"Holiness Standards"

[Spirit of Pentecost]

I know the so-called "holiness standards" (maybe known by other names) has often been a defining characteristic of many Pentecostal groups.

Let me define what I'm calling "holiness standards"
1. No shorts for men (legs fully covered)
2. Men are generally clean shaven (varies)
3. No makeup, jewelry, or pants for women
4. No short sleeves (varies)
5. No TV, movies, etcetera (varies)
6. Men keep their hair short
7. Women don't cut theirs
8. Etcetera (can't think of anymore right off)

This is primarily found among Jesus' Name Pentecostals nowadays, but from what I've heard from fellow believers and from what history's told me, the Church of God (Cleveland) and the Assemblies of God churches once generally held the same "holiness standards" that are now generally found in Jesus' Name churches. Some AG and COG churches may still hold to these standards, but the churches under that banner in my area generally don't (some of the older members may, though).

I know there are other Christian movements that follow their own brand of "holiness standards", such as the Mennonites and the Mormons. The Holiness Baptists and the Wesleyan Methodists (or the "Independent Methodists") generally adhere to standards found among Jesus' Name churches.

I guess my question here is why have so many Pentecostal churches (or churches in general) drifted away from these types of standards? Doesn't Christ call us to come apart separate from the World?

 

[archer75]

Who are you inviting to reply? This is in Pentecostal, but the OP seems to be asking about other groups.

 

[Spirit of Pentecost]

Who are you inviting to reply? This is in Pentecostal, but the OP seems to be asking about other groups.

Maybe I didn't make it clear in the original statement, but I'm asking Pentecostal Christians this question. I've fixed it, too. Thanks

 

[rocknanchor]

On the surface, the OP is true to judge among ourselves, but grants far too little towards "all things are lawful for me". For instance, can you point out the worldly connotation assoc with "shorts" without extracting from the OT?

 

[WannaWitness]

Well, my thoughts are along these lines (more than three months since the last post):

We can all agree (can't we?) that the Bible calls us all as believers (regardless of denomination or sub-denomination) to be holy. Yes, I am more than sure that we all are on the same page on that one. But how do we define "holiness standards" apart from what we clearly read in the Bible? There seems to be a lot of dispute on that, unfortunately. The Bible is clear on what is sin, but some things (apart from what is clearly stated in the Bible) can be sin to one person while the same thing is okay to another, making for different convictions on what Romans 14:1 calls "doubtful disputations". Yes, it is only normal that Christians are to have personal convictions of some form or another. But believers should never "one-up" one another just because they don't share the same conviction. Reading further into the chapter, it says how Christians are to treat one another, despite differing convictions. It mentions specifically eating meat and observing certain days, but anything can be inserted here, as the first verse mentions, like I said, "doubtful disputations". Some Christians, for example, have a conviction not to listen to contemporary music (Christian lyrics or not) or watch movies or TV, and they are right in having that conviction, for that is how they feel God is dealing with them. They don't, however, have the right to deem themselves "holier" or "more Spiritual" than other believers who have a different view. Likewise, those who don't have these convictions should still respect as brothers and sisters in Christ those who do. All Christians should be willing to agree to disagree on these matters, and realize that our common bond is Jesus Christ, and none of the things we disagreed about on earth are going to matter any longer when we see Him face to face in eternity.

Here are some helpful articles regarding standards and conviction.

What’s the Difference Between Holiness and Legalism?

When Mature Believers Disagree on Secondary Doctrines

As always, I wish not to debate, only to provide thoughts from my perspective based on Scripture. Anyone is free to disagree (in part or in full) with what I have brought forth. If so, please do so respectfully.

God bless!

 

[Dave-W]

I know the so-called "holiness standards" (maybe known by other names) has often been a defining characteristic of many Pentecostal groups.

Let me define what I'm calling "holiness standards"
1. No shorts for men (legs fully covered)
2. Men are generally clean shaven (varies)
3. No makeup, jewelry, or pants for women
4. No short sleeves (varies)
5. No TV, movies, etcetera (varies)
6. Men keep their hair short
7. Women don't cut theirs
8. Etcetera (can't think of anymore right off)

My dad was a Wesleyan Methodist preacher. (left the ministry before I was born) "Holiness" doctrine was not exclusive to Pentecostalism.

To that list you can add:

No jewelry for men (wedding bands, wrist watches)
No alcohol consumed
No owning or playing cards
No owning or playing dice
No rock/jazz/blues music
No pants for women (even under their skirts)
No working on Sunday
No sports, either as participant or spectator
No plastic surgery

Yes, most groups that followed that list 50 or 60 years ago no longer do, and most have not said WHY they relaxed the standard. That includes the AoG which I went to 50 years ago.

 

[Spirit of Pentecost]

My dad was a Wesleyan Methodist preacher. (left the ministry before I was born) "Holiness" doctrine was not exclusive to Pentecostalism.

To that list you can add:

No jewelry for men (wedding bands, wrist watches)
No alcohol consumed
No owning or playing cards
No owning or playing dice
No rock/jazz/blues music
No pants for women (even under their skirts)
No working on Sunday
No sports, either as participant or spectator
No plastic surgery

Yes, most groups that followed that list 50 or 60 years ago no longer do, and most have not said WHY they relaxed the standard. That includes the AoG which I went to 50 years ago.

Yes, I'm aware that other movements have the same (or similar) standards. There is a Holiness Baptist church right down the road from where I leave, and they hold pretty strict to the holiness standards. They believe and preach Spirit baptism as well, evidenced by tongues. My pastor has told us of an encounter he had with a Wesleyan Methodist lady that he mistaken for a Holiness Baptist.

There are fundamentals it seems to the holiness standards (or expectations), but there are variations, of course. Some holiness churches, whether Baptist, Methodist, Apostolic, Pentecostal, independent, etc., have differing views. Some allow watches, others don't. Some do wedding bands, others don't. Some do makeup, others don't. Some don't go against beards, others do. Some have not problem with french tips, others do. It just all depends, I guess. (This is from my experiences with Apostolic churches. I assume other branches adhering to holiness standards have the same overall experiences.)

A hundred years (or further) back, all churches practiced holiness. It wasn't preached, or I wouldn't say it was, because they didn't have problems with it back then. Christian men and women didn't have any problem be separated from the world, there was a clear distinction of the sexes, and things weren't compromised to keep membership high. From how I see it, that's how it started changing. The Church (as a whole) let the world creep in the back door, and out went the standards. ("If you give the devil an inch, he takes a mile.") Pastors and congregations gradually got okay with letting those "old-fashioned" standards and expectations go, in the effort to be more modern and hopefully keep the pews full. I'm sure that's the way it went with the Assemblies of God, the Church of God (Cleveland), and other holiness churches who didn't want to hurt feelings by teaching holiness the traditional way. Even Apostolic churches, who are strongly identified with holiness, have loosened their standards in the past years. But as you have said, none of these churches are giving concrete reasons as to why their standards have been lowered. They're just simply not abiding by them any longer. "Why?" Is my question.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

I know the so-called "holiness standards" (maybe known by other names) has often been a defining characteristic of many Pentecostal groups.

Let me define what I'm calling "holiness standards"
1. No shorts for men (legs fully covered)
2. Men are generally clean shaven (varies)
3. No makeup, jewelry, or pants for women
4. No short sleeves (varies)
5. No TV, movies, etcetera (varies)
6. Men keep their hair short
7. Women don't cut theirs
8. Etcetera (can't think of anymore right off)

This is primarily found among Jesus' Name Pentecostals nowadays, but from what I've heard from fellow believers and from what history's told me, the Church of God (Cleveland) and the Assemblies of God churches once generally held the same "holiness standards" that are now generally found in Jesus' Name churches. Some AG and COG churches may still hold to these standards, but the churches under that banner in my area generally don't (some of the older members may, though).

I know there are other Christian movements that follow their own brand of "holiness standards", such as the Mennonites and the Mormons. The Holiness Baptists and the Wesleyan Methodists (or the "Independent Methodists") generally adhere to standards found among Jesus' Name churches.

I guess my question here is why have so many Pentecostal churches (or churches in general) drifted away from these types of standards? Doesn't Christ call us to come apart separate from the World?

Responding primarily to the OP's question "Doesn't Christ call us to come apart separate from the World?"
The call is to sanctification. That's what is meant by being set apart. The bible doesn't contain rules for church attendance specific to dress codes. The only thing that Paul requested was for women to wear scarfs and men to have their hands up (for the duration I'm not sure) If there are any rules that would be it. But I don't believe that to be anything that we should pay attention to because it's symbolic. Symbolically we should show respect for Christianity tho.
Standards of holiness are not detectable from outer frills, but from the inner person being of a spirit that speaks forth Christ's nature in kindness, love, gentleness etc.

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON
This thread has had a clean.
Please note that CF members who are not members of this faith group
are allowed to post in fellowship here,
provided they do not debate or teach against this group's beliefs in their posts.
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[quietbloke]

Thanks for clarification

 

[Paidiske]

Any CF member may post here in fellowship.

Posting in fellowship means they may not debate or teach against the beliefs of this group, but they may ask questions, participate in conversations, and engage in friendly personal exchanges.

So if you have members here posting against CF's statement of faith, or against the particular beliefs of this group, those posts should be reported and mods will review it. But if those same members post respectful questions, engage in conversation without debating the statement of faith or your particular beliefs, or are just "chatting," those posts are allowed by the rules.

I hope that is clear.

 

[quietbloke]

So can people who do not believe in the 'Nicene creed',which includes the Trinity now be members of Christian Forums?

 

[Paidiske]

Yes.

 

[quietbloke]

Thanks for clarification

 

[Vivid Thomas]

 

[Soyeong]

I know the so-called "holiness standards" (maybe known by other names) has often been a defining characteristic of many Pentecostal groups.

Let me define what I'm calling "holiness standards"
1. No shorts for men (legs fully covered)
2. Men are generally clean shaven (varies)
3. No makeup, jewelry, or pants for women
4. No short sleeves (varies)
5. No TV, movies, etcetera (varies)
6. Men keep their hair short
7. Women don't cut theirs
8. Etcetera (can't think of anymore right off)

This is primarily found among Jesus' Name Pentecostals nowadays, but from what I've heard from fellow believers and from what history's told me, the Church of God (Cleveland) and the Assemblies of God churches once generally held the same "holiness standards" that are now generally found in Jesus' Name churches. Some AG and COG churches may still hold to these standards, but the churches under that banner in my area generally don't (some of the older members may, though).

I know there are other Christian movements that follow their own brand of "holiness standards", such as the Mennonites and the Mormons. The Holiness Baptists and the Wesleyan Methodists (or the "Independent Methodists") generally adhere to standards found among Jesus' Name churches.

I guess my question here is why have so many Pentecostal churches (or churches in general) drifted away from these types of standards? Doesn't Christ call us to come apart separate from the World?

I have no problem with dress codes, but why create your own holiness standard in place of the one that God instructed?

 

[Spirit of Pentecost]

I have no problem with dress codes, but why create your own holiness standard in place of the one that God instructed?

Some may justify that the commands in scripture place limitations on outward attire, while others may been pastor preferences, or one's own convictions.

 

[Soyeong]

Some may justify that the commands in scripture place limitations on outward attire, while others may been pastor preferences, or one's own convictions.

Again, I have no problem with dress codes given in Scripture, that are the pastor's preferences, or personal convictions, but again the issue is of creating a holiness standard in place of the one God created. For example, in the 1st century men grew beards, including Jesus, so it is fine for being clean-shaven to be part of a dress code, I see no grounds to say that it is about living in accordance with God's revealed holiness standard, so it should not be elevated to that level, especially when not following other things that are part of that revealed standard, such as keeping God's holy days.

 

[rocknanchor]

Pastors and congregations gradually got okay with letting those "old-fashioned" standards and expectations go, in the effort to be more modern and hopefully keep the pews full. I'm sure that's the way it went with the Assemblies of God, the Church of God (Cleveland), and other holiness churches who didn't want to hurt feelings by teaching holiness the traditional way. Even Apostolic churches, who are strongly identified with holiness, have loosened their standards in the past years. But as you have said, none of these churches are giving concrete reasons as to why their standards have been lowered. They're just simply not abiding by them any longer. "Why?" Is my question.

The Apostle commented on culture's influence as did Jesus, with the rising presence of "evil" and the flesh's growing permissive appetite (2 Timothy 3:13, Luke 23:31). But lest we lose sight of our priorities, our primary concern is for souls and less on un-worldliness whom the world takes note of (1 Cor 9:22). Yet, that doesn't stand as an excuse. Indeed, our liberty with Christ is not to serve the flesh but to minister His love to those defeated of this world. That is what I would say in defense of everything casual while we also do indeed take comfort in all seriousness before Him. So, I suppose that element of casual might actually be an increase in Him if we are still able to see clearly, that seriousness. Give God the glory, always!

 

[rocknanchor]

The subject of this thread can't help but progress quite nearly into another subject to answer 'Spirit of Pentecost'.

They're just simply not abiding by [holiness standards] any longer. "Why?" Is my question.

culture's influence

CF member 'Spirit of Pentecost' has not been seen in nearly five years. Let's say for contemplation, he finally did find a Church home that was happy and content with the standards he longed for. Whatever that happened to be. One thing is post ''5'' goes to the heart of why so many are NOT content with,

Doesn't Christ call us to come apart separate from the World?" The call is to sanctification. That's what is meant by being set apart. The bible doesn't contain rules for church attendance specific to dress codes, , ,Standards of holiness are not detectable from outer frills, but from the inner person being of a spirit that speaks forth Christ's nature in kindness, love, gentleness etc.

There are several occurrences of this in God's living word,

''Therefore, “Come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. ​

Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.” (2 Cor 6:17)​

What would contribute for those Christian's unwillingness to the above in these cultural times that would 'HAVE NO PART OF ANY UNIQUELY SEPARATE' fellowship? Has our lack of vigilance fallen this far? If such a great push for gathering has captured the attention of the world, how is that working out for the Church?

For those who have hunkered in comfortably with the world (Romans 12:2), at this point which is fairly dire, the true end time Church of God would surely feel the Master's dissappointment,

''Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, ,'' (Amos 6:1)​

 

[Michael Snow]

"A Call to Holy Living" by Charles Spurgeon helps us to focus on the key issue.