Revivalism
I’m a member of a Christian forum where someone cited an online article, claiming that the “revival” of c. 1907 was dead, because it became institutionalized.
As one who grew up within Pentecostal revivalism, I know these matters from the inside out: My father was as anti-institutional as nearly anyone of his generation of Pentecostals. He was usually suspicious of local churches, and downright hostile to denominations.
But the problem runs even deeper than anti-institutionalism; the theology of revivalism (insofar as it has unique theology) is fundamentally problematic. Here is what I wrote in response to the forum post.
Well… I think what a lot of people suppose “revival” is just is intrinsically antithetical to anything that can carry forward. But the problem is with their notion of revival, not with institutions that can have inter-generational impact.
IMO, the overwhelming majority of revival theology is based upon serious misappropriation of biblical texts. As a key example: the events of Pentecost were a once-for-all foundational event that established something new – there has never been another Pentecost, nor can there be, any more than there can be a second Incarnation or crucifixion or resurrection of Jesus. (Please don’t misunderstand: this is not in the slightest a denigration of the Holy Spirit’s work in the Church, any more than it’s a denigration of Christ that He experienced the cross and resurrection only once. Just the opposite: the Holy Spirit has been poured out once for all and everything of Jesus now stands in His light as He continues to work. Saying there is only one Pentecost is a magnification of the Spirit, just as saying Jesus died once for all is a magnification of Jesus.)
I don’t believe that what usually get called “revivals” are found in Scripture. There are reformations (e.g. under Hezekiah, Josiah etc). There are new phases in redemptive history (Abraham, Moses, David, and of course the whole life, ministry, death, resurrection, ascension of Christ, with Pentecost as part of that complex of events). But revivalism entails other sorts of notions, such as: Every person needs a dramatic, datable conversion experience, and that God wants to start from scratch every generation.
A few questions should show the error of that. Did David have a dramatic, datable conversion experience? No, the Psalms say explicitly that he belonged to God from his infancy and he was taught to trust while still nursing.
When, for that matter, were the disciples converted? We don’t see anything dramatic when they first begin to follow Jesus. He tells them to drop everything to follow Him, and they do. The act itself is dramatic, but we don’t see any emotional outbursts etc. Why?
Well, in part because most were probably already believers. And in part because we’ve misdefined conversion, as well….
God says that He will be God to Abraham and to his descendants, and Peter echoes that language in his Pentecost sermon. Paul likewise says that children are to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord. All of those sorts of features presuppose a kind of continuity that revivalism finds anathema.
I’m not an outsider to these issues, BTW. I grew up in a very revivalistic setting. In fact, my Dad was largely a revivalist preacher. I’d venture to say that the only time I’ve ever seen revivals do long term good, ironically, is when those affected by them went on into more stable environments that wouldn’t necessarily have been recommended by the revivalists themselves. I look at the years and tears my father invested into serving God and God’s people – and that service was well-intentioned and real, I don’t call it into question – and I can look at the outcome of those years, and the long-term results were negligible. And frankly, my Dad was far more Bible-centered than most revivalists are.
We don’t need to look for another “revival.” Revival-seeking is in some ways a form of renunciation of responsibility. God gave us His revealed will in His Word, and we need to learn that and trust the Holy Spirit to guide us. But that takes discipline, and we want to wait on “inspiration” instead.