Revival v. Revivalism

Article: “Hey Calvinist, Enough of Your Revivalism” by Michael Lawrence, original source here: https://www.9marks.org/article/hey-calvinist-enough-of-your-revivalism/

How do you grow your church? It’s a question every pastor or church leader asks, a question in which almost every Christian is interested. And let’s assume the best motive for the question, a sincere desire to see men, women, and children both knowing and growing in the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. The question is how?

HISTORY OF REVIVALISM

Ever since the early 1800s and the apparent success of the Second Great Awakening, the answer for most church leaders has been the techniques of revivalism. Revivalism and revival are not the same thing. Solomon Stoddard, a Puritan minister in western Massachusetts, defined revival as “some special seasons wherein God doth in a remarkable manner revive religion among his people.” [1] His emphasis is on both the surprising and supernatural aspect of revival, and its impact on the church generally. Conversion and discipleship, growth numerically andspiritually, are the result of divinely-wrought revival. His grandson, Jonathan Edwards, a leader of the First Great Awakening and its most able theological defender, would go on to argue that a genuine work of God’s Spirit isn’t “revealed by the quantity or intensity of religious emotions but is rather present where a heart had been changed to love God and seek his pleasure.”[2] In other words, it’s the fruit of the Spirit, not enthusiasm or momentum, that demonstrates God is at work.

Revivalism, on the other hand, is a set of techniques and methods that are assumed to reliably obtain “the external signs of conviction, repentance and rebirth.”[3] As historian Iain Murray notes, while revival preachers of the Great Awakening would have had no idea how “to secure a revival, a system was now popularized by ‘revivalists’ which came near to guaranteeing results.” [4] So much so that ever since the Second Great Awakening, a “revival” could be announced in advance! Today we call it “reverse engineering” results.

From the camp meetings, altar calls, and anxious bench of the Second Great Awakening, to the marriage of emotionally powerful preaching and singing in the ministry of Dwight Moody and Ira Sankey, to the stirring rallies of Billy Graham, the style of revivalism has shifted to match the changing culture. But the techniques have remained largely the same: the context of the mass meeting to encourage a response, the deliberate use of emotion to motivate a response, and the routine of a set prayer or physical action to actuate the response. Underlying all of this is the assumption that conversion can be reduced to, or at least evidenced by, a personal response that the preacher can elicit, observe, and measure.

I don’t mean to imply that the Second Great Awakening, or the ministries of Moody, Graham, and others did not result in true conversions. They certainly did. In fact, most of us probably know someone who came to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ at a Billy Graham rally. But if Scripture is to be our guide, we must never say that people became Christians because of the techniques of these ministries. After all, conversion is the supernatural and sovereign work of God, in which, through the message of the gospel and by the power of the Holy Spirit, he brings about conviction of sin, lasting repentance, and faith in the substitutionary death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Our response of repentance and faith is the unfailing result of God’s necessarily prior work of regeneration. Unless he makes us alive and gives us the gift of repentance and faith, we will remain dead in our sins. And there’s no human technique that can either force his hand or accomplish his work. This is what it means to be a Calvinist. More importantly, this is what it means to hold the same theology as Paul (Eph. 2:1-­10) and Jesus (John 6:44­–45; 10:27–30)

However, it wasn’t long before revivalist techniques moved from the evangelist’s ad hoc “revival meeting” to the local church’s regular Sunday worship. These revivalistic flourishes have even occurred in churches that confess a Reformed, or Calvinistic, understanding of salvation. And why not? After all, it apparently produced results. If you could gather a crowd (attract), connect with them in an emotionally meaningful way (relate), and remove barriers to response (automate), then you could grow your church without abandoning your theological convictions.

REVIVALISM “WORKS”

From Robert Schuller’s Crystal Cathedral, to Willow Creek and Saddleback, to Mars Hill and Elevation, to your local megachurch, the style and music and branding has changed, but the method tends to be fundamentally the same across the theological spectrum. The pragmatic approach to church growth—attract, relate, and automate—works.

Just ask the Calvinists who pastor large, growing churches. “I like the (attractional) evangelism I do better than the evangelism you don’t do.” “Anybody can be won to Christ if you discover the key to his or her heart.” “All it takes to grow a church is good music, a great children’s program, and sufficient parking.”[5] These comments defend fundamentally pragmatic, attractional approaches to the church, despite the sincerely held belief in the sovereignty of God in salvation by those who said them.

Twenty-five years ago, theologian David Wells published No Place for Truth, or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology?, the first of his volumes critiquing modern evangelicalism’s love affair with modernity. [6] He concluded that as far back as the Second Great Awakening, evangelicals had begun to use the tools of modernity (marketing, technique, bureaucratization, etc.) to accomplish the work of God. The goals were noble, but the motivation was pragmatic. In the modern world, success is measured by numbers, and the tools of modernity worked. As revivalism was refined and perfected by the methods of the marketplace, churches were growing, the “unchurched” were streaming in, and multitudes were being saved. Blinded by our apparent success, however, Wells revealed what the rest of us had failed to see. The tools of modernity produce the culture of modernity, not the kingdom of God. As survey after survey revealed, our growing churches were not filled with the results of Spirit-wrought revival, genuine converts characterized by the fruit of the Spirit, but were filled instead with the results of modern revivalism, religious consumers characterized by the spirit of the age.

TRUST THE ORDINARY MEANS OF GRACE

So, back to the question: how do you grow your church? I suppose it depends on what you think a church is and who you think people are. If you think a church is just a crowd of people who are fundamentally able, perhaps with help from God, to choose to follow Jesus, so long as he’s attractive and relevant enough, then the tools of revivalism are just the ticket. But if you think a church is a gathering of people who were dead in their sins but have been born again through the sovereign and supernatural work of God through the power of the Holy Spirit, then revivalism just won’t do.

What we want is revival, a genuine work of the Spirit, not a product of human technique. From the very beginning, the work of God has been done by the Spirit of God through the Word of God in a world gone awry. [7] From the first preaching of the gospel at Pentecost, to the recovery of gospel preaching in the Reformation, to the explanation of the gospel that God used to save you, God has always worked through his Word faithfully proclaimed to bring the dead to life.

So, “Calvinist,” enough of your revivalism. Grow your church through the ordinary means of grace that God has always used to grow his church: the right preaching of the gospel, the right administration of the ordinances, and the right use of church discipline. Give yourself to the ministry of word and prayer as the apostles did (Acts 6:4). Stop relying on the tools of modernity to build the kingdom of God because they never have and they never will.

There’s nothing wrong with having culturally appropriate music, adequate parking, attractive signage, and a clear process for joining the church. Those are important matters to which we must attend. But don’t think those tools, and others like them, will build Christ’s church. They won’t because they can’t. It’s not our ability to design an attractive worship experience or authentically relate to people in our sermons that raises the spiritually dead to life. The Spirit alone can and will do that work, and he does it through his Word, not our techniques.

[1] Iain H. Murray, Revival and Revivalism: The Making and Marring of American Evangelicalism 1750-1858(Banner of Truth, 1994), xvii.

[2] Mark Noll, A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada (Eerdmans, 1992), 96.

[3] Murray, xix.

[4] Ibid ., xviii.

[5] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church: Growth Without Compromising Your Mission or Message(Zondervan, 1995), 219. Comments one and three from private conversations with pre-2015 Acts 29 pastors.

[6] David Wells, No Place for Truth, or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology (Eerdmans, 1993).

[7] HT, David Helm.

What Does A True Move Of God Look Like?

What does it look like when there is a move of God in a Church…? in a locality?

Some people think the following is what it might look like (this is a direct quote from a recent meeting in Australia this week):

“It was really a beautiful night with Holy Spirit! We worshipped for a while and it was just nice, but we had a bit of a silent moment which turned into roaring laughter, at which point (two people named) started handing out chocolates that they had bought the day before! So of course that caused even more joy! The chocolates were Lindt ‘champagne’ flavour!! Haha. We were discussing later the prophetic symbol of champagne being a drink for royalty, it was so special. There was also lots of dancing! So much joy, I haven’t heard that kind of holy laughter since I was young, in Rodney Howard Browne meetings.”

Really? This was the Holy Spirit at work?

Forget the fact that absolutely NONE of this stuff can be found in the Bible… nothing of the kind happened in the Book of Acts.

I was a Pastor involved in this silliness for far longer than I should have been (in the 1990’s). People were always seeking the next new thing – the next novel experience. Some chased across town, states or even countries to find churches that said they had seen angel dust in the meetings. Some chased the “laughing” thing, flying to Toronto where “revival” had broken out in the Airport Church there – wanting to be “drunk” on God rather than intoxicated by an alcoholic beverage – hours on end were spent rolling on floors, laughing hysterically. The weirder it was (there were accounts of people ‘barking” and acting like animals), the more people thought God was surely at work.

Some of you (readers) have never heard of such things and this is all very strange and weird to you. That is because – IT IS VERY STRANGE AND VERY WEIRD. Its good you have not encountered this – but believe me, this was a “thing” in the 90’s, and some people still seek these kinds of manifestations as proof of God being among them.

No one wanted to say this was strange (out-loud anyway) because…. well… no one wanted to “grieve” the Holy Spirit. The Pharisees were guilty of blaspheming the Holy Spirit when they saw Jesus in action, saying that the power behind the miracles He was doing was the devil… and for sure, no one wanted to be a Pharisee.

But ladies and gentlemen – there is nothing wrong with asking “are any of these manifestations found in the Bible? Can you assure me that any of this has a basis in Scripture?” Nothing wrong at all!

In fact, if anyone were to ask Jesus or the Apostles to show where they were getting what they were doing by the Scripture, I don’t think they would have been in any way offended. When the Apostle Paul was teaching the Bereans, they were commended for checking his teaching out by the Scripture – commended, not rebuked. Here’s what we read:

Acts 17:10 The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed…

Paul could have said “Hey, I am an Apostle, trust me…” But he didn’t. He was very happy to find people who would test his teaching by the standard of the word of God, knowing this was the entire basis of his ministry anyway. He knew that Scripture was the basis for all he was doing and so he wasn’t fearful or threatened when people would go to the Scripture to examine his claims.

And the result was this – BECAUSE what Paul was teaching had its foundation in the word of God, those who checked this out, found his teaching there, and came to believe the message he brought – not because Paul was a super apostle, or had charisma coming out of his pours – but because what he taught was Biblical.

Just on the so called “Toronto Blessing” let me say this. The fruit of a move of God is seen over time. We can look back and see fruit – either good fruit or bad fruit. And sadly, when I see the leader of Toronto Church (John Arnott) embracing the Pope (and with him, his doctrines) as a brother in Christ… that for me in one photo op is the lasting fruit of Toronto – the gospel is unimportant – false gospels are embraced – all in the name of love, unity and the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit was at work – he would have made the gospel clearer to people, not fuzzy or blurred and certainly not discarded.

The Holy Spirit does indeed bring unity among brothers and sisters in Christ. No doubt of that. But never at the expense of the Biblical gospel.

There is a New Testament book entirely given over to this theme – the book of Galatians. And guess what? It is the Holy Spirit who inspired the book.

The book reveals false brothers, who add one work (happens to be circumcision) to the gospel (chapter 2) and at the same time says, “the fruit of the Spirit is love” (chapter 5). Yes, both of these concepts are found in the same book (Galatians). That is because there is no contradiction between the Holy Spirit giving people a love for the true Gospel and pointing out a false one and the fruit of the same Holy Spirit being love, joy, peace, patience, kindness and so on.

So if the silliness described is not a genuine move of God what does a real one look like?

A move of God is when people are awakened to their need of the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. It is when they see the one true Sovereign and holy God as majestic, their sin as the treason it truly is, and, cut to the heart, are brought to a deep repentance and faith under the word of God by preachers who herald the word of God (because that is how faith comes, Romans 10). It is where preachers and congregants long for the word of God without dilution, without distraction, without replacement… where children in Christ are urged towards becoming adults in their understanding (1 Cor. 14:20) and can endure sermons which are more than a few minutes of pep talk or success principles, and entire communities are awakened to their need of God, wanting the true God for who He is, not a made up version that allows self to retain its rule on the throne of the heart.

Actually, a true move of God looks a lot like the Protestant Reformation. Without any fear of contradiction, the Reformation (while never perfect) was the greatest and most far reaching move of God outside of the book of Acts. Entire countries were brought under the powerful preaching of the word of God. Kings and Queens, Emperors and Rulers were shaken to the core as the people under their rule came to understand who was truly in charge… the Lord Jesus Christ, King of kings and Lord of lords, who has all authority in heaven and earth. In a move of God the true gospel becomes center stage, based on the sure foundation of the Bible alone, justification (to be declared right in God’s sight by God) is by grace alone received through faith alone in Christ alone, all to the glory of God alone.

My observation – none of those who advocated the silliness described above – none… could articulate the biblical Gospel… and here is the big deception – they thought and continue to think – they are real pals with the Holy Spirit.

But the fact is, they have absolutely no interest whatsoever in what the Holy Spirit has inspired – no interest in the background information on the New Testament (check the bookshelves of the proponents – you won’t find any useful study material, and if you ever do, these kinds of books have not been opened in decades), no interest in hermeneutics (“what’s that?” they say) and no interest in making sure they are taking a passage of Scripture in its proper context. No – that kind of thing is just for folk who believe in “Father, Son and Holy Bible” as one man wrote to me.

BUT – here is the good news. God is doing much in the middle of all this. All over this world He is giving people a hunger to know Him truly, with open Bibles and with good study tools and prayer – asking God to open the Biblical text to the understanding, and to reveal the true God and true Gospel – one that saves sinners from the wrath to come. Yes, over and over, God is doing this on a global scale.

King’s Church is just a small local expression of what the Lord is doing in many churches, in multiple villages, towns and cities, in manifold countries in our world. He is raising up ‘ordinary churches’ who through the ordinary means of grace are making disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ.

No one is falling, rolling, laughing… and no one is bothered by that… it is not on their radar. No one is saying “the Lord told me this or that” unless with the next breath they recite a verse from the Bible.

And that is the point. All the sheep want is to be fed by the Great Shepherd and to know Him intimately through His word. Don’t get me wrong – these people are seeking – seeking with a passion, to know the true God and the true Gospel. When discovering His truth they seek to make the necessary application to their lives. They are caught up in the treasure of knowing the Lord Jesus Christ, intimately, in and by and through His word. They want and seek nothing else.

When you or I encounter such a phenomenon – understand this my friends, we are witnessing a true move of the Holy Spirit of God.

It is happening. May it happen more and more!

For the fame of His name and His glory. Amen!

Revivalism and the Ordinary Means of Grace

horton_michael_0Article: Do You Hear the Spirit? Revivalism and the Ordinary Means of Grace by Dr. Michael Horton

Duke historian Grant Wacker tells us that in the winter of 1887, a group calling itself the Evangelical Alliance for the United States met in Washington, DC. It was an appropriate site for a noble assemblage of scholars, pastors, college presidents, and other leaders who were intent on recapturing the moral, spiritual, and political clout which they had once garnered in American society. As Wacker explains,

The first session opened with the hymn, “Come Gracious Spirit, Heavenly Dove.” The participants then read the second chapter of the Book of Acts… At the end of the week, William E. Dodge, president of the Evangelical Alliance, asked the delegates to search their hearts to see if they too were open to the Spirit’s guidance. “Christ is waiting for us, he urged. “Are we ready?”1

This could have been a common event in contemporary evangelicalism, but it was, in fact, a significant contributing factor in the success of the Social Gospel movement at the turn-of-the-century. Higher critics with Americanized Hegelian bents (identifying God with progress) preached beside Wesleyan-Holiness revivalists and evangelical preachers. When doctrinal differences divide, such movements often turn to the Holy Spirit as the tie that binds. Invoking the “Spirit” hardly proves as controversial as appeals to the Father and the Incarnate Son do. As many modern feminist and radical theologians are also discovering, the “Spirit” rarely embarrasses. Even the Hopi tribe worships the Great Spirit.

But is this “Spirit,” the Holy Spirit, as in “the Lord and Giver of Life who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets”? That one? Is he the Spirit who is identified in Scripture as “the Spirit of Christ,” that is, the One whose person and work is essentially as well as instrumentally united to that of the Son of Man? Harry Emerson Fosdick, scion of liberalism and champion of modernism against the likes of J. Gresham Machen, wrote a book titled The Secret of the Victorious Christian Life, which was well received by the evangelical masses despite its moralistic optimism (perhaps because of it). And we all know how Norman Vincent Peale, a quite outspoken liberal, was so well received. Billy Graham even counted Peale among his closest allies. The World Council of Churches and similar groups arose out of missionary conferences in which doctrinal differences (i.e., the Word) were set aside in favor of common mission and experience, especially conversion and the New Birth (i.e., the Spirit).

In the past few decades, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), based in Wheaton, Illinois, has reflected the breadth of these older heirs of American Protestantism in a more conservative form. But denominations no longer steer the evangelical ship (or, more accurately, the evangelical regatta). Rather, it is the successive outbursts of revivalism which continually define and redefine the American religious landscape. It is not churches or schools, but movements, which shape American church life. Though Jesus founded a Church, an observer of American evangelicalism might surmise that the Holy Spirit started a revival as competition.

Of course, this state of affairs is tragic for a number of reasons. First, it is deeply dishonoring to God and his Word and Spirit. But second, it is a serious danger for those to whom we wish to bring the good news. In this article, I want to emphasize the important link between Word and Spirit and its consequence for our expectations about extraordinary works of God in our day.

The Historical Problem
As early as the Book of Acts, we see characters like Simon Magus who sought to market their own brand of Christianity by circumventing the Church. It was St. Paul especially who was vexed with these “super-apostles” as he called them: itinerant, self-appointed Christian leaders who made up their theology as they went because they considered themselves “apostles” who received divine revelation of deeper mysteries than those revealed by the ordinary apostles in Jerusalem. They thought that their “ministries” could evangelize, disciple, and perform similar functions to those entrusted to the visible Church. Facing this “sect-spirit” directly in 1 Corinthians, Paul warns, “According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (3:10-11). On that day of God’s judgment, the work of so-called “ministries,” which tried to lay another foundation, says Paul, will be burned as hay, wood, and straw (v. 12-15). Continue reading