Posts tagged ‘sin’

And Now For Something Completely Different …

HOW A NICE JEWISH BOY FOUND JESUS IN THE YELLOW PAGES

This is the 100th post on A Heart That Burns, so I thought I would memorialize that by a different sort of post. I’d like to share my personal testimony of how I came to follow Jesus, and came to be involved with the Church of the Nazarene. May it give glory to God.

I was born into a Conservative Jewish household, and while I was still just a toddler, my family moved to Northern Illinois. There I spent most of my childhood. We attended a Conservative synagogue, and both my older brother and I went to Hebrew school and had bar mitzvahs (a rite of passage into manhood) at the age of 13. But oddly enough for all that, I don’t ever remember a single discussion my family had about God.

The year after my bar mitzvah we moved to Kentucky — not exactly known as a hotbed of Jewish cultural life — and as a result I had little further practice of my Judaism. As I entered high school I began to rebel against my parents and most other authorities in my life. By the time I was a sophomore I was in full-scale rebellion. I acted very tough, and looked it too — with long hair and a leather jacket. Inside I was scared. I hung out with the “wrong crowd”, and I was soon drinking, smoking, and doing as many drugs as I could. Through high school and college I continued to struggle with substance abuse and alcoholism, finally getting clean and sober right before graduation from college . I drifted from one thing to another, trying to find some focus for my life. I felt only confusion, rage, and turmoil inside of me. I was desperately unhappy, and in complete denial of that unhappiness.

By my mid-20’s something had to change. I had been out in the workplace for several years and had just taken a new job in a new city. I felt an urge to reconnect to my Jewish roots, so I decided to find a synagogue. Not knowing the city well, I opened up the Yellow Pages to see if I could find one that I felt able to locate easily. The one I picked said in its ad, “Messianic” and “Proclaiming Yeshua as the Jewish Messiah.” These things meant nothing to me at the time, but I sure had a surprise coming. Little did I know that I had just found Jesus in the Yellow Pages!

I still remember the first night at that synagogue. Imagine how shocked I was to find that I had ended up at a Messianic congregation — a place where there were Jewish and Gentile people who worshiped Jesus together! They called him “Yeshua,” his Hebrew name. The people I met on that very first night were like none I had ever known before. They were so warm and welcoming. They seemed to really be happy to meet me, and they were obviously at peace within themselves. I compared this to my own inner turmoil, and I wanted what they had!

I began attending the synagogue and studying the Bible. One day I was shown some verses from Isaiah 53. The words seemed to point clearly to Jesus. That night, for the first time ever, I got on my knees and prayed.

“God, ” I asked, “can this be true? Can Yeshua be the Messiah?” I prayed for almost two weeks, and then He answered my prayer. A few days later, in November, 1997, I prayed once again, this time to receive Jesus as my personal Savior and Lord. At last I had peace within, for the first time. I grew swiftly in my newfound faith, and continued to devour the Word. I soon felt that God was calling me to serve Him, and that it wasn’t enough merely that I as a Jew had come to know my Messiah — the Lord wanted me to tell other Jewish people about Jesus.

In late 1999 I began to pursue this call as a domestic missionary with the ministry of Jews for Jesus, the largest mission to Jews worldwide. For eight years I did street evangelism, led bible studies, discipled individual Jewish people, spoke frequently in churches on subjects such as the Feasts of Israel and Jewish evangelism, and traveled as a member of the ministry’s music/evangelism team. At the end of this time, due to the illness of a family member, my wife and I left Jews for Jesus.

We began to attend the local Church of the Nazarene, where the pastor strongly urged me to seek God as to whether His call on me was finished. Acknowledging that His call hadn’t ended, but the form of the call had changed, I began my current journey towards ordination as an elder in the Church of the Nazarene. I continue to praise Jesus daily for all He has already done in my life, and all that I know He will accomplish in the future.

Advertisements

From the Archives: Quacking Like A Duck

The following post was originally published on July, 2010

You’ve probably heard the old saw, “if it looks like a duck and quacks like a  duck, it must be a duck!” One might think that this applies to Christianity as  easily as anything else, but this isn’t so. There are many who might claim  the name of Christian and fill your ears with language that sure makes  it sound like they are living the Christian life. I wonder if this isn’t mere  quacking, though. There’s much more than simply proclaiming oneself a  Christian and learning some phrases and words. Consider the following:

But the most common of all the enthusiasts of this kind are those  who imagine themselves Christians, and are not. These abound, not  only in all parts of our land, but in most parts of the habitable  earth. That they are not Christians, is clear and undeniable, if we  believe the oracles of God. For Christians are holy; these are unholy: Christians love God; these love the world: Christians are humble; these are proud: Christians are gentle; these are passionate; Christians have the mind which was in Christ; these are at the utmost distance from it. Consequently, they are no more Christians, than they are archangels. Yet they imagine themselves so to be; and they can give several reasons for it: for they have been called so ever since they can remember; they were christened many years ago; they embrace the Christian opinions, vulgarly termed the Christian or catholic faith; they use the Christian modes of worship, as their fathers did before them; they live what is called a good Christian life, as the rest of their neighbours do. And who shall presume to think or say that these men are not Christians? — though without one grain of true faith in Christ, or of real, inward holiness; without ever having tasted the love of God, or been “made partakers of the Holy Ghost!” — John Wesley, Sermon 37, “On the Nature of Enthusiasm”

Wesley was pretty adamant regarding inner holiness instead of outward display. Why such emphasis on holiness? Pastor Dale Tedder over at Shepherding Souls points out that in the New Testament alone, the word “holy” is applied to over 20 different things:

  • Holy angels
  • Holy servant
  • Holy Father
  • Holy One
  • Holy ones
  • Holy man
  • Holy Spirit
  • Holy temple
  • Holy ground
  • Holy place
  • Holy kiss
  • Holy law
  • Holy brothers
  • Holy scriptures
  • Holy hands
  • Holy people
  • Holy priesthood
  • Holy fear
  • Holy nation
  • Holy women
  • Holy prophets
  • Holy faith, and
  • Holy city

As someone raised in a Jewish household, who came to faith at a Messianic Jewish congregation, the concept of being holy has been something I’ve easily understood during my Christian walk.

“For I am the LORD who brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God; thus you shall be holy,for I am holy.”Leviticus 11:45

In choosing the Jewish people as His own, the Lord called them to be holy as he was holy. How could the children of Israel, the Chosen People, teach the world of His glory  if they didn’t reflect an image of His holiness? The same holds true for the Church today. If we who call ourselves Christians do not live a life which is markedly different from those who do not know Jesus, what possible separation will the world see between us? My denomination — the Church of the Nazarene — has always been characterized by a devotion to holiness in living, a dedication to entire sanctification (Wesley’s concept of Christian perfection, which I’ve blogged on previously).

If Christians will not seek to turn away from the things which make us unholy, whether it is things we see or read or think about or say, are we the voice of Christ in this fallen world, or are we just quacking like ducks?

Whose Justice?

In 1995, I was a public school teacher. My afternoon classes were interrupted on the afternoon of October 3, when the principal at my middle school came over the PA system to announce that a “not guilty” verdict had been issued in the O.J. Simpson murder trial. Absolute pandemonium broke loose, as even my sixth-grade students howled with outrage at what seemed an unjust and unbelievable verdict.

Yesterday, I experienced a heart-stopping emotional flashback to that day, when a similar verdict was handed down in the Casey Anthony trial. Anthony, in case you don’t follow any news at all, is the young woman who was on trial for the alleged 2008 murder of her two-year old daughter Caylee. After a much publicized trial — and to much surprise — a jury found her not guilty of any of the charges against her related to the murder of the toddler.

I’ll admit that like many, my initial reaction was anger. It makes me sick to my stomach that someone who by all appearances seems to have murdered their child will go scot-free. Like many, I was forced to ask, “where is justice?” Now that I have had time to absorb and more importantly, time to pray, I realize I have asked the wrong question. My question should have been, “Whose justice has been served – man’s or God’s?”

How you answer this question depends on which of two camps you might fall into:

  • You feel that justice hasn’t been served and you are angry. If you are in this camp, you probably feel sick inside, just as I did when the verdict was announced. Your internal sense of justice screams that something more needed to be done about  the fact that a little girl was murdered and her body dumped in swamp like garbage.
  • You are upset that other Christians are angry. If you are in this camp, your internal sense of grace is loudly telling you to ask those who are screaming for Casey Anthony’s head why they are not willing to extend a grace that they received. After all, justice would be for you and me to die for our sins, yet instead we received God’s forgiveness. Who, then ,are we to demand justice?

After a day spent working through my own emotions and thoughts, here are some observations on this subject. I pray these might help you to put things in perspective if you are wrestling with how you personally should feel about the Casey Anthony verdict.

  • It is right to have strong emotions about events such as this.  In 1 Samuel 13:14, David is described as a man after God’s own heart. This was the result of David seeking to have emotions like God’s own emotions. When we commit to following Christ, it is essential for us to do as David did, and cultivate hearts that feel as God does towards people and circumstances.
  • There is nothing wrong with desiring  justice. One of the most frequent admonitions found in Scripture is that we be people who love justice. Scripture calls over and over for the wicked to receive punishment that is proportionate to their crimes or sins. Romans 13:1-7 is a clear call for us to allow the administration of justice on earth to be in the hands of human governments, who are to “punish those who do wrong,” as per 1 Peter 2:14 .
  • Grace and justice serve the same ends. As I’ve observed the reactions of fellow Christians during the last 24 hours or so, one thing I have taken note of is an attitude of “either/or” that seems to be present. Either justice must be served (meaning that crimes/sins are punished) OR grace must be given (meaning forgiveness is extended). But grace and justice go hand in hand; if you have no sense that wrongs must be punished, you’ll never feel that anything needs to be forgiven.
  • Overriding all else, it is offensive to the Gospel itself if we do not pray for and earnestly desire Casey Anthony’s salvation. If what goes through our heads in this tragic set of circumstances is more of “I want to see her get what she deserves” than “Lord, may your salvation come to her,” then we reveal that we have hearts that are wicked, not hearts full of the grace of God that was extended to us through the Gospel in Christ. In fact, to do other than pray for her salvation is sin, as Jesus himself made clear through Matthew 5:21-22 “You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire.”

At this point, regardless of whether the preponderance of evidence points to it, no one can say for certain whether Casey Anthony murdered her own daughter. We may never know for certain who did. That is Man’s justice. But God’s justice is so much bigger than that. If she did murder little Caylee, our hearts can find a place of peace in the knowledge that God’s justice is centered on a grace so deep that God gave up His own Son that we might find forgiveness. God’s justice has been accomplished already at the foot of the cross. If the person who murdered Caylee Anthony trusts in Christ, then God’s wrath for the crime was already poured out on Calvary and His justice was done. If that person does not trust in Christ, then we can be certain that a future Judgement yet awaits, in which the administration of God’s justice will be done.

Zombie Land – Guest Post by Jeff Skinner

This guest post is by Jeff Skinner, a Nazarene church planter and pastor of EaglePointe Church of the Nazarene in Auburn, Alabama. I met Jeff when we took a preaching course together at Trevecca Nazarene University, where we’re both studying for Master’s degrees. I know Jeff to be an inventive preacher who manages to be both whimsical and entertaining without ever sacrificing solid Biblical teaching or core Wesleyan doctrines. He’d be the first to tell you that taking too many graduate courses at the same time may turn him into a zombie. 

 It seems these days zombies and vampires are all the rage. While I have not  seen any college  courses on vampires, I have seen a few on zombies. Columbia  University has a course  entitled,  “Zombies in Popular Movies.”  Baltimore  University has an English 33 course on  Zombies.  There is even an Ipad app:  “Plants vs. Zombies”. Xbox, Wii, PS3, all of them have  Zombie  themed games.  Even the Disney Channel is even getting in the Zombie action. One of  their  popular shows had a “zombie dance.”  Zombies appeared in the latest  installment  of The  Pirates of the Caribbean film franchise, “On Stranger  Tides.”  There seems to be a  fascination  with zombies.

I know what you’re thinking, “What do zombies and burning hearts have in  common?” Well it turns out a good bit. In the beginning we were created  in the image of God (Imago Dei). In other words YHWH took a lump of clay and sculpted it into His own image. We are sculpted by the hands of YHWH as a testimony to the greatness of Him. Other kings had graven images/idols made in their honor, but those were made of wood, gold or something else.  Humanity was made out of flesh and blood. Humans are living, breathing, willing testimonies to our Creator. This is quite the contrast to other graven images.

You know the story. Humanity sinned and that perfect image of YHWH called human, was no longer human. Adam blames both God and Eve for his sin and Eve blames God’s creation (Genesis 3:12-13). As a result of this “fall,” our relationship with God, each other, and creation was broken. One might say the result for humanity was we became zombies — sub human. From that point forward humanity would devour everything in its path–especially each other.

Centuries later YHWH made a new relationship with Abraham. Every man child would circumcise the flesh of his foreskin at eight days old as a token of the covenant between YHWH and Abraham. This would be the beginning of the restoration of our humanity.

Then through Jeremiah the Lord told His people:

 31The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.32It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt—a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord.33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people  (Jeremiah 31:31-33).

In effect, this would be the circumcision of their heart.

For Wesley, circumcision of the heart was a spiritual circumcision that removed our inclination to sin. The circumcision of the heart is “a right state of soul: ‘a mind and spirit renewed after the image that created it,’ is one of those important truths that can be ‘spiritually discerned.’”  No longer would humanity be relegated to the class of the “walking dead.”  Our image of YHWH is fully restored; making us fully human again. This is what we in the holiness movement call entire Sanctification.

I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full (John 10:10b).

It is not the will of YHWH for His creation to walk around in a zombie-like existence, devouring everything in our paths. It is His desire for us to live; not merely exist. Unfortunately millions of people choose to exist as zombies instead of living life to its fullest. In the West we are even proud of this zombie existence, referring to ourselves as “consumers.” But once you have tasted life, you will never be happy with your inhumanity.

“O taste and see that the LORD is good; how blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him” (Psalm 34:8).

Altar Theology or Altered Theology? – Part Two

Theological differences become apparent swiftly when the teachings of Phoebe Palmer on entire sanctification are contrasted with John Wesley’s own. In stark contrast to Wesley’s vision of a lengthy, often difficult effort concluding with sanctification, Palmer expressed sanctification as a state of being that all believers could achieve in an instant. This was a viewpoint that Wesley had specifically warned against, as can be seen in the Minutes of the Methodist Conference (1771). Charles White has identified six primary areas in which Palmer departs from Wesleyan views of entire sanctification.

The first of these is that she equates entire sanctification with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Second, Palmer equated holiness with power. Palmer saw entire sanctification as a means by which the sanctified Christian was given power for a life of service in behalf of God and others.

Third, she focused on the instantaneousness of entire sanctification, having little or nothing to say about any progressive growth in grace either before or after sanctification. Palmer’s reasoning was that “whatever my former deficiencies may have been, God requires that I should now be holy … God requires present holiness.” Palmer’s logic was that this “shorter way” was not just possible but a reality, because God would not withhold something that he had required of the individual Christian. In her outlook, Palmer seems to have followed Charles G. Finney, whom Ivan Howard notes “held that entire sanctification could be received at any time, whenever one appropriated Christ by faith.”

The fourth way in which Palmer deviated from Wesley was that she taught sanctification as the beginning of the Christian life, not the goal of it as Wesley had done. Mark Mann notes that Palmer “came to view full holiness as the duty of all Christians, thereby substantially deflating the importance of justification and the new birth (against which Wesley himself had warned). Related to this, Palmer came to emphasize Christian perfection as a grace normally available early in one’s spiritual growth, even as early as a couple hours after one’s conversion.” Such a view of holiness inevitably would lead one to the conclusion that to doubt in entire sanctification would be amiss to sin, and Palmer certainly articulated such to her followers.

“What you need, in order to bring you into this state, is an offering up of yourself through this purifying medium. Now do you still ask, How soon may I expect to arrive at this state of perfection? Just so soon as you come believingly, and make the required sacrifice, it will be done unto you according to your faith….When the Savior said, “It is finished!” then this full salvation was wrought out for you. All that remains is for you to come complying with the conditions, and claim it…it is already yours. If you do not now receive it, the delay will not be on the part of God, but wholly with yourself. … And now my dear K, if you will resolve to let faith depend on the word of God, and not upon your uncertain feelings, your difficulties will all be at an end.”

The fifth difference which White identifies is Palmer’s promulgation of what became labeled as “altar theology,” a concept she drew from Exodus 29:37.

“The acceptance of the gift [of entire sanctification] does not depend on the worthiness of the offerer or the greatness of the gift, but upon the sanctity of the altar: Matt. 23:19, “For whether is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?” It is by virtue of the altar upon which the offering is laid that the gift is sanctified: Exod. 29:37, “And it shall be an altar most holy: whatsoever touches the altar shall be holy.” Christ is the Christian’s altar.”

This altar theology compacted entire sanctification into a process of three steps: an act of entire consecration in which one placed one’s all on the altar, faith in God’s promise of sanctification, and giving public testimony to sanctification. This last step Palmer viewed as a necessity due to the order of God not being fully met until confession was made with the mouth.

The sixth divergence from Wesley’s teachings that is noted by White is that Palmer posited that there was no further evidence needed for the assurance of entire sanctification than Scripture itself. She wrote, “God did not require … anything but what was thoroughly substantiated by the requirements of his written word.” Palmer eschewed any evidence of sanctification in the form of the witness of the Spirit (which Wesley had insisted was vital as an assurance of entire sanctification), writing, “What is the evidence of entire sanctification? … How might an offerer at the Jewish altar arrive at an evidence that his offering was sanctified? In the first place, God had explicitly made known just the sacrifice required, and the manner in which it should be presented. If the offerer had complied with these requirements, he, of course, knew he had done so.”

Although these differences in theology might seem trivial to some, Randy Maddox has demonstrated that John Wesley had spoken quite strongly against each one of the modifications that Phoebe Palmer would make to the doctrine of entire sanctification.  Hardly trivial, Palmer’s alterations in fact caused a theological dissonance in holiness teaching, one that has lasted to the present day and continues to cause serious problems for the Holiness movement. The crux of the problem is that the Holiness movement has since its inception been playing an internal tug-of-war over the matter of its own identity. Is it a Wesleyan identity, or a Palmerian identity? This tension of identity is likely to be one of the reasons for the loss of a laity truly educated in holiness; a problem that Keith Drury has argued has contributed to the death of the Holiness movement as a movement.

In Part Three, I will address the consequences of the identity crisis in the Holiness movement.

Altar Theology or Altered Theology? – Part One

There is perhaps no doctrine as closely associated with the holiness movement as that of entire sanctification. It is undisputable that this is a teaching that the holiness movement owes to John Wesley. Entire sanctification – or Christian perfection, as Wesley referred to it – was central to Wesley’s personal spiritual growth and the development of the 18th-century Methodist movement. Thomas Jay Oord recently pointed out that more than eighty Christian denominations today – among them the United Methodist Church, the Salvation Army, the Free Methodist Church, the Church of God (Anderson), and the Church of the Nazarene – consider Wesley to be their primary theological ancestor, which makes it hugely important that entire sanctification be defined precisely.

When Methodism came to America in the late 18th-century, it grew numerically yet departed from perfectionist teaching as a priority, causing it to suffer spiritually as a denomination. During the 19th-century holiness revival, entire sanctification once more regained its status, due primarily to the ministry of Phoebe Worrall Palmer (whom I’ve previously written about here). Randall J. Stephens credits the success of the holiness movement, particularly in the pre-Civil War north, mostly to her efforts. Yet even as Palmer introduced thousands to the concept of entire sanctification (through her Tuesday Meetings for the Promotion of Holiness and her prolific writings), she represented a divergence from pure Wesleyan teaching. Over the next few posts, I’ll be exploring the argument that Mrs. Palmer’s teaching on entire sanctification – her  “altar theology” – was in fact an altered theology of entire sanctification, to examine the consequences of that for the Holiness movement, and to briefly examine possible solutions for the problems caused by those consequences.

In this first post I’ll be discussing precisely what John Wesley taught regarding entire sanctification or, as he termed it, Christian perfection. By his own report, Wesley’s insights grew out of his readings of Jeremy Taylor, Thomas à Kempis, and William Law. Taylor and Kempis convinced Wesley of the importance of purity of intention and the giving all of one’s heart to God, but it was Law’s Treatise on Christian Perfection and Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life which had the greatest impact.

“Meeting now with Mr. Law’s Christian Perfection and Serious Call, although I was much offended at many parts of both, yet they convinced me more than ever of the exceeding height and breadth and depth of the law of God. The light flowed in upon my soul, that everything appeared in a new view. I cried to God for help, and resolved not to prolong the time of obeying Him as I had never done before. And by continued endeavor to keep His whole law, inward and outward, to the utmost of my power, I was persuaded that should be accepted of Him, and that I was even then in a state of salvation.”

Devotional material such as this, in addition to the Bible, was the source from which Wesley’s doctrine of Christian perfection was deduced. As early as 1733, it is possible to see the seeds of this had begun to sprout, particularly in Wesley’s sermon on “The Circumcision of the Heart.” Here Wesley begins to describe love as the essence of perfection, describing it as, “that habitual disposition of soul which, in the sacred writings, is termed holiness; and which directly implies, the being cleansed from sin, “from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit;” and, by consequence, the being endued with those virtues which were also in Christ Jesus; the being so “renewed in the spirit of our mind,” as to be “perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect.”

Early in his career, Wesley viewed sanctification as something to be achieved instantaneously, yet later in life he would admit that he had confused the consequences of the new birth (i.e., justification) with those of perfection (i.e., entire sanctification). By the time he published the first edition of A Plain Account of Christian Perfection in 1766, Wesley’s views had solidified into the avowal that God had given the promise of salvation from willful sin. Wesley found this promise in passages such as Deuteronomy 30:6; Psalm 130:8; Ezekiel 36:25, 29; Matthew 5:48, 6:13, 22:37; John 3:8, 17:20-21, 23; Romans 8:3-4; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Ephesians 3:14-19, 5:25, 27; and Thessalonians 5:23.  Further, Wesley held that Scriptures such as Luke 1:69-75, Titus 2:11-14, and 1 John 4:17 gave signs that this promise of sanctification was to take place within the lifetime of the individual Christian.

Melvin Dieter has noted that Wesley detailed features of this sanctification in his sermon “On Perfection,” which included:

1. To love God with all one’s heart and one’s neighbors as oneself;

2. To have the mind that is in Christ;

3. To bear the fruit of the Spirit (in accordance with Gal. 5);

4. The restoration of the image of God in the soul, a recovery of man to the moral image of God, which consists of “righteousness and true holiness”;

5. Inward and outward righteousness, “holiness of life issuing from holiness of heart”;

6. God’s sanctifying of the person in spirit, soul, and body”;

7. The person’s own perfect consecration to God;

8. A continuous presentation through Jesus of the individual’s thoughts, words, and actions as a sacrifice to God of praise and thanksgiving;

9. Salvation from all sin.”

It is quite evident that Wesley saw entire sanctification as the conclusion of a developmental process, setting “a point after justification as a terminus a quo and a point, however indefinite, sometime before death as a terminus a quem.” Wesley at times had to combat his own earlier views on sanctification as occurring instantaneously with justification. In A Plain Account of Christian Perfection he clearly argues against this, saying, “Yet we may, lastly, observe, that neither in this respect is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees, as it is termed; none which does not admit of a continual increase. So that how much soever he is perfect, he hath still need to ‘grow in grace,’ and daily to advance in the knowledge and love of God his savior.”

Wesley’s view on sanctification can be summarized as a gradual yet dynamic process, not as a state that once reached remained unchanged. His teaching did not disavow that sanctification could be instantaneous but he did not see it as typical based on his gathering of the testimonies of many who had claimed the experience. Wesleyan scholar Randy Maddox views this confirmation through the experience of the individual Christian, as well as the attestation of the fruit of the Spirit in the life of the believer, as crucial to Wesley’s doctrine of Christian perfection as being a relation of love for God and others. Ultimately, for Wesley entire sanctification was understood – as Paul Bassett has expressed it – as “the perfecting threshold. Now the life of Christian perfection begins. One does not seek to become more perfect. One seeks, by grace, to express more clearly the gift of perfection that has been given.

In Part Two, I’ll be exploring Phoebe Palmer’s theology of entire sanctification

Passover and Holiness, Part 2

In Exodus 12, we read of the institution of the Passover feast. In addition to the lamb, we see  another item that the Lord commands to be eaten during the celebration of Passover.

 “Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread; on the first day you shall remove leaven  from your houses, for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the  seventh day shall be cut off from Israel. On the first day you shall hold a solemn  assembly, and on the seventh day a solemn assembly; no work shall be done on those  days; only what everyone must eat, that alone may be prepared by you. You shall observe the festival of unleavened bread, for on this very day I brought your companies out of the land of Egypt: you shall observe this day throughout your generations as a perpetual ordinance. In the first month, from the evening of the fourteenth day until the evening of the twenty-first day, you shall eat unleavened bread. For seven days no leaven shall be found in your houses; for whoever eats what is leavened shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether an alien or a native of the land. You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your settlements you shall eat unleavened bread.” (Exodus 12:5-20)

The eating of unleavened bread — in Hebrew matzah — is a separate holiday called the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Today the observation of the two feasts are not seen as separate, with the Feast of Unleavened Bread beginning on the first night of Passover. Exodus tells us that the Israelites left Egypt in such haste that their bread had no time to rise — in other words, it was not leavened.

In Scripture, leaven is often used to symbolize sin, such as in Paul’s admonition to the Galatians.

“A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.” (Galatians 5:9)

Leaven is what caused the dough to rise. In the same fashion, sin causes us to rise in our own estimation. When the leaven of sin is in our lives, we become unable to make Jesus our primary focus. Leaven is the enemy of holiness. During Passover, ceasing to eat leaven is a way of saying we wish to remove sin from our lives. In fact, when Orthodox Jewish families prepare to celebrate Passover, they often spend up to 6 weeks prior to the holiday cleaning their house and ensuring there is no leaven within. Perhaps this is why Paul wrote to the Corinthian church,

“Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” (1 Corinthians 5:7-8)

Is there leaven in your life? If so, what will it take to clear it out?

%d bloggers like this: