It's humid today in Pennsylvania, downright soupy. In fact, the air's so thick, if God was minded to, he could drop a big wooden spoon out of the heavenlies and give everything a good stir. Maybe that's just what we need--a heavenly stirring! A whirling breeze exchanging the stale for the fresh, the energy of air on the move, roiling up the grace of new savors throughout the pot. As much as a change in the weather of wind and air would be nice, a change in the weather of Spirit would be even nicer.
Am I longing for revival? Perhaps, but there are some drawbacks that make me pause. Revivals have occurred frequently throughout the age of the church, so much so, that we can look at their characteristics and make some observations. There are some negatives!
Revivals fade. Generally speaking, they last for for about 3-6 years, and then, in about the same amount of time, whatever spiritual impact they've made on society has vanished, like the Titanic on the northern Atlantic. It might have been a big deal while it was afloat, but there wasn't even an oil slick marking it's passing shortly thereafter.
Revivals spoil the taste of their participants. Like candy does before a meal, revival makes everything else, even of substance, seem tasteless. The intensity and excitement of the revival experience hooks the desire of the participant like heroin does the addict. Afterwards ennui sets in, and the one revived becomes bored with, even critical of, the taste of life in the interregnum between revivals.
Revivals infect people with a self-centered spirituality. Participants become like kids in an amusement park. They bounce from one thing to the next looking for a bigger thrill. Experiences are compared on the basis of the thrill delivered. Preachers transform into carnival barkers, cheerleading about the rush to be felt at their meetings. Some turn into reverse-engineers trying to replicate and improve the thrill gotten at another venue. Spirituality riding on a roller coaster!
Revival displaces Jesus as the object of one's affections. Idolatry pure and simple: some of the "revived" relish revival more than they do friendship with Jesus! Their eyes on not fixed on the author and perfecter, but on the next possibility of revival.
Then, I look up from this soup, flicking my hands in frustration, spattering the world around me with sweat and tears, and realize just how badly we need a stirring. Our biggest thrill should be knowing the King of Glory personally, as a friend, rather than the gifts he lavishes on us, but we're thrilled with little if anything at all. Something's gotta change!
We could use some renewing:
A new start of obedience;
A fresh dedication to sharpening one another;
A new sensitivity to the Holy Spirit;
A new enthusiasm for knowing Christ personally;
A new hunger for making Him known to others.
All things being equal, I guess my hope is that God would bring out the big wooden spoon and stir up a revival.
Am I longing for revival? Perhaps, but there are some drawbacks that make me pause. Revivals have occurred frequently throughout the age of the church, so much so, that we can look at their characteristics and make some observations. There are some negatives!
Revivals fade. Generally speaking, they last for for about 3-6 years, and then, in about the same amount of time, whatever spiritual impact they've made on society has vanished, like the Titanic on the northern Atlantic. It might have been a big deal while it was afloat, but there wasn't even an oil slick marking it's passing shortly thereafter.
Revivals spoil the taste of their participants. Like candy does before a meal, revival makes everything else, even of substance, seem tasteless. The intensity and excitement of the revival experience hooks the desire of the participant like heroin does the addict. Afterwards ennui sets in, and the one revived becomes bored with, even critical of, the taste of life in the interregnum between revivals.
Revivals infect people with a self-centered spirituality. Participants become like kids in an amusement park. They bounce from one thing to the next looking for a bigger thrill. Experiences are compared on the basis of the thrill delivered. Preachers transform into carnival barkers, cheerleading about the rush to be felt at their meetings. Some turn into reverse-engineers trying to replicate and improve the thrill gotten at another venue. Spirituality riding on a roller coaster!
Revival displaces Jesus as the object of one's affections. Idolatry pure and simple: some of the "revived" relish revival more than they do friendship with Jesus! Their eyes on not fixed on the author and perfecter, but on the next possibility of revival.
Then, I look up from this soup, flicking my hands in frustration, spattering the world around me with sweat and tears, and realize just how badly we need a stirring. Our biggest thrill should be knowing the King of Glory personally, as a friend, rather than the gifts he lavishes on us, but we're thrilled with little if anything at all. Something's gotta change!
We could use some renewing:
A new start of obedience;
A fresh dedication to sharpening one another;
A new sensitivity to the Holy Spirit;
A new enthusiasm for knowing Christ personally;
A new hunger for making Him known to others.
All things being equal, I guess my hope is that God would bring out the big wooden spoon and stir up a revival.
6 comments:
I've been mulling over for some time whether there should be a difference between revival and harvest? I fear that we've become religious about revival.
To be revived is to be brought back to fullness of life. There's no doubt that the church needs that. But the author of life is Jesus. Nothing less. Nothing more. His revival should cause us to labour with renewed passion in the harvest field, but surely it is not the excitement of the harvest itself that revives us?
Harvest is a season. When it is over it is time to prepare the ground again, to pull up / burn the stubble, and to plough, and then to sow, and then to water, and to wait, and only when the time is right to then reap another harvest. When we despise the season that we're in then we dishonour the author of the seasons - no wonder we need truly reviving.
Why can't we change our expectation? To live in a permanently revived state, abiding in the love of Jesus. Embrace every season with the same love for the Lord of the harvest and with the same willingness to labour. My suspicion is that we'll then see the cycle of the seasons getting shorter and shorter. We'll be permanently revived and we'll no longer associate the revived state with a specific season.
Or am I just a hopeless optimist?
Interesting thought about permanent harvest. I believe that Jesus chose His words with precision and harvests are seasonal. So the question is, is this present age the season, or are there natural rhythms or cycles within this present age?
Maybe the answer is ... yes! ... i.e. both!
It seems to me that the problem we have is that we assume the change of seasons is more to do with us than with the needs of the crop! We assume the time between harvests is for us to get our act together. But the agricultural society that Jesus spoke to about harvest would have recognised the need to burn the stubble, dig the fields, rotate the crops, sow, fertilise, water, scare off pests etc. if they were to reap a harvest later. They would also know which season they were in and that they had to do the required work for that season with the same commitment as at harvest if they were to see a harvest at all.
To be quite frank, it seems to me that most of us are lazy creatures who if we're in spring right now can't even see in our minds eye as far as harvest. Then when the barn is empty and we get hungry we cry out to God for it drop out of the sky. It's interesting that Jesus' first instruction to His followers was to put their hands to the plough, not to the scythe.
And one last thought. Our God sows out of season and He reaps out of season. So in all this talk of seasons we should always be sowing and reaping at every opportunity.
Was that a bit ranty for me? If so then maybe it's just coz I'm still processing!
slw, As you may have guessed, revival is one of my favorite subjects. The difference between Charles Finney and today's preachers(?)....a vast difference. Charles Finney stayed from weeks to months in one place that produced a lifetime of results before going to the next city. He had a persistence and determination that most modern day preachers do not have. The other key element of his ministry was prayer. Finney and his assistant, Father Nash, spent weeks of intense prayer prior to going into a town or city. Today's preacher prays an hour and thinks that is a lot. Also, Finney's preaching style was like none other. The conviction was so great that people either would be struck mute, go out in the spirit for hours or wail uncontrollably. Sometimes it was a busybody in the church, a prominent professor or city official in the community and even the backslidden pastor and his wife. I would have to check the sources but in Roberts Liardon's research he quoted individuals saying that Charles Finney saw the largest number (greater than 80%)of conversions who stayed true to the faith since the time of the apostle Paul. I have heard others unrelated to R. Lairdon say that as well. We have many copycats today who got poor results because they did not pay the same price as Finney and his associates.
I saw this same thing in the Word of Faith circles. Little Kenneth Hagins running around trying to produce the same results. There is a price to be paid...it is "line upon line, precept upon precept."
I would not take the word of someone else or their methods...read Charles Finney extensively for yourself. Then and only then do I think you will come away with a greater appreciation of his ministry. I, also, found the same with Kenneth Hagin...many critics who had never really read his writings at length...only taking bits and pieces and what others had said about him and then drawn the wrong conclusion about his life and ministry.
Mark H, I grew up on a real Kansas wheat farm (4th generation). If you take the literal agricultural use of the word, harvest, you have harvest in every season. In the spring, we harvested hay. In the summer we harvested wheat. In the fall we harvested milo and soybeans. And in the winter we harvested cattle...that was when all our baby calves were born. From my perspective, there is harvest in every season. Maybe that is why the "fields are white" in every season. The prep time to harvest of souls is ongoing, 24/7. In John 4:35, Jesus admonishes his disciples that they don't have four months to get ready for the harvest...the harvest is, now.
AmeriKan,
The last time our area experienced anything akin to revival was when Finney was here. I do appreciate the gift he had, and the things he was used to accomplish. I was first exposed to his writings when I was but a whelp in the Kingdom, through the Last Days Newsletter Keith Green published so many years ago. Finney's fire and dedication have always been impressive to me, I just wish he wouldn't have spent so much effort attempting to reduce the work of the Spirit to a humanly reproducible technique. I suppose I should wade through more of his writings, but it is hard getting past his statement that revival was "a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means." Is it possible to embrace the gift of the Spirit in a man without accepting his own analysis of it? I think in this instance I have to, for time has not, in my mind, shown that analysis was correct. His results certainly have not been replicated, no matter how hard his followers have tried to implement his findings.
As a student of revival, which side of the argument do you come down on: sovereign work of God or the results of methods properly applied?
slw, ["a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means"] I assume this is an accurate, direct quote of Finney's. First, you have to understand the time in which that was written...early 1800s and that Finney was a lawyer. (Maybe that is why I like pcsmythe so much:-) Finney's writings are not an easy read but well worth the digging into. The, "right use of the constituted means," could in his mind be prayer, as he was a great advocate of it and/or the delivery of the pulpiteer. His style was extemporaneous while his peers read their sermons. He has whole books...collections of sermons on the subject of revival. I'm not sure on this one phrase what Finney's intent was but it doesn't seem to be representative of what I believe he believes on the subject of revival. I am very familiar with Keith Green's Wisetracks...in fact, I am looking at two right now, Breaking Up The Fallow Ground and The Back-Slider In Heart. Finney's results and the manifestations of the the Holy Spirit in his meetings hardly seem like what one could say "were reproduceable" by man's efforts. Maybe in light of his methods to bring about the results he saw but that, again, goes back to his individual gifting and anointing and obedience.
Your last question is a very good one and an exciting one to answer...from my viewpoint. Now, depends on what methods you are talking about. It has been said that nothing happens but that prayer went before it. The longer I live, the more I believe that statement. Jesus came into the earth on the wings of prayer...Simeon's and Anna's (Luke 2). The Holy Ghost came to the earth on the wings of prayer in the upper room. William Seymour and Evan Roberts in their own words and writings prayed hours a day for their ultimate goal...revival. In Pensacola, there were women of the church who had walked the streets of Pensacola for two years praying for a move of God before the revival broke out. Would any of the above transpired without prayer...I'm not so sure they would have. I believe prayer in faith is the one thing that moves the heart of God more than anything else. Without going into a long drawn out affair here...I have been awakened in the night with a dream from the Lord and then instructed to pray for a situation on the other side of the earth in India that I knew absolutely nothing about. The next day I see it all over the TV on TBN. Two months later I meet a preacher from India I had never met before in my life. I felt prompted to tell him about the dream. He said, "Let me tell you what would have happened had you not prayed."
When I was much younger(20s) in my Christian walk, I was an ignorant novice. I thought anything and everything that took place was God's sovereign will. It wasn't until the middle to late 70s and I heard Kenneth Hagin for the first time and began to read his teachings that I understood that faith has a lot to do with what happens. To put it into a nutshell, God's sovereignty is only as good as the person who will take His Word and believe what it says. "Without faith it is impossible to please God." God may know we need revival but he will look for a person to move on in prayer ["stand in the gap" Ez. 22:29] to bring revival. So, the first revival...they prayed until it came...120 of them.
The bottom line is that in God's sovereignty, he will always work with man to accomplish His work in the earth. To the man who says, everything is sovereign, then why bother praying. Prayer is the vehicle God uses to accomplish His will in the earth.
I think the spoon gets stirring when God sees hearts that are newly or continually broken before him, regarding the need for personal and corporate holiness before God, and the strong desire for him to "rend the heavens and come down." This leads to our filling up the heavenly bowls with heartfelt prayer, accompanied by fasting, brokenness and humble obedience.
On a corporate level, heartfelt teaching, preaching and worship by revival-yearning leaders is vital to bringing revival to congregations. It was very instructive for me to learn that, before the fire fell in Toronto and Brownsville, their leaders had been desperate for months, seeking God for a fresh touch of fire and joy.
Randy Clark and Tommy Tenney had been desperate, as well, and God first touched them before using them to light fresh fires all over the nation. I remember that Steve Gray was at the same point of utter desperation, with his wife and congregation praying for him to be touched with God.
My point, ultimately, is that revival starts with each one of us, but especially with leaders who have spiritual authority and responsibility to lead and shepherd others into/through revival. We need broken, desperate leaders who have had it with church-growth and purpose-driven programs, and will no longer be satisfied with anything less than GOD HIMSELF.
Post a Comment