The Arminian Magazine--Fall, 1995

FOR SUCH A TIME AS THIS --C. Marion Brown

(An address from the chairman to the Fundamental Wesleyan Society, given July 18, 1995)

I remember the time when, if Acts 2 was read while I was in the congregation of a revival meeting or camp meeting, it meant that all in attendance were going to be required to endure a harangue aimed at two objectives. The first objective was to show everybody in attendance how false I was and how I had departed from the faith once delivered to the saints, i. e. Dr. Godbey and Uncle Bud Robinson and many other icons that rested so assuredly in their shadows. And who was I to contend with such firepower of the early holiness movement

The second purpose was to secure enough vehement backing in the hope that I could be "bowled over" and return safely to the fold of the "holiness movement." The sad product of such soliloquies was that they just widened the differences and hastened the death of a movement that was reaping the harvest of years of scholastic negligence and spiritual carelessness. Recently Dr. Keith Drury declared that the holiness movement is dead!

I do not gloat and proudly say "I told you so!" I weep. I'm broken-hearted, for it was at "holiness altars" that I first started my "trek" toward the celestial city. It was "holiness" preachers whose passion and fervor incited within me the high qualities of determination, dedication, and a delicate sensitive inner ear to the leadings of the Holy Spirit. It was "holiness" parents whose holy lifestyle and whole devotion to God pointed me heavenward, whose prevailing prayers and parental hedges kept me from veering too far from the path of the just. Yet God helped me to see that the human need went much deeper than wedding rings, dress standards, or television.

Is it possible that God raised up the Fundamental Wesleyan Society for such a time as this Years of struggle caused us to grapple with the question of whether such a society was needed. But the fire would not die. This ministry and its bold challenge has cost some of us; yet it was no cost at all. We gladly were counted among those who contended for saving faith as a gift of God; salvation from all sin and victory over all sin as a condition of being termed a Christian; the personal direct witness of the Holy Spirit to our adoption, which is always followed by the indirect witness, and that all Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Our eschatological change came more as a product of our walk with God than as a primary cause.

The first encouraging sign that I see today is a renewed interest in doctrinal purity. Every major move of the Holy Spirit had its basis in a rediscovery of a theological gem that had been neglected and consequently was buried by the organized church.

It was a revelation by the Holy Spirit to the soul and intellect of Martin Luther that gave birth to the reformation. It was not without trembling that he stood before the Diet at Worms and declared, "Here I stand, so help me God, I can do no other."

Likewise the Wesley Brothers had personal earth-shattering revelations by the Holy Spirit. We can all recall Wesley's testimony of his heart being strangely warmed. One only needs to read the sermon he delivered soon after his conversion when he passionately asked the question, "Can there be said to be one Christian in Oxford" to understand that the fire in his bosom was kindled by the Holy Spirit. No man walks into the arena of spiritual conflict that boldly without a mighty infusion of the Holy Spirit.

For me the climax came as I was standing between the altar rail and the platform in the Bible Methodist Church in Brent, Alabama. Robert Brush was reading to me an introduction to one of Wesley's sermons and I have never been the same, nor do I ever want to be the same! This was the culmination of months of confessing my sins and receiving some assurance that God had heard me. At that point I rediscovered the doctrinal purity that had birthed the Methodist Awakening: If any man be in Christ Jesus, he is a new creation, old things pass away and behold all things become new.

Doctrinal pollution always precedes a deterioration of practice. I am fully persuaded that Wesleyan doctrine in its original form is as close to the doctrine of the apostles as any has discovered. If doctrine does not promote victory over all sin then it is very evident that we will not expect it in our followers. My question to those who beg for sin is this, If the blood of Christ can cleanse from one sin, then why cannot He cleanse from all sin And if the power of the Holy Spirit can make you victorious over one sin, then why cannot he make you victorious over all sin

In the second place I see encouraging signs in our devotional sincerity. Evident among us is a willingness to be open and honest about our relationship with Christ. Any student of the Wesleyan Revival will clearly see that the class meeting was a major vehicle that promoted the personal spiritual growth and channeled it into the veins of the Methodist societies making them the dominate force both on the frontiers and in the bustling cities.

Personal spiritual growth among a few is always a prerequisite to a major awakening. There must be men who have been there in their quest after God to guide the seekers. "The husbandman that laboreth must first be a partaker of the fruit" (2 Timothy 2:6).

At the heyday of the holiness movement R. G. Flexon is reported to have said that only 10% of the members of the Pilgrim Holiness Church were in the experience of entire sanctification. When you take into consideration that the Manual of the Pilgrim Holiness Church identified this experience as effected by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, a clearer reason develops for the death of the holiness movement. Not only was their doctrinal teaching misguided, but many did not live what they professed.

The third area for encouragement is that of our printing ministry. There are platforms and pulpits that are closed to us and we have been dissected without the opportunity for rebuttal. However, "the pen is mightier than the sword." You can disagree with and oppose the printed page, but it always reads the same. Original Wesleyan doctrine is not always suited to the week-end revival or the ten day meeting, but when taken in serious inquiry it always slays its opposition. I am persuaded that there are a host of folk that are where I once was: lots of profession and little possession. They are troubled at their prospects of meeting God face to face. But there is rustling in the mulberry branches and if we cannot preach it to the masses, perhaps we can sent the message by an alternate route. We have a radically diseased generation and it will take radical doctrine, radical preaching, and radical literature to effect a change. May the Lord help us to aim what resources we have to the areas that will make a difference.

In closing, I feel that I would be remiss if I failed to point out some areas that we need to be on guard. First, we must not become too reactive toward the outward distinctives that have marked the holiness movement. We must preserve orthopraxy as well as orthodoxy. While it is easy to point out excesses and some who have gone to seed on outward standards, modesty, the distinction of the sexes, and other practices that marked holy men and women of old must and will accompany an awakening. Christians in a degenerate world will be distinct and marked.

The second danger that may indeed hinder our usefulness is a closed mindedness to those of a different stripe. One of the earmarks of a New Testament Christian is that they are of a teachable spirit. Many men and organizations have painted themselves into a corner because of some controversy and were bypassed by God. A. W. Tozer is reported to have said that he did not fear that there would not be a coming revival, his fear was that the Christian and Missionary Alliance would not be a part of it. H. E. Schmul has voiced the same concern about the conservative holiness movement.

The only effective antidote for this crippling disease is frequent outpourings of the Holy Spirit upon each of us. Alone with God, a new anointing does wonders for the intellect, the will, and the emotions. It clears our vision of how God views the circumstances. I join with Adam Clarke and declare to you, without fear of valid opposition, that no life of God can exist in the soul without frequent baptisms of the Holy Spirit. If we, as individuals or as a collective group, desire to be useful in this whitened harvest field, we must stay close to the closet.

It is not enough that we have rediscovered a buried and ignored or forgotten truth, our hearts must be kept ablaze with holy and fervent love resulting from close communion with God. Lord, set our hearts afire, clear our vision, and make us useful agents in the kingdom of Christ.

The third area that we need to be on guard is that we don't limit what God wants to do. Now I am preaching to myself. At times when I do not see clear evidences of God at work, I am prone to lessen my expectations. I am ashamed and have often had to apologize to God for my lack of trust. I quote to myself, "Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass" (Psalm 37:5).

I have not had some of the dramatic answers to prayer testified to by others, but I have had enough to keep me on the King's Highway. For it is a way in which the light shineth brighter and brighter unto the perfect day.

Little is much when God is in it,

Labor not for wealth or fame,

There's a crown and you can win it,

If you go in Jesus' name.

(Kittie Louise Suffield)

WHAT IS A FUNDAMENTAL WESLEYAN (Continued from Vol. 13, Issue 1) --Vic Reasoner

3. We are Wesleyan-Arminians

Although the name of James Arminius is still maligned, few have matched him in scholarship and sainthood. In contrast to the rigid dogmatism that so often accompanies those who contend for the faith, Wesley cautioned, "It is the duty of every Arminian preacher, first, never in public or in private, to use the word Calvinist as a term of reproach."

When Arminianism loses the balance of the Holy Spirit it becomes humanistic, teaching we are saved by an act of our free will. Likewise, Calvinism tends toward fatalism. Wesley argued for a balance between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. He said Methodism came within a hair's breadth of Calvinism by ascribing all good to the free grace of God, by denying all natural free will, and in excluding all human merit. Therefore, as fundamental Wesleyans we have as much in common with conservative Calvinism as with liberal Arminianism.

In agreement with Calvinism we affirm man's natural inability to do good apart from divine grace. In contrast to Calvinism, we believe the Scriptures teach a conditional election, a universal atonement, prevenient grace, and conditional perseverance.

Wesley affirmed the position of Arminius while giving a new emphasis to the witness of the Spirit and sanctification. Wesley also observed, "Who has wrote more ably than Martin Luther on justification by faith alone And who was more ignorant of the doctrine of sanctification, or more confused in his conceptions of it"

As Wesleyans we believe in an infallible Book, the fall and sinfulness of mankind, a universal atonement, and prevenient grace. The work of the Holy Spirit in awakening, conviction, repentance, and faith produces all these gifts from God. We believe in justification by faith, regeneration through the baptism with the Spirit, and adoption into the family of God. We believe in the necessity of the new birth, which gives victory over outward sin and is always attested to by the direct witness of the Holy Spirit. We believe that the indwelling Spirit begins the process of sanctification and brings assurance witnessing with our own spirit. We believe the Spirit will lead us to Christian maturity as individuals and through the outpouring of the Spirit in revival, the kingdom of God will cover the earth.

4. We are fundamentalists

By the turn of the twentieth century historic Christianity was under attack. Fundamentalism at its best was a modern attempt to defend historic Christianity. With the validity of the Bible under attack, fundamentalism was originally a battle for the Bible.

Since the modern fundamentalist movement came a hundred years after Wesley we would not expect him to use their precise language. If you read secondary sources about Wesley by liberal authors, you will find he always seems to agree with them. However, if you read Wesley himself you find him saying, "My ground is the Bible. Yea, I am a Bible-bigot. I follow it in all things, both great and small." "Believe nothing they say, unless it is clearly confirmed by plain passages of holy writ." "If there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there is one falsehood in that book, it did not come from the God of truth."

We recognize Adam Clarke as a pioneer in the comparison of biblical texts, known as lower or textual criticism. Yet Clarke concluded, "Men may err, but the Scriptures cannot; for it is the Word of God himself, who can neither mistake, deceive, nor be deceived" (Works, 12:132, see also Commentary, 5:11). However, we deny the value of and reject the conclusions of destructive higher criticism which starts with naturalistic presuppositions. Modern Wesleyan scholars have all too often capitulated to the higher critic in an attempt to gain acceptability for our message. But once our doctrinal source is impugned our message is stripped of its authority.

William Abraham wrote The Coming Great Revival in 1984, declaring that modern evangelicalism is at an impasse. The dilemma of evangelicalism is whether it will revert back to fundamentalism or blend in with liberalism Abraham feels that the Wesleyan tradition has a solution to this impasse, but only if we purify ourselves of our fundamentalist corruption, repudiate the inerrancy of Scripture, and make a "bold and unqualified commitment to critical work in biblical studies." But revival has come when the integrity of the Word of God was upheld and preached it with the anointing of the Holy Spirit. If we replace the living bread of God's infallible Word with the barren stone of higher criticism, we have nothing to contribute to the impasse and we will move towards apostasy, not revival.

While Wesley argued for liberty concerning nonessentials, he also believed there are essential Christian doctrines which must be maintained in order to be Christian. In his preface to the Notes Upon the Old Testament, Wesley spoke of "those grand, fundamental doctrines, original sin, justification by faith, the new birth, inward and outward holiness."

However, we must defend Christian doctrine with a Christlike spirit. Fundamentalism has too often been associated with harsh, bitter attitude, a separatist mentality, and a bizarre form of prophecy known as "dispensationalism."

We are fundamentalists only so long as we define what constitutes the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. And unlike militant fundamentalism, we endeavor the practice the "catholic spirit" of love towards our Christian neighbor with whom we may disagree. Our use of the word fundamental primarily refers to the Scripture as our sole authority.

As early as 1916 J. B. Chapman, editor of the Herald of Holiness, wrestled with this terminology. He stated that Nazarenes believed in the fundamentals and then proceeded to give his list of fundamental doctrines. However, if the question is raised whether Nazarenes are Fundamentalists, using the term as a proper noun, Chapman answered, "Yes, with reservations." While Chapman had reservations about certain Calvinistic tendencies among Fundamentalists, there was no reservation, however, concerning the inerrancy of Scripture. We are in agreement with Chapman at this point.

Our commission is to preach the whole Book to the whole world. We are to preach a free gospel for all men and a full gospel from all sin. Anything short of this is neither apostolic nor Wesleyan.

FROM OUR MAILBAG

Dear Vic,

Thank you for acquainting me with the ministry of the Fundamental Wesleyan Society. The Spring issue of The Arminian is impressive. It bears witness to the realistic relationship between human experience and God's grace. I believe your work is needed. I pray God will keep you faithful in your specific task, and keep you "connected" to be larger Wesleyan fellowship, and ultimately to the Kingdom.

Blessings!

Dr. Steve Harper Adjunct Professor of Spiritual Formation at Asbury Theological Seminary and Nazarene Theological Seminary, Executive Director of A Foundation for Theological Education, and founder of Shepherd's Care, a ministry to ministers.

DELIVERED FROM DOUBT --A. J. Smith

Aaron Jacob Smith (1887-1960) was brought up in a Christian home and professed to have been converted in 1907. Five years later he attended college at University Park, Iowa and professed to be sanctified.

He went to China as a missionary under the Church of the Nazarene. While in China he read John Wesley's Plain Account of Christian Perfection and realized he had never been born again. He wrote, "I had come to teach the Chinese the way of Life and how to live holy lives, and found that I was not converted nor sanctified myself." After he experienced the new birth in March of 1927, both Chinese and American church leaders began confessing sin and revival broke out in China.

Smith gave his testimony in Twenty Years in the Dungeon of Doubt and How I Got Out stating, "I am convinced of the fact that there are millions of church members who are living merely on an intellectual presumption. . . . I believe there are tens of thousands of church members in the Holiness churches who either have never been truly born of God, or have lost out, and are today living merely on past experiences."

However, Smith said when he confessed to his denomination that he was born again in China, "my ecclesiastical head was cut off." He suffered no persecution until he was truly born again, but after his conversion he was a "speckled bird" among the holiness people.

Smith returned to the states and became president of Central Florida Bible Institute in Intercession City. Later he was dean of the People's Bible School and College, now John Wesley College, at Greensboro, NC. Around 1948 he collaborated with Elmer Long to compile a twelve page tract entitled The Holy Spirit and the Born Again Man, which went against the status quo within the holiness movement.

In 1951 Dr. Smith promised before a panel meeting "to refrain from making any further statements about the matter of the Disciples and their spiritual state before and after

Pentecost." However, after studying the Scriptures and the writings of Wesley, Clarke, and Fletcher he retracted that promise and wrote Bible Holiness and the Modern, Popular, Spurious in 1953. Although he died in 1960, the Fundamental Wesleyan Society, to a large extent, is a continuation of his ministry and emphasis.

Just as John Wesley came to America to convert the Indians, only to discover he was not born again, so A. J. Smith went to China only to discover the same need. Here is part of his testimony:

I have had people ask me how I knew that I was not a regenerated man previous to March, 1927. There are a number of facts that witness against me while in my deceived state. All of these, or any one of them for that matter, are proof against me that I was not "born again." I will give these points here.

(1) In the first place, undoubtedly the strongest point against me was that I had never had the "Witness of the Spirit" that I was a child of God.

(2) I did not hate sin, nor did I forsake all sins and all sinful habits.

(3) I had not confessed all those sins that the Holy Spirit showed me.

(4) I had not made restitution for all the sins and things that the Lord showed me.

(5) There was the absence of godly sorrow, consequently no true repentance ("godly sorrow worketh repentance" 2 Corinthians 7:10).

(6) "The fruit of the Spirit" (Galatians 5:22-25) was lacking in my life; on the other hand many of the "works of the flesh" (Galatians 5:19-21) were in evidence.

(7) I did not separate myself from the world, especially worldly companions. "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 6:14). "Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God" "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world."

(8) Lack of "love for the brethren." I did not especially care for the fellowship of the saints of God.

(9) There was not the love for God's Word and prayer that I know we have after we are born again.

(10) There was outbroken anger. I would get mad at horses and cows if they offended me or refused to obey me, and would punish them mercilessly. I would get angry at people, and my temper would get the best of me. This was sin, say what you will. "He that committeth sin is of the devil" (1 John 3:8). "Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not." Oh, I know that some folks try to twist these Scripture passages so as to make them mean, "He that committeth habitual sin, or the unpardonable sin, is of the devil." The original text does not bear this out. How may years have I tried to shield myself behind these crooked interpretations!

(11) There was a spirit of unforgiveness in my heart. I held things against others; neither did I ask their forgiveness when I had offended them, or go to those whom I knew held things against me, even though I was not at fault. "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer" (1 John 3:15). "But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (Matthew 6:15).

(12) My conduct in the home was not right. I was also given to joking and laughing, loved to tell stories that would make people laugh, instead of telling something that would cause them to repent or think about God. How many preachers there are who think it is a trait of cleverness to be able to make the audience laugh! This kind of preaching will never create conviction, but on the contrary will prevent conviction; and if there is any, will smother it [Jesus Lifting Chinese or Marvelous Spiritual Awakenings in China. Cincinnati: God's Bible School and Revivalist, 1929, pp. 100-101].