We Are Holiness People

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church

–March of 1999

We Are Holiness People

On the cover of this issue of the Revivalist you will see a distinguished vanguard of holiness theologians of this century who have nobly declared and defended the doctrine of entire sanctification for the various descendants of Methodism.  These men were more than academicians.  They were men who saw the holiness training as a doctrine to be believed, an experience to be enjoyed and a life to be lived.  They were indeed holiness men.

As the holiness movement, internationally and nationally, has lost momentum and drifted toward mainstream evangelicalism, the identifying title “holiness people” is used less frequently.  Some see it as an antiquated term associated with derision and scorn.  (To them it conjures up images of snake handlers and holy rollers.)  Others feel that it no longer identifies in any meaningful way what the holiness church really is.

I believe it is still a good term and we shouldn’t shy away from using it.  I don’t think we should use it in the sense to advertise or emphasize our personal righteousness, but I do believe it is a term that identifies what we believe doctrinally and what we practice freely.  We are holiness people…are we not?

 Dr. Taylor points out in his article that holiness people are those who have found an answer to the problem of the “Christian’s wobbling” and the “church’s feebleness.”  They understand that at the core of the unsanctified believe is the sinful self that seeks always to turn “to its own way.”  They recognize the sophisticated antagonism of the carnal heart as a “hangover tendency” of self rule and self centeredness that needs to be cleansed by the refining fire of the Holy Spirit’s baptism.  They still preach and teach that the sin nature can be and must be cleansed.

It is the holiness people who offer hope for the Christian who lacks love for the brethren, personal victory in the inner man, stability in the Christian walk and freedom from the love of this present world.

Holiness people offer a message of entire sanctification that promises: (1) the power of Spirit fullness that enables a person to be what God wants them to be; (2) a dispositional alignment with the plan and purpose of God for their lives; (3) a new thrust of single-minded devotion that will help one stay focused; and, (4) a passionate love for mankind that is grounded in a perfect love towards God.

Are you a holiness person in more than just name?  Are we, indeed, worthy sons and daughters of such noble fathers?  If not, why not seek to be so today?  Confess your need, ask God to sanctify you wholly, and believe Him to do it.  The assurance of inner cleansing can and will be yours.

Giving Away Your Money

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Ministry

–Winter of 1999

Giving Away Your Money

Money has been a favorite topic of conversation for Christians since the earliest days of the Church. Scripture itself gives a significant portion of its content to the subject. Money ranks near the very top of subjects most often mentioned in the Bible; only idolatry is mentioned more.

Most of us have a fairly good understanding of why the Bible has so much to say and so many warnings to give about money. We have all seen what the power and influence of money can do. We have watched as those who craved it and clutched it became so twisted and bent that their chances of being a blessing and making it to heaven are indeed as probable as a camel getting through the eye of a needle. On the other hand, we have seen the example of those who have held it loosely and given it generously to the benefit and blessing of thousands.

“Why do some people and their money part so slowly, while others give with such freedom and ease?”

The Old Testament has numerous passages that refer to God’s people giving a tithe (tenth) of their money back to God. Upon close examination, one will find that the tithe doesn’t have its origin in the law. The first in the Bible was given by Abraham 430 years before the Mosaic Law was revealed. The reason Abraham tithed was to acknowledge God’s sovereignty (Heb.7:1-10). He tithed as a testimony that God owned everything in his life. This is a practice that Jacob took up as well. Since the minimum amount mentioned in the Bible is a tithe, it would seem that if we cannot return to God this small amount we are acknowledging that the whole has not been surrendered. The giving of the smallest requirement is an outside indication of an inside spiritual condition. It is our testimony that God owns everything in our lives.

So the bottom-reason people struggle over giving is the issue of sovereignty. Does God own it all or is it mine to do with as I please? When God told his people that they did not love Him, His proof or evidence was that they had withheld the tithe from Him. At the heart of giving is the heart. Giving indicated more than anything else who is really in control of our lives.

Are there biblical guidelines for the giving of our money?

A very simple study of God’s Word will produce a number of principles that should guide our giving. The first principle is that we should give “willingly”. II Cor. 9:7 teaches us that we should give to God with a willing spirit, not reluctantly or from a sense of pressure. Cheerful giving can only stem out of a love for God and a desire to advance His cause. Gifts given from a willing spirit bring untold blessing on the giver as well as the recipient.

Another principle in giving is that we are to give “liberally” (II Cor.9:6). Our giving should be marked by generosity. Our frame and reference should not be, “How little can I give and still give.” Giving should be as generous and liberal as our means will allow.

II Cor. 8:13-14 gives us a third principle. The principle of giving sensibly. Our giving should be guided by good sense. We are not to endanger the welfare of our own family and personal responsibilities by giving beyond our means. Paul admonished the Corinthians, “not to get yourselves into trouble in order to offer relief to others.” Rather share what is fair and appropriate so that none, including yourselves, will have any lack.

Paul gives a fourth principle in II Cor. 9:5-7. The principle of giving thoughtfully. Paul lays down some excellent advice on “planned giving.” Giving should not be spasmodic and emotional. It should be well thought through. We should plan ahead for special offerings and other gifts. Making provision in advance for giving is a sure way to make giving a greater blessing for all involved, as well as a way to insure that we do have something to give. There will always be times of “special direction” from the Spirit in our giving for which we may not be prepared and for which He will provide the extra funds in ways to increase our faith. Generally though, people who make plans to give not only accomplish their plans but give far more less strain than those who do not.

A fifth principle that we rarely ever hear about is the principle of proportionate giving (Lk.12:48). If I could change our church our manuals I would change the section on giving to read, “We covenant with Christ and one another to give proportionately beginning with the tithe of our income.” Our giving should not be regulated by the tithe. The tithe ought to be the base or minimum level of our giving. Jesus said, “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required.” Proportionate giving may well be the standard for New Testament believers. None of us has to be an accountant to know what ten percent of our income is, but each of us has to a person on his knees before God if we are to understand our obligation to give proportionately.

Proportionate to what you say? Proportionate to the accumulated wealth of our family? Proportionate to our income and the demands upon it? Proportionate to the keenness of our awareness of those who suffer and are needy? Proportionate to our understanding that our God owns all? The answer, of course, is in proportion to all of these things and any others God may enlighten us with. The widow’s mite teaches the clear lesson that giving is not measured by the amount we give but by what we have left over when we have given.

The last principle is the principle of giving sacrificially (Lk. 14:33). I remember taking an offering one time in the Philippines among rural farmers who were very poor. They had no money, but still wanted to give. So they gave their rice, eggs, chickens, goats, and pigs. Literally, taking the food from their mouths to give. God expects us to give at times until we feel it. In all reality, we have never really given, until we have felt the self-denial of a sacrificial gift.

Where do I give?

Most Christians receive an unbelievable number of financial appeals each week. They have become frustrated and confused and even angry about so many letters “asking for money.” Many requests are indeed counterfeit, but not all are promotional rubbish. Many represent fine Christian organizations with real legitimate needs.

How do you know which to support? Let me offer you four suggestions that may serve as guidelines in choosing where to send your money.

First, in all your giving make sure that you are faithful to support your local Church. Studies indicate that twenty percent of the people do eighty percent of the giving. If every member would be faithful in his giving, the local Church would have more than enough for its own ministries as well as the others it may support.

Secondly, understand that you can’t give to everything and ask God to carefully lead you in adopting a few ministries as your own. This will allow you to follow more closely the work that they do as well as get better acquainted with the workers. This gives you a feeling of being a “team member” in advancing God’s work through these particular ministries.

Third, use wisdom and discernment in choosing what you will support. Blind giving is like blind loyalty; it can be a mistake. Make sure you know what their doctrinal position is and what kind of people serve on their board and on their staff. Ask if it has as annual audit by an independent auditing firm.  Request a copy of its most recent audit or financial report if you have reason to question how funds are used. If it is not worth forthcoming, then you may have real reason to suspect something is wrong. If it is a sending agent and collects money for others, ask how much stays in the home office for administrative purposes and how much goes to the field. Our giving must be done without a lot of strings attached. However, giving is a spiritual investment for which you have a right to know how it is being spent.

Fourth, pray over every gift given and continue to hold the ministry up in prayer. Stay in contact with them and follow the results of your giving. This can be a wonderful way to see how your giving is making a difference.

Jesus made it clear that we could not serve God and money. He also told us that where our heart is that is where our treasure would be. The wonderful thing about being changed by His grace is that we can be free from the power of money and become men and women who are only stewards of what comes into our hands. This is liberating as well as exciting. We can make a difference for His kingdom in so many ways and places as we follow His guidance in our spiritual investments.

Sun-Lit Certainty or Shadowed Insecurity

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Theology

–Winter of 1998

Sun-Lit Certainty or Shadowed Insecurity?

Thanks to my friends, I’ve been on a reading binge lately. My list includes: Latimer: The Apostle to the English (thanks to Dr. Kinlaw); Anatomy of a Conversion: The Messages and Mission of John and Charles Wesley (thanks to Dr. Brown); and Lives of Eminent Methodist Ministers (thanks to Uncle Bob). Reading about the English Reformation, the birth of Methodism, and the colorful men who moved forward with its message renewed my love for and commitment to our historic holiness message.

Interestingly, though, I found a common doctrinal thread running through all of these books. The Reformers were burned at the stake for it, the Wesleys were banned from many Anglican pulpits because of it, and the Methodist preachers placed it at the very heart of the Wesleyan message. It was the doctrine of assurance – the simple fact that man can know that he is saved.

The Reformers contended that a man can know that he is justified by grace through faith in the atoning work of Jesus Christ. Samuel Wesley’s dying words to his sons John and Charles were “the witness, son, the witness; that is the proof of Christianity.” Wesley’s own heartwarming experience at Aldersgate convinced him that a man can have a clear knowledge of the salvation experience. In his sermon, “The Witness of the Spirit,” Wesley defines the testimony of the Sprit as “an inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God directly witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of God, that Jesus Christ hath loved me and given himself for me, and that all my sins are blotted out and I, even I, am reconciled to God.” Wesley, later in life, after many years of developing thought on the subject, made it clear that the objective witness of God’s Word is and must be our sure anchor. He also realized that the conscious witness of the Spirit may dim or fade in relation to a person’s mood, emotions or physical condition. However, he contended to the very end that a man can know that he is saved, and that justifying faith will bring a sweet calm to the heart, enabling the believer to rest in the arms of Jesus. Hence, historic Methodism still has at its heart the truth that “all men can know they are saved.”

On one occasion, when Wesley was visiting Bristol, the bishop of Bristol, Joseph Butler, endeavored to stop Wesley from preaching. Their dispute centered around the doctrine of assurance. The bishop contended such a doctrine was not true to the Scripture or the teachings of the church. This happened sometime in the late 1730’s. Thirteen years later, as the bishop lay dying, he approached his death without the assurance of salvation. He called for his chaplain and told him that he was afraid to die. The chaplain encouraged him with the thought that Christ is our Saviour, but the bishop plaintively asked, “How can I know that Christ is my Savior?” Some forty years later as Wesley lay dying, the words that fell from his lips were these, “The best of all is, God is with us.”

Bishop Kern notes the startling contrast between these two dying men. There is the “sun-lit certainty of Wesley’s experience and the shadowed insecurity of a bishop’s soul.” The bishop “could prove the existence of God by analogies from nature but did not know Him in the peace of an inward mystical and redeeming fellowship.”

I’m so grateful that I can sing with Wesley, “My God is reconciled; His pardoning voice I hear, He owns me for His child, I can no longer fear; With confidence I now draw nigh, and, ‘Father, Abba, Father,’ cry.” Can you sing that verse with me?

The Word Was Made Flesh

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Holiday

–December of 1998

The Word Was Made Flesh

Christmas is the time of year that gives us an opportunity to reflect on the ageless mystery of the Incarnation.  Once again we walk into Bethlehem’s cold stable, stand alongside the shepherds, and peer down into the face of the Christ child.  As we look at this helpless little babe, we have to remind ourselves that this is the Eternal Son Who commanded the worlds to be born out of the womb of nothing.  These tiny arms laid the timbers of the universe and stretched forth the heavens like a curtain.  It is no wonder that we ask ourselves in amazement, “Why?  Why did He choose to put on the garment of our flesh and veil Himself with our humanity?  Why did the Eternal Word become flesh?”
It is not difficult for us to understand that sin had separated the Creator from His creatures.  The chasm caused by our transgression was so vast and deep that in order to bridge it there must be a mediator between God and man.  This redeemer must be human so as to identify fully with fallen man, yet divine so as to be able to satisfy fully the demands of a Holy Law.  It would take this “Lamb of God” to make full propitiation for sin and satisfy God’s holy justice.

But there is another side to the need for God to come in the flesh.  God, indeed, had created man, but He had never been a man.  He had watched men toil in the heat of the day, but He had never felt the blistering rays of the sun on His brow.  He had seen men struggle and stagger in the midst of temptation, but He had never felt the onslaughts of the evil one.  He had seen men bleed, but He had never bled.  He had seen men standing on the verge of the grave, finally sinking to its hopeless depths, but He had never felt the cold grip of death or spread His omnipotent shoulders on the bottom of a sepulcher.  How could this chasm be bridged?  It could only be bridged in the God-man, Jesus Christ.  In Christ, God could look at us with human eyes, speak to us with an earthly tongue and touch us with a brotherly hand.  In Christ, God could walk the dusty trail of time.  He could share our human existence.  He could sit by a well of water, thirsty, and hungry.  He could stand at the tomb of a friend or at the brow of a hill overlooking a city and weep for the condition of them both.  He could enter into our world, see it, and feel it through our flesh.

Steven Covey tells the story of boarding a New York subway one morning to find a pleasant group of passengers sitting quietly, reading or merely resting with their eyes closed.  Then suddenly a man and his children entered the subway car.  The children were so loud and rambunctious that instantly the whole climate changed.

The man sat next to Covey and closed his eyes, apparently oblivious to the whole situation.  The children were running back and forth, screaming, throwing things and even grabbing people’s papers.  It was extremely disturbing and yet the man seemed to take no notice.

Covey relates, “It was very difficult not to be irritated.  How could anyone be so insensitive as to let his children run wild like that and do nothing about it, taking no responsibility at all?”

Finally, Covey turned to the man and said, “Sir, your children are really disturbing a lot of people.  I wonder if you could control them a little more.”

The man lifted his gaze, as if to come to a consciousness of the situation for the first time, and said softly, “Oh, you’re right.  I guess I should do something about it.  We just came from the hospital where their mother died about an hour ago.  I don’t know what to think, and I guess they don’t know how to handle it either.”

Covey immediately saw things in a completely different perspective.  He thought differently and felt differently about the man and his children’s behavior.  Feelings of sympathy and compassion flowed freely.  He sought to do whatever he could to console this poor man and his children.  He literally entered into this man’s sorrow.

Through the Incarnation, God has identified with us completely in Christ.  He has become our Elder Brother, our dearest Friend and our High Priest who is “touched by the feelings of our infirmities.”  The “Word was made flesh and dwelt among us…” and neither heaven nor earth has been the same since.

Defining the Doctrine of Entire Sanctification

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Theology

–November of 1998

Defining the Doctrine of Entire Sanctification

Definitions have become very important in American politics lately.  The American public has learned that even a simple word, like “alone,” can have a totally different meaning than its normal connotation when taken upon the tongue of one who is affluent in legalese.

Definitions have always been important to people who want to communicate with precision, as well as those who want to understand with accuracy.  We have all had the experience of listening to a speaker who used words that meant one thing to us and another thing to him.

Holiness teachers and preachers must be at the top of the list of those who strive for clarity and consistency when taking up the terms we use to communicate our Wesleyan beliefs.  In my last article I sounded a note of concern about the lack of clarity that so often surrounds the doctrine of entire sanctification.  I’m convinced that some of the confusion has its root in the failure to define accurately and adequately what entire sanctification is.

In preparing my mind for this article, I read from over twenty different Wesleyan theologians who wrote over a period of about two hundred years.  I wanted to see how each age and culture expressed this fundamental Wesleyan teaching.  It is true that each writer defined the doctrine through the language and lens of his day.  Nevertheless, all agreed on the essential elements and presented those elements with the greatest of care for his readers.  Each chosen concise and clear statements that were biblically accurate and theologically sound.

The question that naturally surfaces here is, “How did our leading Wesleyan thinkers define entire sanctification?”  It must be noted they never defined it in a detached or isolated way.  It was always placed within the over-arching goal of holy living.  Each would place it within the context of the following guidelines:

First, they defined it in the context of the holiness that God requires and enables man, by grace, to know in this life.  Holiness was generally defined as the renewal of fallen man into the image of Christ.

Secondly, they defined it in the context of man’s need, carefully defining the two-fold nature of sin.  The nature of sin was best defined as self-centeredness, selfishness or an orientation toward self.

Third, they defined it in its proper context of the over-arching doctrine of sanctification.  Generally speaking, sanctification was defined as the gracious work of God in us, through the Holy Spirit, by which He transforms us into the full image of Jesus Christ.  It involved the three aspects of initial, entire and progressive sanctification.

In finally defining entire sanctification, it needs to be noted that the term itself is very important.  It is a model term that contributes to our understanding of what does indeed happen in our heart.  Dr. Richard Taylor says, “The term entire sanctification implies a previous state of partial sanctification, while suggesting that there is a side of sanctification that can be completed just as there is a side that remains progressive.”  Each of these distinctions is important.  It must also be noted that in defining the term, it is somewhat like trying to define your hand.  It is impossible to talk about your hand without talking about your finger, your palm or your knuckle.  The finger is not the hand, nor is the palm the hand, nor is the knuckle the hand.  But, the hand must have each of these parts to be a hand.  Entire sanctification is much the same way.  There are several aspects that happen simultaneously, making up the whole of what it means to be entirely sanctified.  Taking into account the various aspects of the doctrine and striving for scriptural language, I would define entire sanctification as follows: Entire sanctification is the gracious work of god in cleansing our heart from all self-centeredness (inherited depravity) through the infilling of the Holy Spirit, whereby we are enabled to love God with our entire being and our neighbor as ourselves.

The whole point of this article is to stress the need for clarity.  But, I must also point out that the reality of a holy heart and life can only be experienced.  It cannot be known by verbal dissection alone.  It may be that time or eternity will reveal flaws in our expression and definitions.  But let it be said that we gave our best to understanding this doctrine fully and communicating it effectively.