# Revivals...



## J. Dean (Jun 8, 2011)

Are revivals really scriptural?

Before you answer, let me explain: the Arminian church I attend is pushing these revival (or as they like to say, "spiritual renewal") services in a couple of weeks, and having had plenty of previous experience in this sort of thing in the pentecostal and Nazarene church, I know what's going to happen: a spurious time of emotionalism and running down the aisles followed by a heightened level of pietism that eventually fades off into mundane life, which in turn is deemed to be bad because the emotional high is gone.

Thank God in heaven that my wife and I will be in a Reformed service that Sunday (see my prayer request thread if you don't know the story), and I'll be sitting under good, solid preaching. 

But it raises questions with revivals. And I mean this: if a church minister is doing his job preaching as he should, is a "revival" necessary? Maybe it's because of the bad experiences I've had with revivals, but it seems to me as if there's far too much made out of the "run down the aisle and blubber your eyes out" experience. And if you're not doing this Pietism-lite exercise, you should question your salvation (at least, that's often the impression I get, especially while in the Assemblies of God).

Now, don't get me wrong: often I've been moved in the Spirit during church, or during reading the Bible or in prayer, and it moves me to thank God spontaneously (though not in a "look-at-me" manner) or drop to my knees confessing sin. Emotions can and do accompany a real walk with God. But are we really to seek after that emotional response?

I noticed, by the way, that Edwards, Whitfield, and Wesley did not call the Great Awakening a "revival;" that term does not become en vogue until Charles Finney comes along (Yes, I realize Wesley was an Arminian, but even he would have been repulsed by Finney's theology and techniques). It's associated with his man-centered Pelagian theology and antics, and it's most unfortunate that later generations latch on to his methods.

When I read a sermon from somebody like Spurgeon, or the work of J.C. Ryle, or of Puritans like Gurnall or Owen or Watson or Rutherford, it's as if EVERY sermon or point is made for the purpose of maintaining the Christian walk, every moment, every day. At the risk of sounding too harsh, sometimes I wonder whether modern preachers call for revival because they are not delivering the Word from the pulpit as they should be.

So, what do you think? Are revivals and revivalism what the church needs, or are they a sign of deficiency in the church?


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jun 8, 2011)

First I don't think Finney was Arminian. He was semi-Pelagian at best.

Second, the church needs the three marks, not theatrics.


----------



## CharlieJ (Jun 8, 2011)

J. Dean said:


> So, what do you think? Are revivals and revivalism what the church needs, or are they a sign of deficiency in the church?



That last question is interesting. I wonder if there have ever been revival services without the accompanying rhetoric of decline. All the revivals I've ever attended stressed the need to re-cover, to re-awaken, to re-dedicate. It's as though the church is admitting it's not healthy. It also raises the question what a "backsliding" person should do if there's not a revival coming soon on the schedule.


----------



## Andres (Jun 8, 2011)

J. Dean said:


> Are revivals really scriptural?





J. Dean said:


> I know what's going to happen: a spurious time of emotionalism and running down the aisles followed by a heightened level of pietism that eventually fades off into mundane life, which in turn is deemed to be bad because the emotional high is gone.



You seem to have answered your own question sir.


----------



## Rufus (Jun 8, 2011)

Real revivals, different from man made revivals.


----------



## LeeJUk (Jun 8, 2011)

I would agree with practically all you said J. Dean. 

The thing you are describing is man-made so called revival. I would rather call that an evangelistic campaign or gospel mission rather than revival.
Revivals in history are to restore life that has been lost in the churches when really there is no alternative I think. I think revival needs to come when there is a lack of the word being preached deeply, faithfully, boldly and in the Spirit's power each sunday. 

I say with caution that revival wouldn't be necessary perhaps if the church was doing as it should in terms of preaching, evangelism, discipleship and holiness. Revival is what brings those elements back into their new testament level/standard when it's been lost.


----------



## Bill Hier (Jun 8, 2011)

I tend to think revivals are exactly what you described them as:

```
a spurious time of emotionalism and running down the aisles followed by a heightened level of pietism that eventually fades off into mundane life, which in turn is deemed to be bad because the emotional high is gone.
```

I have never known of any that actually produced more New Testament, Bible believing Christians, all have been based upon the methods of Finney, who I would say calling a semi-Pelagian to be a compliment; he was a heretic of the highest order, fully Pelagian, and more (in a bad way).


----------



## J. Dean (Jun 9, 2011)

Thank you gentlemen. You've confirmed what I suspected.

It's funny, because I was in a Christian band in my younger days, and our singer INSISTED on an altar call, every concert, every time. He gave off this impression that people couldn't be saved unless they walked forward (Ironically, he started having the entire audience come forward at the end of every concert for "worship." We didn't have really big crowds). Once, I was the speaker at the end, and didn't give one. I explained the gospel, prayed, and that was more or less it. You would have thought from the cool reactions I got from the other band members that I had done something horrible on stage. 

Anyway, feel free to give other thoughts or share experiences you might have had with this stuff. And thanks again. This board really is a breath of fresh air!


----------



## Rich Koster (Jun 9, 2011)

Read Revival & Revivalism by Iain Murray.


----------



## J. Dean (Jun 9, 2011)

Rich Koster said:


> Read Revival & Revivalism by Iain Murray.


 
I've seen that book and have considered getting it. After reading it, I plan on submitting it to the church


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 9, 2011)

*A few scattered thoughts:*

-Many churches don't need _*RE*_vival; they need VIVAL. They aren't just back-slidden...they've never slid forward in the first place.

-All true awakenings have false fruit sown in by Satan; we shouldn't doubt the true wheat due to the tares that the Devil sows. The Finneyites err, but so do those that doubt that revivals do exist and that they are needed. 

-Revivals always seem preceded by urgent and corporate prayer. While it is true that we cannot schedule a "revival" in our church (only the Spirit can make such a schedule) we CAN schedule dedicated times of urgent and corporate prayer.


----------

