WesleyGospel Ministries

Romans 6 begins Paul’s teaching on sanctification, which is the majority of his Gospel.

Originally from here.

Never Talk Against ‘Legalism’: Call It Tenderness of Conscience.

Legality [Legalism], with most who use that term, really means tenderness of conscience. There is no propriety in the word if one would take it for seeking justification by works. Considering, therefore, how hard it is to fix the meaning of that odd term, and how dreadfully it has been abused, I think it highly advisable for all the Methodists to lay it quite aside.

John Wesley, February 16, 1771, “Letter to Mary Bishop.”

No Such Sin As ‘Legalism’.

O beware of all that talk or write in that un-Scriptural manner, or they will perplex, if not destroy, you! I cannot find in my Bible any such sin as legality [legalism]. Truly, we have been often afraid where no fear was. I am not half legal [legalistic] enough, not enough under the law of love. Sometimes there is painful conviction of sin preparatory to full sanctification; sometimes a conviction that has far more pleasure than pain, being mixed with joyful expectation. Always there should be a gradual growth in grace; which need never be intermitted from the time we are justified. Do not wait, therefore, for pain or anything else, but simply for all-conquering faith.

John Wesley, November 27, 1770, “Letter to Mary Bishop.”

Defy All Liberty, But Liberty to Love & Serve God;
Fear No Bondage, But Bondage to Sin.

I find no such sin as legality [legalism] in the Bible; the very use of the term speaks an Antinomian. I defy all liberty, but liberty to love and serve God (2 Pet. 2:19); and fear no bondage, but bondage to sin (Rom. 6:13). Sift that text to the bottom, and it will do the business of poor H—and all his disciples: “God sent His own Son in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us” (Rom. 8:4). Justitia legis, justitia legalis! (“The righteousness of the law is legalistic righteousness.”) Here is legality [legalism] indeed!

John Wesley, November 30, 1770, “Letter to Joseph Benson.”

‘Legalism’: A Silly & Meaningless Word.

[7.] What evasion now? What way could Satan take to make all this Light of none effect? What could be done when that grand truth, “By grace ye are saved through faith,” was more and more generally received? What, indeed, but to persuade the very men who had received it, to “turn the grace of God into lasciviousness [licentiousness]?” (Jude 1:4). To this end Simon Magus appeared again, and taught, “that Christ had done, as well as suffered all: that His righteousness being imputed to us, we need none of our own: That seeing there was so much righteousness and holiness in Him, there needs no more in us: That to think we have any, or to desire or seek any, is to renounce Christ; That from the beginning to the end of salvation, all is in Christ, nothing in man; and that those who teach otherwise are legal [legalistic] preachers, and know nothing of the Gospel.”

[8.] This is indeed “A Blow at the Root,” the root of all holiness, all true religion. Hereby Christ is “Stabbed in the House of his Friends,” of those who make the largest professions of loving and honouring Him; the whole design of His death, namely, “to destroy the works of the devil,” (1 John 3:8) being overthrown at a stroke. For wherever this doctrine is cordially received, it leaves no place for holiness. It demolishes it from top to bottom; it destroys both root and branch. It effectually tears up all desire of it, all endeavour after it.

It forbids all such exhortations as might excite those desires, or awaken those endeavours. Nay, it makes men afraid of personal holiness, afraid of cherishing any thought of it, or motion toward it, lest they should deny the faith, and reject Christ and His righteousness. So that, instead of being “zealous of good works,” (Titus 2:14) they are a stink in their nostrils. And they are infinitely more afraid of the works of God, than of the works of the devil.

[10.] … Be no longer afraid of the strongest exhortations either to inward or outward holiness. Hereby God the Father is glorified, and God the Son truly exalted. Do not stupidly and senselessly call this legal [legalism], – a silly, unmeaning word. Be not afraid of being “under the law of God,” (1 Cor. 9:21) but of being under “the law of sin” (Rom. 8:2). Love the strictest preaching best, that which most searches the heart, and shews you wherein you are unlike Christ; and that which presses you most to love Him with all your heart, and serve Him with all your strength.

John Wesley, A Blow at the Root: or Christ Stabbed in the House of His Friends.

Originally from here.

At the time of Stanley Frodsham’s birth in 1882 in Bournemouth, England, many women were losing their lives in childbirth, so his mother who walked with God gave herself unto prayer dedicating him to the Lord while he was yet in the womb. As he grew she would read to him from the Bible and often as she did tears would flow from her eyes. His father was also a godly man and known for his strict integrity. He always carried a copy of the Book of Proverbs with him and read a chapter a day by which he governed his life. Young Stanley was well educated as he grew, even beginning to learn French and Latin at the age of seven. From a young age he had a deep desire to be a writer. He was an avid reader and studied hard the English language but came to see that the simpler he wrote the better people understood him. He was raised in a Congregational church where the greatest visiting speakers were always the simplest. One day he read the life story of Hudson Taylor the founder of the China Inland Mission, he was challenged to the core by the reality of this man of God and by his life of faith. He now hungered to know God just as Taylor had known him. As he sought God he had a life changing encounter with Jesus Christ, the old sins of swearing and smoking fell off immediately. Along with his brother he started a business, God blessed them greatly and they were enabled to give large sums of money to God’s work. Against all pressure they refused to work or open on Sundays. All his days he gave up and shunned immediately anything he felt did not glorify God or that hinted of worldliness.

In the winter of 1906 over into 1907 he visited Canada to explore the possibility of business investment. While there he began to hear about a spiritual revival of New Testament Christianity which was coming to the church across the world. When he returned to Britain he travelled to Sunderland in England in October 1908. It was there in the home of A. A. Boddy that Mrs. Boddy laid hands on him and prayed, the Spirit of God filled him and “torrents of tongues poured from his lips.” In 1909 Stanley began his publishing ministry by writing a Pentecostal paper called Victory. The second issue was distributed at the Sunderland Whitsuntide convention and so spread across the land. He joined the first Pentecostal church in Bournemouth called the Apostolic Faith; it was run by a very strong charactered leader, who made a big emphasis on prophecy, as well as the restoration of the ministry of apostle and prophet. This leader accused him of something of which he was totally innocent; this threw him into a time of great heartache and distress of soul, but he cried unto the Lord. This led him to leave this church seeing that they had moved into error. Soon others left and Stanley became their pastor even though he had no such formal training. The first time he saw someone healed was when he was called to pray for a man who was crippled with rheumatism, he anointed him with oil and prayed, the pain left and the man was healed. This was the first of many such healings. He was married to Alice Rowlands, the service was conducted by Smith Wigglesworth. In 1912 he attended the Sunderland convention again, two of the speakers were Wigglesworth and Barratt; it was here that he also met the Carter brothers for the first time. Stepping out into a life of living by faith, they moved to America.

Their views on money were strong, they trusted God alone, did not make known their needs and lived a very simple life which allowed them to give much to God’s work. While pastoring a church there they took a break, when they returned they found that false stories had been circulated about them and the people turned on them. So they felt it best in the will of God to resign. At that very time J. W. Welch wrote to him thanking him for writing articles for the Pentecostal Evangel (the Assemblies of God magazine). At that time Welch was the magazine editor but felt out of place with it. He told Frodsham, “We are praying for God’s man; are you the man?” He invited him to attend the 1916 General Council of the AoG. Here he was immediately elected as General Secretary and appointed as a member of the committee to prepare the Statement of Fundamental Truths. At the same time he was assistant editor of the Evangel. As the missionary treasurer he greatly raised missions giving through his written articles. They met in a church building with wooden benches and sawdust floor. Later this would become a central church where the Word would sound out of. In 1920 he became the editor of the Pentecostal Evangel. He would rise every morning at 4:30am to pray and study the Word before going to his writings. He knew that he could only give out to believers as he received from God. In ’22 a Bible School was started in the basement of the church. In ’26 he compiled his first book on the Pentecostal Revival which is still a classic called With Signs Following. He would eventually write 15 books which would soon be published into Russian, Spanish, Chinese and eventually Indian and other languages. Two other classics he wrote and compiled was Wigglesworth’s testimony called Apostle of Faith and his sermons. Also in ’26 A. W. Ward came as pastor to the local church, and became great friends with Frodsham, who regularly published his sermons in the magazine.

In ’49 he heard of a new and fresh outpouring of the Holy Ghost which initially brought a great unity amongst Pentecostals. [Probably Gordon Lindsay’s Voice of Healing revivals]. From the beginning Frodsham accepted this as a move of God and recognized its similarity to that at the beginning of the century. Over the next years it would sweep the nation. Again the gifts were operating and not just a theological concept amongst Pentecostals. But there was soon opposition from some groups because of extremes. Stanley always stood for testing all things by Scripture and always dealt with what was not so. But he had a real reviving in the midst of this outpouring. Some in the General Council made a strong stand against what they saw as the extremes in this move, and there were undoubtedly extremes and fanatics within it. After much prayer he sadly resigned as editor of the Evangel, then from the council, and finally handed in his ministerial credentials. This cost him his reputation but he kept his conscience intact. It was a very sore time, but he wanted to be free to minister amongst all believers and Pentecostal churches. He left on good terms in a spirit of love with his friends on the council feeling it was too small an issue for him to take such drastic actions; they disagreed with him, but at the same time respected him. His stance was, “Our differences are temporal, our unity is eternal.”

As he moved into a new wide phase of ministry amongst independent Pentecostals, his ministry was totally Christ-centered and he was bold in dealing with error when he came across it. When he came across groups that were ‘way out’ if they did not hearken to the clarity of Scripture, then he departed and avoided them. He gave himself afresh in a new way to the Word of God and prayer. Out of a deep hunger for God he was moved more than ever to give his early mornings and all nights to God in prayer. He said, “We should be on our faces before Him from dawn to dusk, and then long into the night. I’m sure God has much for us who will get desperate and spend much time waiting on Him.” For the next 13 years he travelled constantly with his wife having no permanent home or base. It was a life lived out of a suitcase. So many invitations came that it was hard to follow them all up. In ’64 the Spirit of God started to continually bring solemn prophetic warnings to him of coming delusion and error that would come to the churches (one such prophesy that was given to Frodsham is recorded under Warning on this site; for audio click here). He warned of a spirit of deception coming to those who did not hold fast to the Truth of the Bible and walk in holiness and righteousness. He could see afar off what was going to come in amongst Pentecostals and Charismatics. Looking back over forty years it is easy to see that he was truly hearing and warning from God. One fellow labourer and friend noted his characteristics, “His gentleness, his forgiving spirit to all who offended him, his abounding and unfailing generosity, the precious gift of prophecy, and his indomitable faith.” In ’69 in the middle of the night he finished his pilgrimage and so God’s Penman went to be with his Lord. On the grave marker was engraved an open book with AMEN HALLELUJAH GLORY on it. The last letter written to his only daughter finished with these apt lines, “Make much of the Word of God, make much of the Blood, and make much of the shortness of time.”

Because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of My mouth! –Jesus, Revelation 3:16

Listen to the Holy Spirit in your heart! (1 John 2:27). And judge for yourselves the things I am going to say (1 Cor. 14:29). Blow the trumpet in Zion and sound the alarm! (Joel 2:1). Many churches have pastors, but the Lord has not sent them. They have sent themselves! (Jeremiah 23:21). You will know them by their fruits (Matt. 7:16). They are false prophets in deed; and also in word (in sermons). How can you tell if a pastor is preaching a sermon under a false prophetic spirit? Let me tell you that reading or quoting from the Bible is not sufficient grounds to render a pastor a true prophet of the Word–he needs to be eaten up with the Spirit of the Word, which is holiness and righteousness. Lend me your eyes for a moment as I lay down some rules for judging or highlighting aspects, or should I say, manifestations of a false prophetic spirit in a sermon that you may harmlessly and even casually allow in a Sunday morning church service. Beware! For the craftiness of Satan is always so cunning, subtle, and deceptive. 2 Corinthians 11:13-15: “Such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.”

1. No Fear of Hell. False prophet sermons never have a sense of the fear of Hell; there is no dread of the Judge; no vision of the flames of eternal damnation. If anything, there might be a very rare reference to “the fear of the Lord” as a reverence, awe, and respect for God. But never what Jesus said: “I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into Hell. Yes, I tell you, fear Him” (Luke 12:5). That is Jesus’ definition of the fear of God!

2. Humanistic, Self-Help Psychology. False prophet sermons often take on the character of a self-help book from the supermarket. They may very well use Biblical buzzwords, and even name a few sins, and say the word “repentance,” but they will not belabor those words for long; or go into great length on the nature of virtues and vices. They preach like guidance counselors, like Bible-toting pulpit psychologists, who can give you some pointers on how to live an emotionally healthy life in a crazy, busy world bent on pursuing economic success. Colossians 2:8: “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.”

3. Lightheartedness and Joking. In a false prophet sermon, because there is no fear of Hell, even in the backdrop; there is no weightiness, no gravity, no truly serious spirit of reverence in the sermon. The pastor succumbs to the role of a church comedian; it comes to be expected of him. After all, “a merry heart does good, like medicine” (Proverbs 17:22). He is a fool; and can’t be taken seriously when he handles the Word of God. Sometimes joking is good; as when you are mocking sin, as Elijah mocked Baal (1 Kings 18:27)–but that’s all the Bible seems to allow for in the context of preaching.

4. Brief References to Very Carnal Movies. False prophet sermons will occasionally have brief references to extremely carnal movies, which are usually used to make some lame illustration for a point the pastor is trying to make in his sermon. But “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matthew 12:34); and these false prophets reveal the carnality of their hearts, when, although their illustrations might be clean, the movie that they reference is the most diabolic, fleshy, rotten trash of Hell. A quick look on the imdb.com Parents Guide will show that the movie probably has 25 cuss words and sexually immoral scenes or references. Colossians 3:8: “You must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth.” “Oh, its not a sin if I watch someone else cussing in a movie; its just to make the story more realistic; its not like I’m repeating what is being said.” Oh, aren’t you? In your mind? Do you think Jesus doesn’t judge the thoughts and intents of your heart, pastor? (Hebrews 4:12). Jesus said, “Anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Most of these extremely carnal movies, pastor, are enabling you to commit spiritual adultery with women in the comfort of your family room. Then you go and preach your false prophet sermons on Sunday morning; bad job! Jeremiah 23:11, 14: “‘Both prophet and priest are profane; Yes, in My house I have found their wickedness,’ says the Lord…Also I have seen a horrible thing in the prophets of Jerusalem: they commit adultery and walk in lies; they also strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns back from his wickedness. All of them are like Sodom to Me, and her inhabitants like Gomorrah.”

5. Dry, Historical Background of the Bible. False prophet sermons are often peppered with historical background knowledge of the Bible. Roman and Jewish context, Josephus, and blah, blah, blah. To show off to others that they know more about the Bible than the common man does. This is the modern version of the Catholic priest’s Latin mass. There is nothing spiritually profitable about this; barely ever is there anything moral taken from this historical Bible background information. Its just factual; almost like filler material for the sermon, because they have no meaty spiritual things to say. You can also hear a dry, bored, tone of voice, as they tell you about these historical facts. Imagine Ben Stein’s “Clear Eyes” commercials. “Wowww.” 1 Corinthians 8:1: “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.” Better to be wise in righteousness, and wise in love, than to be simply knowledgeable about historical facts.

6. Idolatry of Being a “Church Leader.” A true prophet is eternity-conscious in basically all of his ministry activities. But a false prophet in his sermons will occasionally reveal how earthly-minded he really is when he speaks about being a “church leader” or a “leader” when he speaks of “leaders” and “leadership.” All of these un-Biblical phrases cropped up in ministry books around the 1970s; and started to become part of the vocabulary of pastoral ministry ever since the “church growth” movement gained headway. In the old KJV, the word “leader” is usually referring to king David or some other political leader; only once is Moses, the prophet-governor, called a leader–and that’s in the apocrypha (2 Esdras 1:13). Yet, you will find the word “leader” all over the modern Bible versions. The lines of distinction between a pastor and a business manager or supervisor are often blurred; their attributes are often shared; and their similarities highlighted and capitalized on. Its a spirit of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. Its all over The Maxwell Leadership Bible; might as well say, “Leader” means “Controller of Others.” Its no wonder why such pastors take on a business savvy spirit, because “their god is their belly” (Philippians 3:19); far from feeling shame by preaching on tithing, they openly flaunt Malachi 3 and its Old Testament tithing law. They would do well to live up to the requirements of 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus; and put down their business leadership pastor books–at least for a moment. But they won’t, because they are too distracted by the praises of men (and women) in their churches. “Their course of life is evil, and their might is not right” (Jeremiah 23:10). Far be it from them to issue scathing rebukes for sin to save their souls from Hell! ITS ALL VANITY!

7. No Moral Energy. False prophet sermons have no moral backbone; there is no unction, no thrust, no power. They never pound the pulpit while making a strong moral point. If they do ever pound the pulpit, its because of hype and stupid, non-moral false emotion: what we call “false fire.” Take, for example, the false prophet Hananiah. He prophesied false words about king Nebuchadnezzar’s power being broken and the Jews coming back to their land in 2 years–thus weakening the sense of divine punishment on the Jews for their impenitence and rebellion. And he apparently did this with quite a show of emotion and hype, because he went so far as to break the yoke that Jeremiah was wearing on his neck (Jer. 28:1-4, 10-11):–but Jeremiah said to him, “Listen, Hananiah! The Lord has not sent you, yet you have persuaded this nation to trust in lies” (v. 15).

8. Boring, Lukewarm Spirit. God intends preaching to be that of preaching righteousness, as with Noah and John the Baptist (2 Peter 2:5; Luke 3:1-20). But when Biblical righteousness is not preached in the pulpit by a fervent God-indwelt saint, then the sermon will be preached by a limp false prophet in a boring, lukewarm, pathetic tone; an insipid, dry, calm spirit–a ‘when will this boring sermon ever end’–kind of spirit. Often sappy, Hallmark card type of metaphors, family-friendly, dads and kids illustrations, stuff that makes you want to gag, because it is so sappy and so syrupy; and not Biblical holiness. Why do people choose to endure this instead of sound doctrine? You got me. Oh, I know–they love their sins and don’t want to give them up, so they are willing to have a pastor who will scratch their itching ears and not preach against their sins (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

9. Rambling Thoughts; Not Focused on the Biblical Text. False prophet sermons have to have some Bible in them, otherwise, people would catch on. People still have enough respect for the Bible to require that it be used in sermons. Thank God for that! But when a false prophet handles the Bible, he does so deceitfully (2 Corinthians 4:2), so as to lessen the impact of moral responsibility; and allow his thoughts to ramble this way and that. Even if he does say something moral, it is so brief, and so incomplete a thought, that there is no way to drive home the point; no way for the church member to draw a conclusion and make a personal application, because there is just so much rambling. False prophets also do not focus for very long on Biblical passages, because if they did, then they would be confronted by the Scripture, and its ethical requirements.

10. Allowance of Sexually Immoral Images. False prophet sermons, as I said before, in an indirect way (or even a direct way) will make casual references to activities in which there are sexually immoral images of young women. Carnal movies, trips to the beach or pool (bikinis, etc), romantic, sexually intimate illustrations, etc. All of this is okay? These things should just not be in a sermon–much less normal Christian conversation. It encourages sexually immoral thoughts (fornication; adultery); which again, brings us to the words of Christ, “Anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28).

—–

Jesus said, “¹⁵Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. ¹⁶You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? ¹⁷Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. ¹⁸A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. ¹⁹Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ²⁰Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven. ²²Many will say to Me in that day, “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ ²³And then I will declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness! (antinomianism).’”–Matthew 7:15-23

“Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. Because lawlessness (antinomianism) is increased, most people’s love will grow cold.”–Matthew 24:11-12

“Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.”–Luke 6:26

In the Bible, false prophets are known for their…

1. Speaking in the name of another god, the occult, or the New Age (Jer. 23:13).

2. Speaking from their own hearts (Jer. 23:16); motivated by selfish ambition.

3. Prophesying for money only, like Balaam (2 Peter 2:15).

4. Watered-down, weakened, or non-existent Bible teaching (Isa. 8:19-20).

5. Rejection of lordship salvation through Jesus (Gal. 1:8).

6. Encouraging sexual immorality–either obviously or indirectly (Jer. 23:14).

7. Bribing people to apostatize from lordship salvation (Deut. 13:5).

8. Downplaying moral responsibility before God (antinomianism) (Matt. 24:11-12).

9. Humanizing Jesus–rejecting His divine nature (1 John 4:1-3).

—–

Price, Paula. The Prophet’s Dictionary, “False Prophets.” – Jeremiah 23; 28; Micah 3:6; Ezekiel 13; Deuteronomy 13:1, 5; 18:20-22; 1 Kings 13; 1 John 4.

—–

Antinomianism is at the root of all false prophet sermons. Here are some godly polemics against this false prophet heresy. I think a lot of the New Calvinists are antinomians; and that would render part of it a false reformation and false revival.

Baxter, Richard. The Scripture Gospel Defended…In Two Books…The Second Upon the Sudden Reviving of Antinomianism. London, 1690.

De Fleury, Maria. Antinomianism Unmasked and Refuted; and the Moral Law Proved from the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, to Be Still in Full Force as the Rule of the Christian’s Conduct. 1791.

Fletcher, John. Checks to Antinomianism. Edited by Peter Wiseman. Abridged Edition. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press, 1953.

Jones, Mark. Antinomianism: Reformed Theology’s Unwelcome Guest? Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013.

Luther, Martin. “Against the Antinomians, 1539.” Edited by Franklin Sherman. Luther’s Works: The Christian in Society IV. Vol. 47. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1971.

Rutherford, Samuel. A Survey of the Spirituall Antichrist. London, 1647.

Wesley, John. A Blow at the Root.
—–. “A Dialogue Between an Antinomian and His Friend.”

The Holiness Movement among American Methodists in the 1830s-1880s was part of the Third Great Awakening. The goal of the Holiness Movement was to move beyond the one-time conversion experience that the revivals produced, and reach entire sanctification. A related movement, Pentecostalism went one step further, seeking what they called a “baptism in the Spirit” or “baptism of the Holy Ghost” that enabled those with this special gift to heal the sick, perform miracles, prophesy, and speak in tongues.^[1]

By the 1880s tensions between the Holiness advocates and more traditional Methodist bishops led to seceding groups forming new Holiness denominations, especially the Church of the Nazarene (1908) and the Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) (1881).

Phoebe Palmer

The chief Holiness leader was Phoebe Palmer (1807-1874), a Methodist lay leader and the most influential Methodist woman of her generation. In 1840, during a period of spiritual struggle and doubt, Palmer discovered through reading the Bible the calling to spread the doctrine of holiness. This discovery led her to leave the traditional woman’s sphere and become a pivotal leader in the Holiness Movement. Palmer led revivals in the United States, Canada, and Britain, wrote extensively, and became editor of the Guide to Holiness. She helped found the Hedding Church and established the Five Points Mission in New York City, which housed and educated needy families. After her death her followers broke away from the Methodists and set up their own Holiness and Pentecostal churches. Palmer’s theology produced a laicized ministry and offered both parents and children of the second and third generations of believers a formula to gain assurance of total sanctification as a gift from God. Her “Altar Covenant” linked Scripture, sacred song, and physical setting to form the way to full redemption. The altar in Holiness became the focal point of worship, in accordance with Palmer’s beliefs.^[2]

The Holiness Movement rejected the Middle Class formalities of the mainline Methodists and sought an authentic religious experience.

Late 19th Century

The movement reached a wide audience through Holiness Camp Meetings, beginning in 1867 at Vineland, New Jersey. The Holiness Movement influenced the transformation of the Methodist camp meeting in the latter 19th century. The frontier camp meeting that had focused on the conversion experience during the first part of the century ultimately evolved into a system of summer camps and conferences. Holiness camps were established on permanent campgrounds in natural surroundings. Here families could escape the evils of urban life and renew spiritual values. The focus was on nurturing the faith of those already converted. The camps also emphasized religious education.^[3]

Though still mainly Methodist, it spread to other Protestant denominations, while meeting stiff resistance from the established leaders of the Methodist Episcopal Church. The hostility between such people as Hiram Mattison (representing the traditionalists in the Methodist Episcopal Church) and George Woodruff (representing the upstart Holiness Movement within that church), during 1867-87 may be attributed to their differing approach to worship. The issues at stake were the definition of holiness and what it means to be holy. For Holiness advocates, especially those of the ‘National Camp-Meeting Association for the Promotion of Holiness,’ the pattern of their gatherings was testimony, shared feeling, and spontaneous or Spirit-guided evangelism. The mainstream members of the church, however, preferred the pattern of joint specialized, rationally deliberated, and centrally coordinated benevolent activity. The ‘National Camp-Meeting Association’ sought to provide a firm ground for the empowerment of people who would go forth to conquer the world for Christ. The mainstream church sought the same goal but operated on bureaucratic and organizational principles alien to Holiness advocates.^[4]

The Holiness Movement transformed Wesleyan teaching by emphasizing revivalist techniques of invitation, decision, and testimony, and by insistence on visible evidence. By the 1890s physical healing was commonly expected, and the experience of sanctification was called “baptism with the Holy Spirit.” Divided by the rise of Pentecostalism after 1900, the surviving Holiness groups became less exuberant.

On the surface, speaking in tongues was the critical factor separating Pentecostals from adherents of the Holiness movement, but the underlying difference between the two was the manner in which the movements interpreted Scripture. Holiness people used metaphor to make Biblical events synonymous with personal experience. For them, the Exodus symbolized the progression of the soul to the life of holiness. Pentecostals sought to reenact elements of the Biblical text literally, and believed they participated in the fulfillment of Scripture.^[5]

Church of God (Anderson Indiana)

Holiness leader Daniel S. Warner was resolutely anti-sect and critical of all denominations; his followers coalesced in the 1880s around his publication, The Gospel Trumpet. It became known as the Church of God (Anderson Indiana), and in 2004 reported 252,000 full members in the U.S. in 2240 churches. It retains a focus on sanctification, remained Holiness, and was highly critical of those who came to believe that speaking in tongues was the defining gift of the Holy Spirit.

Healing

Baer (2001) explores the significance of ideas of divine healing to the emergence of Pentecostalism from the radical Holiness Movement in the late 19th century. The careers and ministries of Maria Woodworth-Etter, John Alexander Dowie, and Charles Parham all demonstrate a commitment to notions of divine healing, where faith and belief in Christ and His atoning sacrifice on the cross could bring about a complete healing of the body and the soul. Pentecostals participated in a broader evangelical culture in which divine healing was a key element in a program that could include ecstatic religiosity and a belief in Christ’s imminent return. Newspapers reported the purported.^[6]

Darwinism

Holiness church members opposed Darwin’s theories of organic evolution and natural selection, because they viewed the theories as challenging the Biblical narrative and detracting from the idea of human perfection. Wesleyans among them placed experience over exegesis and did not assign as high a priority to fighting Darwinism as other conservative Protestants. They tended to adhere to the gap or ruin-and-restoration theory, which placed geologic ages between the beginning of creation and the Edenic restoration, or they backed the interpretation that Biblical “days” spanned great geologic ages. During the fierce debates of the 1920s, typified by the Scopes Trial, the most important Holiness spokesman was Henry Clay Morrison, a Southern Methodist who played a major role in fighting for creationism. There have been relatively few creationists in the science departments of Holiness colleges, however. Some Holiness church members support theistic evolution, but they have been virtually silent.^[7]

Canada

Mussio (1996) traces the development of Holiness-inspired dissent in Canada by focusing on the Holiness Movement Church, a sect led by Methodist evangelist R. C. Horner and created in opposition to official Methodism in 1895. The Hornerite schism served to discredit the doctrine in the eyes of Methodist leaders. The Holiness crisis sheds light on the broad cultural support for the experience, and demonstrates that the pressures placed on Methodism by dissent were integral to its transformation. The schism reinforced the Holiness Movement’s critique of professional elites and the Middle Class. As such, Hornerism and late 19th-century Christian perfectionism, can be viewed as part of a broad populist movement, intent on defending traditional social values against the forces of modernization.^[8]

Missions

Holiness thought shaped the ‘Woman’s Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church’ during 1869-94. The decentralized organization of the society allowed Holiness piety to flourish even as the official church position came to discourage holiness. Many of the missionaries linked their decision to become missionaries to their second conversion, or sanctification, and society members were recruited at camp meetings where Holiness sentiments were prevalent.^[9]

Japan

Bays (1997) places the development of the Oriental Missionary Society (OMS) and its missionary work in Japan in the context of a convergence during the 1890s of three forces: the dynamic growth of the Holiness Movement in the United States, the beginnings of the Faith Mission Movement, and the institutionalization of the Holiness Movement. The origins of OMS are rooted in the work of Japanese religious leaders Juji Nakada and Tetsusaburo Sasao, whose desire to develop a Holiness Movement in Japan converged with the missionary interests of Americans Charles Cowman and E. A. Kilbourne. The Bible school and evangelistic network developed under Japanese leadership in 1901 soon became a Japanese-foreign joint venture. By 1917 the trend toward internationalization and institutionalization had placed the missionary endeavor under foreign control. The attempt to maintain foreign control also delayed the creation of the independent Japan Holiness Church until 1917.^[10]

See Also:

• Church of the Nazarene
• Pentecostalism
• Methodism

Further Reading

• Brasher, J. Lawrence. The Sanctified South: John Lakin Brasher and the Holiness Movement. (1994). 260 pp.
• DuPree, Sherry Sherrod. African-American Holiness Pentecostal Movements: An Annotated Bibliography. (1996). 650 pp.
• Harrell, David Edwin. All Things Are Possible: The Healing and Charismatic Revivals in Modern America (1975), a major scholarly history excerpt and text search
• Jones, Charles Edwin. Perfectionist Persuasion: The Holiness Movement and American Methodism, 1867-1936 (1974)
• Kimbrough, David L. Park Saylor and the Eastern Kentucky Snake-Handlers: A Religious History. (1992). 346 pp.
• Kostlevy, William C. Historical Dictionary of the Holiness Movement (2001)
• Mills, Gene. Faith Cure: Divine Healing in the Holiness and Pentecostal Movements (2003).
• Opp, James. The Lord for the Body: Religion, Medicine, and Protestant Faith Healing in Canada, 1880-1930 (2007)
• Sanders, Cheryl J. Saints in Exile: The Holiness-Pentecostal Experience in African American Religion and Culture. (1996). 177 pp.
• Smith, Timothy Lawrence and W. T. Purkiser. Called Unto Holiness: The Story of the Nazarenes‎ (2 vol. 1962), standard scholarly history.
• Stanley, Susie C. Holy Boldness: Women Preachers’ Autobiographies and the Sanctified Self. (2002). 336 pp.
• Stephens, Randall J. “The Convergence of Populism, Religion, and the Holiness-Pentecostal Movements: A Review of the Historical Literature.” Fides Et Historia 2000 32(1): 51-64.
• Stephens, Michael S. Who Healeth All Thy Diseases: Health, Healing, and Holiness in the Church of God Reformation Movement. (2008) online review
• Synan, Vinson. The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition: Charismatic Movements in the Twentieth Century. (1997). 340 pp.
• Thornton Jr., Wallace. The Conservative Holiness Movement: A Historical Appraisal.
  
• Thornton Jr., Wallace. From Glory to Glory: A Brief Summary of Holiness Beliefs and Practice.
• Thornton Jr., Wallace. Radical Righteousness: Personal Ethics and the Development of the Holiness Movement.
• Thornton Jr., Wallace. “Thornton, Wallace, Jr. (2014). When the Fire Fell: Martin Wells Knapp’s Vision of Pentecost and the Beginnings of God’s Bible School.” Asbury Theological Seminary Series in Pietist/Wesleyan Studies. Lexington, Kentucky: Emeth Press, 2014.
• Thornton Jr., Wallace. “The Revivalist Movement and the Development of a Holiness/Pentecostal Philosophy of Missions.” Wesleyan Theological Journal 38, no. 1, 160-186.” [2], 2003

Notes

1. ↑ Harrell (1975)
2. ↑ Charles Edwin Jones, “The Posthumous Pilgrimage of Phoebe Palmer,” Methodist History 1997 35(4): 203-213; Charles Edward White, The Beauty of Holiness: Phoebe Palmer as Theologian, Revivalist, Feminist, and Humanitarian (1986); Kendra Weddle Irons, Phoebe Palmer: Chosen, Tried, Triumphant: An Examination of her Calling in Light of Current Research. Methodist History 1998 37(1): 28-36. 0026-1238
3. ↑ Charles H. Lippy, “The Camp Meeting in Transition: The Character and Legacy of the Late Nineteenth Century.” Methodist History 1995 34(1): 3-17. 0026-1238
4. ↑ A. Gregory Schneider, “A Conflict of Associations: The National Camp-Meeting Association for the Promotion of Holiness Versus the Methodist Episcopal Church.” Church History 1997 66(2): 268-283. in JSTOR
5. ↑ Charles Edwin Jones, “Beulah Land and the Upper Room: Reclaiming the Text in Turn-of-the-century Holiness and Pentecostal Spirituality.” Methodist History 1994 32(4): 250-259
6. ↑ Jonathan R. Baer, “Redeemed Bodies: The Functions of Divine Healing in Incipient Pentecostalism.” Church History 2001 70(4): 735-771. in JSTOR
7. ↑ Ronald L. Numbers, “Creation, Evolution, and Holy Ghost Religion: Holiness and Pentecostal Responses to Darwinism.” Religion And American Culture 1992 2(2): 127-158. 1052-1151
8. ↑ Louise A. Mussio, “The Origins and Nature of the Holiness Movement Church: A Study in Religious Populism.” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 1996 7: 81-104. 0847-4478
9. ↑ Dana L. Robert, “Holiness And The Missionary Vision of the Woman’s Foreign Missionary Society of The Methodist Episcopal Church, 1869-1894.” Methodist History 2000 39(1): 15-27. 0026-1238
10. ↑ Daniel H. Bays, “The Early Years Of The Oriental Missionary Society: Foreign Missionaries and Native Evangelists in Japan, 1901-1917.” Fides Et Historia 1997 29(1): 15-27. 0884-5379
    

In Romans 3, and especially 4, Paul spoke of faith in the cross bringing about forgiveness of sins, and imputed (credited) righteousness received freely as a gift from Christ–which legally sets sinners into a right standing with God, and dismisses them from being eternally punished in Hell. In Romans 5, however, Paul is speaking of the fruits of the Holy Spirit, or the moral effects and results that faith in the cross brings into the Christian life. Rather than speaking of righteousness in terms of credit or imputation (as in ch. 4), here in ch. 5 he speaks of righteousness as a gift of the Holy Spirit (imparted righteousness): “God has poured out His love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom He was given us” (v. 5); and “how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life” (v. 17).

Correction

13:54 – I say, “Romans 6:4-6 comes to mind;” but meant to say, “Hebrews 6:4-6.”

This chapter teaches that God imputes or credits righteousness to Christians when they repentantly believe in the atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ. Far from teaching any antinomian doctrine of imputed righteousness, Paul only shows that in the case of Abraham as a precedent, God has and still does deal with sinners in this way, when He initially calls them by faith.

This is an old Church of England chant on Psalm 130:1-7, which was modified over time, but was originally inspired by Henry Purcell’s “Out of the Deep Have I Called Unto Thee, O Lord” in De Profundis (1680). Buy this and many other recorded psalms here; perfect for prayer and contemplation.

1. Out of the deep have I called unto thee, O Lord:
Lord, hear my voice.

2. O let Thine ears consider well:
the voice of my complaint.

3. If thou, Lord, wilt be extreme to mark what is done amiss:
O Lord, who may abide it?

4. For there is mercy with Thee:
therefore shalt Thou be feared.

5. I look for the Lord; my soul doth wait for Him:
in His Word is my trust.

6. My soul fleeth unto the Lord before the morning watch:
I say, before the morning watch.

7. O Israel, trust in the Lord; for with the Lord there is mercy:
and with Him is plenteous redemption.

8. And He shall redeem Israel:
from all his sins.

9. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son:
And to the Holy Ghost.

10. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be:
World without end. Amen.

Apology of the Augsburg Confession (by Philipp Melanchton), Luther’s friend:

Of the Ministry – Article V.

1] That we may obtain this faith, the Ministry of Teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, 2] the Holy Ghost is given, who works faith; where and when it pleases God, in them that hear 3] the Gospel, to wit, that God, not for our own merits, but for Christ’s sake, justifies those who believe that they are received into grace for Christ’s sake.

[4] They condemn the Anabaptists and others who think that the Holy Ghost comes to men without the external Word, through their own preparations and works.

In the fifth article the statement that the Holy Ghost is given by the Word and sacraments, as by instruments, is approved. For thus it is written, Acts 10:44: “While Peter yet spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.” And John 1:33: “The same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.” The mention, however, that they here make of faith is approved so far as not Faith alone, which some incorrectly teach, but faith which worketh by love, is understood, as the apostle teaches aright in Gal 5:3. For in baptism there is an infusion, not of faith alone, but also, at the same time, of hope and love, as Pope Alexander declares in the canon Majores concerning baptism and its effect; which John the Baptist also taught long before, saying, Luke 3:16: “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.”

Of Ecclesiastical Order – Article XIV.

[Notice how this could easily apply to godly non-denominational pastors, trying to remain faithful to the Gospel, in an age dominated by Seeker-Sensitive pastors…especially the third paragraph.]

Of Ecclesiastical Order they teach that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called.

When, in the fourteenth article, they confess that no one ought to administer in the Church the Word of God and the sacraments unless he be rightly called, it ought to be understood that he is rightly called who is called in accordance with the form of law and the ecclesiastical ordinances and decrees hitherto observed everywhere in the Christian world, and not according to a Jeroboitic (cf. 1 Kings 12:20) call, or a tumult or any other irregular intrusion of the people. Aaron was not thus called. Therefore in this sense the Confession is received; nevertheless, they should be admonished to persevere therein, and to admit in their realms no one either as pastor or as preacher unless he be rightly called.

24] The Fourteenth Article, in which we say that in the Church the administration of the Sacraments and Word ought to be allowed no one unless he be rightly called, they receive, but with the proviso that we employ canonical ordination. Concerning this subject we have frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old church-regulations and the government of bishops], even though they have been made by human authority [provided the bishops allow our doctrine and receive our priests]. For we know that church discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid down in the ancient canons, with a good and useful intention. 25] But the bishops either compel our priests to reject and condemn this kind of doctrine which we have confessed, or, by a new and unheard-of cruelty, they put to death the poor innocent men. These causes hinder our priests from acknowledging such bishops. Thus the cruelty of the bishops is the reason why the canonical government, which we greatly desired to maintain, is in some places dissolved. Let them see to it how they will give an account to God for dispersing 26] the Church. In this matter our consciences are not in danger, because since we know that our Confession is true, godly, and catholic, we ought not to approve the cruelty of those who persecute this doctrine. 27] And we know that the Church is among those who teach the Word of God aright, and administer the Sacraments aright, and not with those who not only by their edicts endeavor to efface God’s Word, but also put to death those who teach what is right and true; 28] towards whom, even though they do something contrary to the canons, yet the very canons are milder. Furthermore, we wish here again to testify that we will gladly maintain ecclesiastical and canonical government, provided the bishops only cease to rage against our Churches. This our desire will clear us both before God and among all nations to all posterity from the imputation against us that the authority of the bishops is being undermined, when men read and hear that, although protesting against the unrighteous cruelty of the bishops, we could not obtain justice.