C
child of Jesus
Guest
Q: are the doctrinal foundations of The Holiness Movement sound?
Q: subsequently, do the movements which found their origins in it have sound doctrinal foundations?
Q: specifically which doctrines may be unsound? please elaborate, documenting in Scripture if possible.
[this is open to all: supportive and critical. please link to sources you are familiar with - for assisting others in their own assessments]
.......................
The Holiness movement
is an American off-shoot of Methodism which generally follows the Arminian doctrinal teachings of John Wesley. Holiness Christians left Methodism in the 19th and early 20th centuries because they felt that mainstream Methodism was failing to emphasize Wesleyan teachings on sanctification, particularly the experience of Christian Perfection, which Holiness theologians usually refer to as entire sanctification, following Wesley's colleague John Fletcher. Among the more notable Holiness bodies are the Church of the Nazarene and the Salvation Army.
theopedia
The Holiness movement
The traditional holiness movement is distinct from the Pentecostal movement, which believes that receiving the Holy Spirit involves speaking in tongues. Indeed, many of the early Pentecostals were from holiness movement, and to this day many "classical Pentecostals" maintain much of holiness doctrine and many of its devotional practices. (Oneness Pentecostals, such as the United Pentecostal Church, still largely adhere to these "standards.") Additionally, the terms Pentecostal and apostolic, now used by adherents to Pentecostal and charismatic doctrine, were once widely used by Holiness churches in connection with the consecrated lifestyle described in the New Testament.
However, Pentecostals add and emphasize that the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit is evidenced specifically by speaking in tongues, a position which churches in the traditional holiness movement do not accept. During the advent of Pentecostalism at Azusa Street, the practice of speaking in tongues was strongly rejected by leaders of the traditional holiness movement. Alma White, the leader of the Pillar of Fire Church, a holiness denomination, wrote a book against the Pentecostal movement that was published in 1936. The work entitled Demons and Tongues, represented early rejection of the new Pentecostal movement. White called speaking in tongues “satanic gibberish” and Pentecostal services “the climax of demon worship”.[2]
Nevertheless, many holiness churches and organizations joined the Pentecostal movement (e.g., the Church of God in Christ and the Pentecostal Holiness Church), accepting the Pentecostal teaching on speaking on tongues as a "third work" of grace, in addition to conversion and sanctification. As a result, Pentecostal churches in the Southeast and in the African-American community, are often called "holiness" and "sanctified" churches.
wikipedia
Q: subsequently, do the movements which found their origins in it have sound doctrinal foundations?
Q: specifically which doctrines may be unsound? please elaborate, documenting in Scripture if possible.
[this is open to all: supportive and critical. please link to sources you are familiar with - for assisting others in their own assessments]
.......................
The Holiness movement
is an American off-shoot of Methodism which generally follows the Arminian doctrinal teachings of John Wesley. Holiness Christians left Methodism in the 19th and early 20th centuries because they felt that mainstream Methodism was failing to emphasize Wesleyan teachings on sanctification, particularly the experience of Christian Perfection, which Holiness theologians usually refer to as entire sanctification, following Wesley's colleague John Fletcher. Among the more notable Holiness bodies are the Church of the Nazarene and the Salvation Army.
theopedia
The Holiness movement
The traditional holiness movement is distinct from the Pentecostal movement, which believes that receiving the Holy Spirit involves speaking in tongues. Indeed, many of the early Pentecostals were from holiness movement, and to this day many "classical Pentecostals" maintain much of holiness doctrine and many of its devotional practices. (Oneness Pentecostals, such as the United Pentecostal Church, still largely adhere to these "standards.") Additionally, the terms Pentecostal and apostolic, now used by adherents to Pentecostal and charismatic doctrine, were once widely used by Holiness churches in connection with the consecrated lifestyle described in the New Testament.
However, Pentecostals add and emphasize that the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit is evidenced specifically by speaking in tongues, a position which churches in the traditional holiness movement do not accept. During the advent of Pentecostalism at Azusa Street, the practice of speaking in tongues was strongly rejected by leaders of the traditional holiness movement. Alma White, the leader of the Pillar of Fire Church, a holiness denomination, wrote a book against the Pentecostal movement that was published in 1936. The work entitled Demons and Tongues, represented early rejection of the new Pentecostal movement. White called speaking in tongues “satanic gibberish” and Pentecostal services “the climax of demon worship”.[2]
Nevertheless, many holiness churches and organizations joined the Pentecostal movement (e.g., the Church of God in Christ and the Pentecostal Holiness Church), accepting the Pentecostal teaching on speaking on tongues as a "third work" of grace, in addition to conversion and sanctification. As a result, Pentecostal churches in the Southeast and in the African-American community, are often called "holiness" and "sanctified" churches.
wikipedia
Last edited:
), nice guy, always preaches Christ and tries to lead a holy life ... but it simply does not work.
