Restart

Take a Look at This New Blog!

There is a new blog that is recommended by ReStart - the personal blog of William Slider.  It contains stories, photos, and useful information.  Go to WilliamSlider.com and enjoy!

Related articles

All Lives Matter

School Choice Is Liberty's Last Best Hope

Antifederalist Paper #36 - REPRESENTATION AND INTERNAL TAXATION

COVENANT AND SCHISM IN THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: A TIME TO SPLIT?

by Dr. Riley Case of the Confessing Movement

"Covenant and Schism in the UMC: A Time to Split?" is the title of the featured article in the April 16 issue of Christian Century.  Though progressive in perspective, the Christian Century is a highly respected journal not so intimidated by denominational institutionalism as to gloss over serious problems in the church.  The thrust of the article is to the effect that the "divide over homosexuality in the UMC may have grown too wide to bridge." 

Let us be thankful for some forthright reporting.  Someone (besides the evangelicals) is willing to trouble us with uncomfortable truth.  There is no admission of a "divide too wide to bridge" from the Council of Bishops, nor from the general boards and agencies, nor from the annual conferences, nor from the official church media in The United Methodist Church.  The mantra that is repeated ad nauseam from progressive bishops and boards and annual conferences is, that if there are tensions in the church: "let us have conversations, dialogues, holy conferencing, and studies," which, it should be noted, almost never admit to the enormity of the problem of dealing with irreconcilable differences, but instead assume that if we better understood each other we would make some adjustments (as in, change our convictions) and live together in unity.  There seems no recognition that after a while all of the "holy conferencing" tends not to unite the church but to further divide the church.  

Sometimes the response after such talks is:  Can't we just agree to disagree?  That is like counseling an abusive husband and an abused wife to live together in peace without any expectations of changed behavior.  The husband continues to be abusing, the wife abused, but they respect their differences.  This means the wife continues to be abused.  That does not work well in marriage and it does not work well in the church.  

The Century article quotes Jack Jackson, professor of mission at Claremont School of Theology who has stated that it may be time for the church to cut its losses and separate.  "Every four years we have this vitriolic conversation that has only gotten worse and worse...I think we are stuck.  How can we get unstuck?  How long can the church in progressive areas hang on and continue to decline?  Or would it be better to say, we are brothers and sisters in this Methodist movement, but really we can't live together anymore?  Let's bless each other in our different ministries and move on." 

For years evangelicals have been accused of being divisive, disloyal, and wanting to divide the church.  Let this truth now be known:  it is the progressives who are dividing the church.  Evangelicals have supported the doctrine and discipline of the church.  Progressives on the other hand speak of "new truth" and of the churches needing to "progress" beyond the Bible, beyond historic faith, and beyond our United Methodist Discipline.  Curiously, they have used the term "Biblical obedience" to mean to declare the Bible wrong, the tradition of the church wrong, the Discipline of the Church wrong and hateful. 

So the progressive group Love Prevails proclaims it is time to declare the vows of church membership loyalty are null and void.  Progressives should no longer uphold The United Methodist Church with "prayers, presence, gifts, and service" because to support The United Methodist Church with prayers is to be complicit with un-Christian and unconscionable practices (a prayer boycott?).  This is called "divestment."  Evidently some pastors and even bishops have taken  the divestment strategy even further since some pastors and bishops believe they no longer are bound by ordination vows or any clergy covenant understandings.  Since church teaching is "hateful" and "unjust"they answer to a higher authority, which seems to have a lot to do with personal preferences.  Where are the voices who will label this for what it really is: bullying and divisive? 

Along with "divestment" the Love Prevails group vows to practice "disruption."  This was the strategy at the 2012 General Conference at which progressive demonstrators and disrupters were able to shut down the conference for some hours (if time is money the cost was several hundreds of thousands of dollars), kill the voting on further legislation having to do with human sexuality, as well as a lot of other legislation, and kill the Call to Action legislation that promised modest reform in the bureaucracy.  When the vote was announced that Call to Action had failed, Methodist Federation for Social Action (MFSA) supporters cheered and gave each other high fives. 

Not all progressives advocate disruption, but they seem to respond positively to it.  The Connectional Table (CT), the most powerful church agency which exists to coordinate United Methodism's vast maze of bureaucracies, allowed itself to be disrupted and then harangued by Love Prevails in November of 2013, resulting in the promise to re-arrange the agenda to deal with Love Prevails concerns at the CT meeting in April of 2014.  It should be mentioned that the Connectional Table has 68 persons either ex officio, staff, or voting members, only ten of which are pastors serving local churches.  Most of the rest are bishops or professional bureaucrats or members of various ethnic caucuses (not less than 30% of the members of CT are mandated to be from ethnic/racial groups but Africans don't count).  Africa, with nearly 40% of UM members, has 6% of the voting members of CT (49 voting members).  

After presentations at the April CT meeting Bishop Minerva Carcaño of the California-Pacific Conference made a motion for CT to petition the 2016 General Conference to remove all language in the Book of Discipline disapproving of homosexual practice.  Bishop Carcaño, it will be recalled, is the one who remarked after the 2012 General Conference that the Africans need "to grow up" (a remark so prejudiced that if she had been owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, might have gotten her banned from the league).  The motion was later amended but it passed, thus putting the Connectional Table in conflict with the General Conference (to whom it is supposedly accountable). 

How do these actions, and others, relate to the Christian Century article "Covenant and Schism in the UMC: A Time to Split?" Quite directly it would seem.  Every day, it seems, brings developments that seem to belie the claim that United Methodists are a connectional people who are united in a common doctrine and a common moral vision.  How long can the church continue down this path?

[Editors Note:  There are denominations that continue to maintain the Wesleyan heritage, doctrine, and moral vision.  These denominations include the Free Methodist Church and the Weslyan Church.]

Related articles

United Methodist Council of Bishops Request Complaint to Be Filed against a Retired Bishop

New South Conference

"The Covenant God" - William W. Slider

Covenant Renewal

Holiness Teachings: ATTRIBUTES OF HOLINESS—CONTROL OF APPETITES - B.T. Roberts

True holiness has its influence on every part of our nature. It affects for good every member of the body, and every faculty of the mind. It produces symmetry of character.  

Holiness gives to its possessor control over all his bodily appetites. He has appetites. The Saviour, who was holiness itself in bodily form, had them. He was hungry and thirsty. The natural appetites were given us for a good       purpose. They are not in themselves sinful. But they are to be kept within proper bounds. They were not intended to be our masters. They must be regulated and controlled.  They are to be brought into subjection to reason, to conscience and the word of God. No holy person can be under the dominion of appetite. He is delivered from this bondage.  

One who is holy never indulges his appetites in an unlawful manner. He will starve before he will steal.  

“I know,” says the Apostle, “both how to be abased, and I know how to abound, every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry; both to abound and to suffer need.”—Philippians 4:12

The Saviour, when he was hungry after having fasted forty days, would not obtain bread in the manner suggested by the devil. We should follow this example. No matter how strong may be the cravings of appetite, or to what straits we may be reduced, we should remember that there is something more to be considered than simply whether what is presented will assuage hunger, or satisfy thirst. Have I the right to it?  Can I obtain the right on conditions with which I may lawfully comply? Esau did not steal, but he sold his birthright to obtain means to gratify his hunger. Many do the same today. The bodily appetites clamor for indulgence. Satan offers to gratify them on condition of some service rendered to him,—as breaking the Sabbath, catering to the vices of others, preaching the Gospel in such a manner as to throw out of sight the cross and the self-denial. A holy person will suffer the pangs of hunger before he will obtain his bread by any of these methods. If he will not resort to these means to keep from starving, of course he will not for any other purpose.  

True holiness will give one such control over his appetites that he will not indulge them in an inordinate degree. He eats to live, but does not live to eat. His tastes are simple and natural. His wants are easily satisfied.  He who spends large sums of money to gratify his own pampered tastes, while so many are perishing of want, may be orthodox and polite, but he is not holy. No matter though he can afford to be “clothed in purple and fine linen, and fare sumptuously every day,” yet he sees representatives of Christ in the destitute around him, and he denies himself of luxuries that he may minister to their necessities. Church festivals, to raise money, are open to this, among other objections. They educate the people to make self-gratification a stronger motive to action than duty to God, and to our fellow men. They assume that Christians will do more for their stomachs’ sake than they will for conscience’ sake. They take it for granted that they care more for their own sensual enjoyment, than they do for the claims of God, or the sufferings of their fellow men.  

True holiness saves those who enjoy it from all unnatural, depraved appetites which have been formed by a course of sinful indulgence. Such is man’s depravity that he forms appetites at which his physical nature at first revolts. After a time the indulgence of these appetites is attended with momentary enjoyment. Such is the use of opium, tobacco and ardent spirits. No one likes them at first. They frequently make beginners sick. But they stimulate the nervous system, and create an excitement which affords a certain degree of pleasure. When this excitement passes off, it is followed by a corresponding degree of languor and depression.  This soon becomes so insupportable that the stimulant must be had at any cost. An       appetite is formed that the victims will gratify at the expense of every thing which men hold dear. Property, friends, reputation, standing, health, and even life itself are sacrificed to gratify an appetite which brutalizes and enslaves. The only safe course is to avoid the beginning. But for those who sincerely repent of their wickedness in forming and feeding such an appetite, God provides a remedy. The promise,  

“If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness,”—I John 1:9

covers this ground. The appetite for either of the stimulants named, cannot be godly—this no one contends. It cannot be indifferent,—it is of too positive a character. It is an unrighteousness,—both its nature and its effects proclaim this. That it is true of the appetite for opium and the appetite for ardent spirits is generally conceded. No one will maintain that a drunkard is holy.  

“This ye know, that no drunkard shall inherit the kingdom of God.”—I Corinthians 10:6

But an habitual tobacco user is as clearly condemned by the Scriptures, as is the one who habitually uses ardent spirits as a beverage. His habit involves, of necessity, personal filthiness. But we are commanded to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh, and of the Spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of the Lord. We readily admit that the works of holiness may be begun in the heart of a person who uses tobacco. But it cannot go on and this habit continue. One or the other will cease. He will cease to advance in holiness, or he will abandon his unholy habits. No person can perfect holiness without cleansing himself from all filthiness of the flesh, as well as of the Spirit.  

Again, we are commanded to eat and drink to the glory of God (I Corinthians 10:31). We do this when we eat temperately, and such things as do not injure us or others. But it is a fact, as clearly established as any fact can be, that the habitual use of tobacco breaks down the nervous system, and brings on many diseases. No man,. immoderately addicted to the use of tobacco, can retain his mental vigor, and his bodily soundness, as he could without it. No one, seeing a professed Christian smoking or chewing, will think any more highly of the Christian religion on that account. It is an act, to say the least, in which God is not glorified.  

No man has the right to spend the Lord’s money in this way. It is God who gives the power to get wealth. It should be used to advance His cause,—to make men better,—to relieve their wants and instruct them in the way of life. A Christian man cannot spend his money as he wills, but must use it as the Lord wills.  

But there is little use in multiplying words on this subject.  Those who are really in earnest to gain Heaven, and who are willing to meet the       conditions of salvation, cannot fail to see the necessity of denying themselves of the gratification of an appetite formed in sin, the indulgence of which can do no good, but must eventually result in much harm. Those who make religion a mere matter of convenience, or fashion, would not be convinced any way, and it would do no good if they were. It is useless to talk against idols, to men who are joined to their idols. But to those who have formed this appetite, and wish to be delivered from it, we say holiness will do it. Seek earnestly to be delivered from bondage to your animal nature, and you shall be delivered. You will become spiritual by       becoming holy.  

“As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.”—Romans 8:14

But if you are a slave to your appetites, do not profess holiness. If you do, you have no reason to expect that your profession will be received.       Holiness is a radical work. It changes us in our appetites. The things that we once loved we now hate. Old things are passed away and behold all things are become new.  

Give yourself no rest until this thorough work is wrought in you. Seek to have the blood of cleansing applied to every part of your nature.  Look to be sanctified wholly, and believe that  

“Faithful is he that calleth you who also will do it.”—I Thessalonians 5:24

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: ATTRIBUTES OF HOLINESS - UNSELFISHNESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Attainableness of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: How to Attain Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: ATTRIBUTES OF HOLINESS - DELIVERANCE FROM PRIDE - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: PROPERTIES OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: HOLINESS IS NOT UNDERSTOOD - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: NATURE OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: ATTRIBUTES OF HOLINESS—DELIVERANCE FROM PRIDE - B.T. Roberts

The heart is the seat of sin. Actions derive their moral character from the disposition with which they are performed To give a sum of money may be an act of benevolence, or it may be bribery,—it may spring from love to Christ, or from love of the praise of men.  

“For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.”—Mark 7: 21-24

A justified soul does not yield to sin.

“Whosoever is born of God, doth not commit sin.” I John 3:9

A soul sanctified to God wholly does not have sin.

“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.”—I John 1:7

True holiness will save one from sins that are popular, just as readily as from those that are disgraceful. It is the work of the Spirit. With God, the standard of right does not vary. Selfish considerations lead men to tolerate, sometimes one sin, and sometimes another. A few years ago, many of the advocates of holiness had nothing to say against the sin of slave-holding. The Church gained by it in numbers and resources. How, many take no decided stand against pride and worldly conformity.  They have not a word to utter in condemnation of conspiracies of the strong against the weak. But those who really aim at being right with God, turn from every thing       which He has forbidden, even though it is encouraged by the Church.  

Holiness implies deliverance from pride. A holy person cannot feel proud. A holy Church cannot indulge in pride. Pride cannot dwell in a holy soul.  

“Him that hath an high look and a proud heart will not I suffer.”—Psalm 101:5

“Be clothed with humility; for God resisteth the proud and giveth grace to the humble.”—I Peter 5:5

In this particular, the Roman Catholics are a reproof to the Protestants. To all who are loyal to the Church, the Catholics give the largest latitude of word and action—of business and pleasure. To keep within the bonds of decency and morality is all that is required of the ordinary members of her communion.  You will find among them, ladies as gaily dressed as any that the times can furnish.  But they do not profess holiness. Their priests may err in many things, but they do not encourage their people to think that they can become saints, while indulging in pride to the fullest extent that their means will allow. They are taught that if they would become holy, pride must be renounced, and all appearance of pride must be laid aside. But in Protestant churches, you will find persons advocating holiness, whose appearance unmistakably declares that pride reigns within. Their costly apparel, their ornaments of gold, their affected tones, their whole bearing, proclaim that there has been no real renunciation of the vain pomp and glory of the world. This is all wrong, and altogether wrong.  

It may be urged that such a course recommends holiness; that it leads the rich and the refined to embrace it. But this is a mistake. It may lead them to embrace a delusion,—to believe that they are sanctified, when they are not even scripturally awakened. That, which is thus recommended, is not holiness. It may have some of its properties, but the essentials are wanting. To make people believe that they can so put on Christ’s righteousness as to set off their own purple and fine linen to better advantage, is to make them believe a ruinous lie. Contraries cannot dwell together. Pride and humility can not reign at once in the same heart. Then do not deceive, even for so good an object as the promotion of holiness. The Saviour has commanded us to count the cost. Until men can see that holiness is more to be desired than all which they are required to give up, they will never obtain it.  

“But,” many urge, “we should have pride enough to be decent.” There is no pride in Heaven. But there is purity. So we may have inward and outward purity, without pride. Pride is a result of the fall. It had no place in Eden. It should have none in all our hearts. Seek then for that holiness which roots it out entirely.  

You may make a consecration to the Lord ever so full in other respects, but if it does not include the giving up of your pride in all its forms, you will not get an experience which will enable you to do the will of God.  And just in proportion as you give up pride and long for deliverance from it, just in that proportion will God take it from your heart. It is a dangerous foe—give       it no quarter. It is a subtle foe, lying in ambush for your overthrow—give it no place for concealment.  

Holiness implies deliverance from pride, as manifested in the provision which we make for our children. Pride is one of the sad effects of the fall. It will manifest itself in some form or other in our children, until they are brought completely under the influence of divine grace. But parents, who are wholly sanctified to God, will not give it any encouragement. It needs no fostering.  Do what you can to prevent it; from the atmosphere around, it will drink in enough nourishment to grow with alarming rapidity. Cut it back all you may, and with each coming season it will put forth new vigor, and manifest the utmost tenacity of life.  As long as you find in yourself a disposition to encourage display in your children,—to fit them up to shine with worldly splendor, you may rest assured that the work of holiness in yourself is not yet complete. You are not fully delivered from       pride.  

Holiness implies deliverance from denominational pride.  There are many who dress plain, and who furnish their houses plain, who will nevertheless give their thousands towards the construction of a church, when every accommodation could be secured for one-third the amount paid for its construction. Two-thirds of all that is paid for our fine houses of worship, is expended for display, and answers no purpose except to gratify pride. One denomination builds a fine church.  The next one that builds puts forth every possible exertion to surpass it in magnificence.  To raise money, festivals and lotteries are resorted to, and in some cases, downright       dishonesty is practiced. The fine church must be filled with finely dressed people, and so pride and extravagance are encouraged and the poor virtually excluded from the house of worship. If the true Gospel course were taken by all who call themselves by the Christian name,—if the money expended to gratify pride were judiciously employed in spreading the truth as it is in Jesus, the time would soon come when it could be said in all parts of the world,  

“The poor have the Gospel preached to them.”—Matthew 11:5

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: NATURE OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: PROPERTIES OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Attainableness of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: How to Attain Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: HOLINESS IS NOT UNDERSTOOD - B.T. Roberts

John Wesley's Sermon on the Holy Spirit

Holiness Teachings: PROPERTIES OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Gold has the same properties in all countries, by whatever name it may be called. The nature of love and of hatred never changes with the lapse of time. Holiness may present different manifestations in different circumstances, but its qualities are as unchanging as its Author. The views of men may vary, but it never varies. Examine it in detail or view it as a whole, its qualities never change.  

The indistinct notions which many entertain of holiness, are owing to the fact, that they have never seriously considered what it is which constitutes holiness. They are like one who knows nothing of gold but its color, and is therefore ready to call every thing gold which looks like it. He who has any skill in the metals, is not so imposed upon. If he finds one of the required qualities, he searches for another, and not until he finds that a metal possesses all the properties that it should, does he pronounce it gold. So if you have holiness, you have all those moral qualities, which taken together, form that grand total of Christian graces, which the word of God denominates holiness. Let us look at some of these qualities.  

We will first notice some of the things from which holiness implies deliverance. This is the more necessary, because the self-indulgent spirit which wealth and luxury always beget, Jays stress upon a few of the positive properties of holiness; without insisting upon laying aside every thing which is inconsistent with it. But the Bible has quite as much to say about the negative, as about the positive side of holiness. The first commandment reads,  

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”—Exodus 20:3

It was not enough to worship the true God—this, Solomon did, even in his backslidden state; but no false god must be worshipped. Of the ten commandments, nine contain negative provisions. They tell us what we shall not do. Nine prohibitions in the Ten Commandments, and but two positive precepts! From this we might infer that God sees that there is much greater difficulty in keeping us from doing wrong, than there is in leading us, in other respects, to do right. “Herod heard John gladly and did many things,” but he would not put away the woman with whom be was unlawfully living.  

“Cease to do evil; learn to do well” (Isaiah 1:16), is God’s order. To require this, makes trouble. The Romans never scrupled to add another go to their Pantheon. They would readily have admitted Christ to that honor. But       when the uncompromising Apostles demanded that their false gods should first be dethroned, Christ was rejected, and his disciples thrown to the wild beasts and to the flames. It was not the purity. so much as the intolerance of Christianity, that stirred up the fierce opposition which it encountered. The martyrs would have avoided their fate, if in addition to worshipping Christ they would have consented to worship Jupiter and Minerva. But they not only maintained that Christianity was true, but that it was exclusively true. They not only preached that, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;” but that “he that believeth not shall be damned.” They were bold to declare, “Neither is there salvation in any other.” No terrors could induce them to join in the cry, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians,” or swear by the image of Csar. It was this opposition to all that was false, that brought       them into trouble wherever they went.  

In general, then, holiness implies deliverance from sin.  It is the opposite of sin, as light is of darkness.  

The Bible teaches us the possibility of having every wrong propensity of the soul destroyed. We are aware that some passages look, at the first view, as though the continuance of sin in the soul was unavoidable. Let us give the more prominent of these a careful and candid examination. The first to which we call attention is found in I Kings 8:46 —“ If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not.)” In the original Hebrew, the word that is translated “sinneth,” is in the future tense. “This tense,” says Stuart, in his Hebrew Grammar, page 207, designates all those shades of meaning which we express in English by the auxiliaries may, can, must, might, could, should, would,” etc. Thus “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden.”—Genesis 3:2  The term “may eat,” is, in the original, in the future tense. So, also,  

“That they may fear thee.”—I Kings 8:40

The phrase, “may fear,” is in the future tense in the Hebrew. The same is true of the phrase, “may know,” in the forty-third verse, “That all the people of the earth may know thy name.” Hence, a literal translation of the forty-sixth verse would read: “If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that may not sin.)”  This teaches, not that every man does actually and necessarily sin, but that every one is liable to sin. It is possible that he may, but not necessary that he should sin. So, also, the supposition, “if they sin,” implies that they might sin, or they might not. It expresses a contingency that could not exist if sin were unavoidable.  That they might not sin, is clearly implied in the declaration that if they did, God would be angry with them, and deliver them into the hands of their enemies, so that they should be carried into captivity. But as this was not necessary, it follows that it was not necessary that they should sin.  

Most of the above remarks will apply to the passage found in Ecclessiates 7:20—“For there is not a just man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not.” The word, “sinneth,” is, in the original, in the future tense, and should also be rendered, “may sin.” This passage teaches the doctrine that runs all through the Bible, that we are never secure from the danger of falling. In our best estate, when grace has done the most for us, we have great need to “watch that we enter not into temptation,” to “keep our bodies under, and bring them into subjection,” lest we should “become castaways.”  

“Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin.”—Proverbs 20:9

This passage is intended to reprove the boasting of a self-righteous,       conceited Pharisee, who not only claims a goodness he does not possess, but ascribes his fancied purity to himself. If we offer up, in fervent desire, and a faith that will not be denied, the prayer of David: “Create in me a clean heart, O God,” who shall say this prayer will not be answered? God alone is able to unify the soul.  It is only by coming to Him in importunate supplication that we can obey the Apostle’s direction,  

“Cleanse your hands, ye sinners, and purify your hearts, ye double-minded.”—James 4:8

In this way alone can God’s command be met.—

“O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness that thou mayest be saved.”—Jeremiah 4:14

“If I justify myself, my own mouth shall condemn me; if I say I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse.”—Job 9:20

In this chapter Job treats of the majesty and holiness of God. In the 15th verse he says: “Whom though I were righteous, yet would I not answer, but I would make supplication to my Judge.” Before the purity of God he       counted his righteousness as nothing, however he might lift up his head in the presence of his fellow man. Thus, in the verse above, we understand Job to say: “If I justify myself (before God) ; mine own mouth,” in the prayers that I make for the mercy of the Lord, “shall condemn me.” He did justify himself most triumphantly before man, and repelled the accusations which his friends, unable to reconcile his afflictions with the supposition of his innocence, had brought against him. If I say, “I am perfect” in God’s sight, of myself, “it shall also prove me perverse.” His perfect humility, here manifested, justifies the testimony that the Lord, who cannot be       deceived, gives in his favor.  

“Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil.”—Job 1:8 “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.”—Job 14:4

This text refers to the natural depravity that belongs to every one that is born into the world-to what is commonly termed original sin.  It teaches that all are by nature depraved, not that this depravity -cannot be removed by grace.  

The Septuagint—the Greek version of the Old Testament, from which our Saviour and the Apostles generally quoted, thus renders it: “For who is pure from corruption? Not one, although his life upon earth be one day.”  

“Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips.”—Isaiah 6:5

This is true of all while in their natural, unsanctified condition, yet let us read on and we shall see that the SPIRIT OF GOD, represented by “a live coal” “from off the altar” touched his lips, “so that his iniquity was taken away,” and his “sin was purged.”  

“All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.” Isaiah 64:6

The Jews were exceedingly corrupted in the days of Isaiah.  The prophet being humbled and alarmed at the general wickedness of his people, confesses it in the first person, as ministers generally do on such occasions. It is the hypocritical professions of the Jews—a strict observance of the forms and ceremonies of religion while living in sin—that the prophet compares to filthy rags.  

“I am carnal, sold under sin.”—Romans 7: 14

In this connection, the Apostle speaks of his inward experience:        

1. As an unawakened Jew: “I was alive without the law once.”  

2. As a converted sinner: “But when the commandment came” to my       comprehension, “sin revive, and I died;” my hopes perished.  

3. As a believer in Christ:  “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” Now, “being made free from sin,” and become truly the “servant of God,” he had his “fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.”

That the Apostle, in the above passage, refers to himself prior to his conversion, is the opinion of President Edwards, a Congregationalist       divine, who for learning and piety, and philosophical acumen, never had a superior in this country; who says: “The Apostle Paul, speaking of what he was naturally, says, ‘I am carnal, sold under sin.” ’  

“If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” I John 1:8

That this refers to man in his natural condition, is evident. The apostle is speaking about the power of Jesus’ blood that cleanses us from all sin. It is those who, falsely and dangerously trusting to their own morality and       their naturally amiable dispositions, say that they do not need to be “cleansed from sin,” to whom the Apostle applies the above verse. But, being convinced that we are sinners, both by nature and by practice, he assures us that,  

“if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to CLEANSE US FROM ALL UNRIGHTEOUSNESS.”—I John 1:9

These we believe are the strongest passages ever brought forward to prove the necessary continuance of sin. Look at them candidly, and you will be satisfied that we have given their true meaning. Let us ask, beloved reader, are you at the present time saved from sin? You may have been once. That cannot help you now. It only makes your condition still more deplorable, if you are still under the dominion of sin. Seek deliverance at once. Give no quarters. Let every sin die. That is a false holiness which does not deliver from all sin. Salvation from sin can alone secure salvation in Heaven.

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: NATURE OF HOLINESS - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: HOLINESS IS NOT UNDERSTOOD - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: How to Attain Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Attainableness of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Justin Martyr: The First Apology: Chapter XXVI. - Magicians Not Trusted by Christians.

John Wesley's Sermon on the Holy Spirit

Holiness Teachings: How to Attain Holiness - B.T. Roberts

If it is by the power of God that we are sanctified, then why are no t all, and especially all professing Christians, holy? Because they do not meet the conditions.  These are:  

1. Giving one’s self fully to God. All of time, talent, property, reputation influence, yea life itself, must be handed over to God to be His for ever.  

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable  service.”—Romans 12:1

The body includes all. A living sacrifice is a constant, perpetual one.

“For I am the Lord your God; ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy: for I am holy.”—Leviticus 11:44

That is, set yourselves apart for God’s service, and he will make you holy.

“For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall save it.”—Matthew 16:25

2. Confession of all sin actual or inbred.

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”—I John 1:9

If we confess our actual sins he is faithful and just to forgive us. If we confess our inbred sins he is faithful and just to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.  

3. Faith in Christ as our sanctifier.

“God put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”—Acts 15:9 “That they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”—Acts 26:18

But beware that your so-called faith is not presumption. Otherwise you may become a self-conceited Pharisee, instead of a humble, meek, holy follower of Jesus.  

“How can ye believe which receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh from God only.”—John 5:44

In both these passages faith is spoken of as the medium through which sanctification is received.  

Reader, what do you think of these passages of Scripture that we have brought before you? Do they not show you the necessity and the attainability of holiness?  Do you live in this state of grace? If so, thank God, and press forward. If not, make no delay to obtain it. You have too much at stake to live without it a single day. Resolve that you will be holy. Ask God to search you. If, in the light of the Spirit, you see, as is often the case, that you are not justified, have the courage and honesty to confess your condition. If in a backslidden state you seek for holiness, you will, in all probability, take up with something short of reality. 

Be thorough! Confess as fully as the word and the Spirit of God direct. Give yourself up without the least reserve to obey the Lord in everything. Look to Jesus as your present Saviour from all sin. Plead His promises. Rely upon His grace to save you to the uttermost. Thus you shall soon feel the sanctifying power the Spirit of God all through soul and body. You will then, in your daily life, have your fruit unto holiness; and the witness of the Spirit will be given, to assure you of your present gracious state, and to give you a pledge of untold glories to be enjoyed in the world to come.  

“Now we have received, not the Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.”—I Corinthians 2:12

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: The Attainableness of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

John Wesley's Sermon on the Holy Spirit

John Wesley's Sermon on Grieving the Holy Spirit

Holiness Teachings: The Attainableness of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

1. God commands it.

“Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the Lord your God.”—Leviticus 20:7

“But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation.”—I Peter 1:15

God never commands that which is impossible. To affirm that he does is blasphemous.  It would make him out a tyrant.  

2. To sanctify the soul or make it holy, is God’s work. If this can be proved, then it follows that holiness is possible. With Him things are easy that are impossible for men.  

“Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh. And I will give you a heart of flesh, and I will put my Spirit within you, an cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments and do them.” Ezekiel 36:25-27

Here God says He will do the work, and do it thoroughly.

1. He will cleanse—not from some,—but from ALL idols, and from ALL filthiness.

2. He will give a new heart and a new spirit.

3. He will cause us to walk in His statutes and judgments. He will impart the spirit of obedience, and with it the power to obey.  

“Sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth.”—John 17:17

“And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly.”—I Thessalonnians 5:23

These passages plainly imply that it is God’s work to make believers holy.

3. Some have attained to holiness.

“Enoch walked with God three hundred and sixty-five years.”—Genesis 5:21, 22 “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.”—Genesis 6:9 “Job was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.”—Job 1:1

In the New Testament, the disciples of Jesus are called Christians but three times, never Methodists, Baptists, or Presbyterians. Over sixty times they are called Saints, or the holy ones.

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

John Wesley's Sermon on Grieving the Holy Spirit

Icon Collection #13

Holiness Teachings: The Necessity of Holiness - B.T. Roberts

1. [Holiness] is indispensably necessary to qualify us for heaven.  We cannot get there without it. None ever did, and none ever will.  

“Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.”—Hebrews 12:14.

“To see God,” is to be in His presence, to enjoy the bliss He alone can impart.  So that, unless he “Follows peace with all men and holiness,” no one, no matter what his church or his creed, can stand before the throne of God.  

“These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”—Revelation 7:14.

But “white robes” are the emblem of purity (Revelation 19:8).  

“Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.”—Psalm 24:3-4.

God’s holy place is heaven. But only those who are pure in heart, and clean in life shall dwell there.  

2. Holiness is indispensable to present happiness. The unholy person cannot be happy. He may enjoy pleasure; but pleasure is not happiness. People seek after pleasure because the are unhappy. The pleasures of the world are short-lived and unsatisfactory.  But he who is holy has a never-failing spring of enjoyment within.  

“In whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable, and full of glory.”—I Peter 1:8.

“The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous.”—Psalm 118:15.

3. Holiness is essential to usefulness. Unholy men may spread Christianity, but they pervert it as they spread. it. Their “riches are corrupted,” and they corrupt Christianity when employed for its support. Perhaps no man ever devoted so much wealth for the spread of the Gospel as Constantine; and no one ever did so much to corrupt it. An impure channel will foul the purest water. Colored glass imparts its own hue to the light that passes through it. A holy soul alone is qualified to lead others into holiness.  

“Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence and take not thy holy spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free Spirit. Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee.”—Psalm 51:10-13.

One may, without a clean heart, or the joy of salvation, convert people to the church, but it is to be feared that few of them will be found to be converted to the Lord.  

“And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”—Acts 2:4,41.

Holiness is power. He that possesses it can do good.

“For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.”—I Corinthians 4:20.

Related articles

Holiness Teachings: A Summary - B.T. Roberts

John Wesley's Sermon on Grieving the Holy Spirit

The Epistle of Barnabas: Chapter XIV. - The Lord Hath Given Us the Testament That Moses Received.

John Wesley's Sermon on the Holy Spirit

John Wesley's Sermon on the Resurrection of the Dead

Benjamin Titus Roberts

Benjamin Titus Roberts (1823–1893) first trained as an attorney, then entered the ministry in the Genesee Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church of New York State. His ministerial studies were done at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. He married Ellen Lois Stowe, had seven children, and pastored several churches in New York state.

During his tenure at Wesleyan University, B. T. Roberts excelled, achieving university honors. While there, he met Daniel Steele, later to become president of Syracuse University, and William C. Kendall, soon to become Roberts' comrade for reform in the Genesee Conference. Upon graduation, Roberts was offered the presidency of Wyoming Seminary of Kingston, Pennsylvania, a secondary institution of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Roberts declined the position, electing instead to enter the pastorate, seeking Elders orders in Genesee Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church. He was admitted to the Conference in 1848 on trial.

Roberts' first pastoral appointment was Caryville, New York, followed by Pike, New York. Roberts was married during his first charge. At the 1850 annual conference, Roberts was admitted to full membership and ordained a Deacon. In 1851, he was sent to the Rushford, New York charge. During these early charges, Roberts demonstrated a concern not only for the abolition of slavery, but also for the destructive effects of wealth upon Methodist livelihood. To Roberts, many of the Methodists in his Genesee Conference, especially those in Conference administration (bishops and other clergy), were overly concerned with social prestige than with old-time Methodist standards that aim for "growth in holiness," as John Wesley himself said it. Roberts also encountered leaders of what has come to be called the Holiness Movement, individuals like Phoebe Palmer. Roberts was also influenced by Methodist evangelist John Wesley Redfield.

In 1852, Roberts was ordained elder and sent to Niagara Street Church, a central church of the district and oldest church in Buffalo, New York. Roberts' conflict with the conference began in earnest at the Niagara Street appointment for he sought to make the church a "free" church by eliminating the the pew system. Roberts here observed the potential problems of the "pew system" in which wealthy families could purchase and/or rent pews for congregational worship. Roberts, along with a number of other would-be reformers, could essentially identify three problems with the pew system: 1) it ended the segregation of the worshiping congregation into male and female (which John Wesley himself approved of), 2) it commercialized the church, and 3) it discriminated against the poor.

In 1853, Roberts was sent to Brockport, New York. By 1854, it was clear that a major, conference-wide conflict was brewing. On the one side were those conservatives who favored traditional Methodist teaching on matters of social and personal ethics, and who favored the traditional Methodist emphasis on entire sanctification. On the other side were those progressives who favored an assimilation of Methodism to prevailing American sensitivities and mores, including a de-emphasis on entire sanctification in favor of more "realistic" ethical expectations. These conflicting undercurrents bubbled to the surface in 1855. Leslie Ray Marston, former bishop in the Free Methodist Church of North America, best described the situation:

In July 1855 the Buffalo Advocate accused the minority group of organizing a secret society called the "Nazarite Union," basing the charge on a document that had come into the hands of Editor Robie, and which had been prepared by the unpredictable Joseph McCreery, Jr. It is true that McCreery did design an organization to combat the "Buffalo Regency," as the controlling faction came to be called. But McCreery emphatically declared that the so-called "Nazarite Union" existed only on paper, and said "I alone was responsible for the whole concern." Nevertheless, much was made of the affair and the 1855 Conference adopted a resolution which assumed the actual existence of such a union and passed disapprobation thereon. The term "Nazarite Union" came to designate the reform group for several years, but B. T. Roberts never accepted the designation.

Unfortunately for Roberts and the other so-called "Nazarites," the so-called "Buffalo Regency" controlled conference officers and appointments. There has been documented accusation that the Regency were by and large "secret society men," belonging either to fraternal lodges or meeting in secret outside of Conference meetings in order to bully through policy and resolutions during official Conference meetings. This caused great trouble for Roberts who published the article "New School Methodism" in The Northern Independent, a religious news journal, just days before the 1857 Annual Conference met. In the article, Roberts cited exactly where he believed the present day Methodist Episcopal Church to have deviated from its Wesleyan heritage.

In 1857, the Annual Conference of Genesee convened in LeRoy, NY. Ecclesiastical charges were brought against Roberts. All of his attempts at appeal, trial by committee, or trial in civil court of law were denied. Roberts was convicted of "immoral and unchristian conduct." Roberts was not the only Methodist minister to be formally charged by the Genesee Conference in this period, all done so in an avowed effort to stamp out "Naziritism." Though formally reproved, however, Roberts was surprisingly appointed to a new charge in Pekin, NY!

While in Pekin, a local preacher named George W. Estes republished Roberts' "New School Methodism" in pamphlet form, including with it documentation of Roberts' trial at the 1857 Annual Conference.  This was perceived by Conference leadership as a defiance by Roberts of his previous reproof. The Annual Conference met in Perry, NY in 1858 at which time Roberts was once again tried and found guilty. He was formally stripped of his ordination but remained a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church as a layman on probation. During the ensuing year, Roberts supported his family as a traveling preacher as he and the reform movement in general had a healthy following among Methodist laity. This support was demonstrated by a number of local church resolutions within the Genesee Conference, condemning the actions of the Conference leadership in its treatment of Roberts.

The idea of separating from the Methodist Episcopal Church had entered the mind of some reformers and had already produced denominational offspring, both in America and in England. However, Roberts attempted to avoid secession, waiting during his probation period to appeal his case directly to the General Conference of the MEC to be held in 1860. Various "free" Methodist churches, independent of the MEC, were formed prior to Roberts' formation and organization of an official denomination named "Free Methodist."

With J. W. Redfield and others, he formed the Free Methodist Church of North America at an organizational conference at Pekin, New York in 1860. That same year he founded a magazine, the Earnest Christian. In 1866 he founded Chili Seminary in North Chili, New York, which today is known as Roberts Wesleyan College in his honor. He was general superintendent of the Free Methodist Church from 1860–93. He traveled extensively and was a frequent speaker at Holiness camp meetings.

Roberts was a staunch abolitionist and early Free Methodists derived their name in part from their opposition to slavery. Many of the early Free Methodists were active in the operation of the Underground Railroad. They were highly critical of the Methodist Episcopal Church, from which many of them had come, because it did not boldly denounce slavery.

Another "freedom" Roberts advocated was the practice of using freewill offerings for church support. They were critical of the Methodist practice of pew rentals, which expressed the social prestige of those who rented the most expensive pews. After the separation of the Free Methodists, the Methodist Episcopal Church abolished pew rentals.

Seventeen years after his death, the Methodists returned his ministerial papers to his son, and formally acknowledged that they had wronged him.