perfect holiness. With each new generation, there are new offerings in the nuances of obfuscation, even though these nuances are often in tiny increments of deviation from the pathway of righteousness. They are often subtle deviations and they are offered as the true pathway. These subtle deviations from the true pathway of righteousness usually carry a more anthropocentric emphasis. They exalt love for our fellowman above our love for the truths of doctrinal purity. It is one of Satan’s age-old tools of obfuscation. When someone refuses to be acceptable to various degrees of deviation from the pathway of righteousness or from doctrinal purity, he is immediately accused of being unloving.
Apparently, there are now certain acceptable deviations from the pathway of righteousness and doctrinal purity. These new degrees of acceptable deviations are not based upon an accusation regarding the fallibility of Scripture, but the fallibility of theological dogmatism. Apparently, we can never be certain about anything any longer. Oh yes, there are certainly theological absolutes, but they fall into a very narrow category we will call the fundamentals. Apparently, now the only real fundamental worth separating over is the Gospel. Of course, this Gospel Only view must be very broadly defined to include Lordship Salvation, Easy Believism, Only Believism, Monergism, and even the Pentecostal Full Gospel. These New Centrists are no longer going to separate over unimportant doctrines such as false Ecclesiology, false Eschatology, false Cessationism, or even over what defines acceptable spiritual music in the worship of God.
When a person has somehow justified his actions, he will hear no other point of view even if it comes from his peers. When he is corrected or criticized by his peers for an obvious deviation from his previous practices, he justifies his new practice by condemning his old practice along with everyone that still walks in that old way. The historic pattern is that the new generation rising to power must always be willing to kill the giants of the previous generation in order to establish a new monarchy of leadership. Every new generation is willing to accept the new leadership especially if they come offering a governance of lower expectations. That new leadership will always find a way to justify those lower expectations and do so without shame. There really is “nothing new under the sun.”
“15 Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD. 16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. 17 Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken” (Jeremiah 6:15-17).
As each new generation accepts these new pathways of acceptability, there will also be those still trumpeting the “old paths.” Once the new generation has accepted these new pathways of acceptability, they also MUST reject those trumpeting the “old paths.” Those still trumpeting the “old paths” must be labeled as extremists and hypers. Granted, there are always extremists and hypers in every generation. Therefore, it is easy for those promising to refine the pathway of righteousness simply to push everyone to the right of them into various categories of extremism. After all, they can justify this because they are the new right. This is just more justification. They “will not hearken.”
Apparently, there is no allowable degree of tension in the spiritual dynamic of theological discussion. Apparently, all forms of experimentation in theological dialogue must be allowed if we want our voice heard by those that disagree with us. Apparently, there are those who think they will be able to convince those who have deviated from the path of righteousness, even though all of their arguments have already historically been cast aside. Those proclaiming to possess a more noble degree of true biblical love argue that obviously those arguments were cast aside because they were offered in an unloving way and with a too dogmatic voice. The outcome of this philosophy is that the discussion with heretics (those dividing the pathway of righteousness) never comes to an end. God’s command regarding this is simple – “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject” (Titus 3:10).
Those that claim to possess this higher and nobler degree of true biblical love do not see themselves as deviating from the narrow pathway of righteousness. They simply believe that the narrow pathway of righteousness is narrower than God intended. They see themselves redefining the pathway of righteousness. For them, the pathway of righteousness is really much broader than hitherto allowed. For them, there is room for broad acceptance of numerous theological views because man is fallible in his interpretation of Scripture. In fact, they tell us, those who hold to the old narrow pathway of righteousness are actually in the ditch somewhere. They tell us that they in fact are pursuing a radical center of a new broader way.
It is amazing how Inclusivism always comes wrapped in such wonderfully intellectual and rational packages. Amiability is the new word for theological toleration. Amiability is the new word for biblical love. I come from Old School Fundamentalism. We believe in theological absolutes and we believe those theological absolutes are black and white issues. We believe if you study the Word of God diligently that you can actually find dogmatic answers to every important question about God, life, and the biblical practice thereof. Old School Fundamentalists were taught about social engineering through the processes of the Hegelian Dialectic and Centrism. Therefore, we talked in the language of right and wrong, not right and left. Centrism is the language of culturally acceptable norms. Right and wrong is the language of the God of the Word. There is no acceptable deviation in the language of right and wrong when it comes to the pathway of righteousness. There is just turning aside or straight on. Today, we need more men who are willing to obey God’s command to Moses in Deuteronomy 5:31 – “But as for thee, stand thou here by me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgments, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it.”
“29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever! 30 Go say to them, Get you into your tents again. 31 But as for thee, stand thou here by me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgments, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it. 32 Ye shall observe to do therefore as the LORD your God hath commanded you: ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left. 33 Ye shall walk in all the ways which the LORD your God hath commanded you, that ye may live, and that it may be well with you, and that ye may prolong your days in the land which ye shall possess” (Deuteronomy 5:29-33).
I do not understand how knowledgeable men can so easily be led into the ditch of philosophical compromise. I do not understand how knowledgeable men can justify using the language of Centrism when they must know it is the language of cultural manipulation. I think they must understand their methodology and have adapted certain agreed upon talking points. If they are right (and their argument is that they are right), then everything to the right of them is wrong and everything to the left of them is wrong. Yet, they are willing to label everyone they say is to the right of them as Hyper, while labeling select individuals to the left of them as friends. Then they separate from those to the right of them (which means all those unwilling to accept their new center) and maintain fellowship with those they admittedly understand to be to the left of them. It does not seem too difficult to discern the direction in which they are moving, even though they claim they have not moved. This obviously tells us something about them. Either they never were where they once professed to be, or they have moved. Either of those two possibilities is unacceptable.

By Dr. Lance Ketchum

We don’t “trim” the MESSAGE in order to placate the masses or individuals who might come to our services.  We are to preach the “whole counsel” of God to people as they are . . . most of our “preaching” should be done outside of church by our lives and our lips.  cp. Acts 5:42; Acts 20:18-38; I Peter 3:15;

Do YOU ever take a STAND for the TRUTH outside of your local church?  Does your language, dress, conduct, lifestyle, reflect that you are “Christ-like.”  Does your spirit, attitude, the way you “say” things reflect positively or negatively on your “professed Christianity?” cp. Col. 3:16; I Thess. 4:1-5; II Thess. 3:6;

These are the questions we should all ask ourselves every day!

I read where Franklin Graham was asked to comment on President Obama’s faith as 20% of Americans believe he is Muslim.  He basically said that that was the President testimony.  Is that enough to satisfy you?  After all Jeremiah Wright said that he was a Christian too . . . and he preached Marxist Black Liberation Theology to Obama for 20 years!!! 

Here is the end of Mr. Graham’s interview and the USA Today’s article. 

The controversy prompted USA Today to pose the question this morning, “Who, exactly, is a Christian? Or Christian enough? Or the right variation of Christian?” The report quoted a different Pew survey stating that most Americans think they are believers, but their actual practices do not always match their profession.

Interest that USA Today would pose that question!

Most all of the callers – many of whom identified themselves as “Christians” – had no problem with any of Coach Ryan “tactics” and virtually all of the callers were very critical of former Head Coach, Tony Dundee calling “out” Coach Ryan for using “that language” when trying to get his players to be more aggressive and responsive during their practice.

The vast majority of callers, as well as the “host” of the show, saw nothing “wrong” with anyone using “that type of language” and thought that anyone who was critical was a “naive idiot”.  I called in and got to the screener and ask why it was ok to use God and Jesus name in their swearing and not Buddha, Allah, Mohammad, or the Virgin Mary, Obama, their mother, or some pope, I was politely told that the station was switching topics and to call back some other time. Of course, when the station came back from the break they continued with the SAME topic for another 10 or 12 minutes when the Tiger Ballgame was starting!!  I was lied to . . . .

My question is  . . . what do you think about the obvious “language” problem in our society and in “our churches” among self professing “Christians”.  Does Exodus 20:7; Ephesians 4:29; Matthew 12:36-37; or Luke 6:45 – apply?