- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Bob H said:
Maybe he'll stick around a while and explain to us again how Calvin was gay.
LOL!
Is the modern emphasis on revival Biblical?
- Thread starter pastorryanhayden
- Start date
Maybe he'll stick around a while and explain to us again how Calvin was gay.
LOL!
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Bob H said:
I'll take your sudden change of subject as a tacit admission that Pappa's accusation was, as usual, a crock of used food. Thanks!
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
Ransom said:
Wasn't it King James that was gay?
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
bgwilkinson said:
That accusation is based on bad history.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
Binaca Chugger said:
What accusation is the basis of your statement?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Binaca Chugger said:
Actually, it's based on his love letters.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
Ransom said:
Oh Yuk!!!!
That's what I was thinking.
Bob H said:admin said:
The Calvinist whipping boy. He gets blamed for everything
It's hard to picture the Charismatic Movement, or easy believism without Finney in the picture.
BTW I'm not a Calvinist.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2013
- Messages
- 4,336
- Reaction score
- 89
- Points
- 48
Ransom said:
Any study I have seen by neutral parties clearly indicated the homosexual accusation is based upon bad history. I have read history by parties on both sides of the KJVO issue who interpret history to validate their point. This is bad history on both parts. Taking a whole perspective and from reading neutral historians.... the homosexual accusation is an assumption based upon a biased view.
C
christundivided
Guest
Binaca Chugger said:
I difficult to misinterpret what "James" meant when he called George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham "my sweet child and wife."
I've got news for you BC.... No man uses such terms towards another man....unless he's up to something.
C
christundivided
Guest
pastorryanhayden said:Bob H said:admin said:
The Calvinist whipping boy. He gets blamed for everything
It's hard to picture the Charismatic Movement, or easy believism without Finney in the picture.
BTW I'm not a Calvinist.
Finney was never really a Calvinist. There is far too much evidence to the contrary.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Finney was a Calvinist? KJVOs are gay? I'm confused.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
Binaca Chugger said:
Can I assume you have never read the letters of King James and that you are relying on what others have said? There is a great deal of revisionist history that is nothing more than advocacy for a particular view point. Why not read the original writing of King James. Then you can know for sure what he wrote, not viewed with a twisted bias. I believe you might be very surprised.
Original research is so refreshing.
I do not base my opinions on studies others have made. I do my own original research. It is so easy in this day of massive original sources access.
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2012
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
So, the appropriate question is ... are we in need of "reviving"? Are we satisfied with what we are? Always the same fights, the age-old disagreements? There is no need to revive a living, conscious man. The living do not require a resurrection, neither are the righteous compelled to repentance. So ... is this living, or what? Is the constant bickering, fussing, and snarling amongst ourselves righteous and tolerable, what we enjoy with contentment?
If you do what you have always done, you will always get what you have always gotten.
Yes, an emphasis on revival is needed when the need for revival is present. We need the preaching of an Isaiah amidst the rise of idolatry, the weeping of a Jeremiah when sin takes society across the line, the demonstrations of an Ezekiel when Judgment is come, and the hope of a Daniel when the present is so dark.
If you do what you have always done, you will always get what you have always gotten.
Yes, an emphasis on revival is needed when the need for revival is present. We need the preaching of an Isaiah amidst the rise of idolatry, the weeping of a Jeremiah when sin takes society across the line, the demonstrations of an Ezekiel when Judgment is come, and the hope of a Daniel when the present is so dark.
Papabear,
I'm a fan of George Whitfield. I've even visited his grave (it's in the basement of a prebyterian church in Newberryport, MA.). I've also read plenty of Ravenhill, Tozer and Spurgeon.
The question was not is revival biblical or is revival necessary but is the modern emphasis (and I'm thinking typical IFB here) biblical. I can't deny that American Christianity is weak and anemic, but I don't think a lack of zeal is the cause. I think our churches are full of unregenerate people who got there, in part, because of an emphasis on certain aspects of revivalism. I think unchecked revivalism keeps christians ignorant and brings in all kinds of bad practice. I think that if you want to fix that we should emphasize what the Bible emphasizes for Christians which is not revival. Revivals are great for getting people saved, I don't think that they are supposed to normative to the Christian life.
I'm a fan of George Whitfield. I've even visited his grave (it's in the basement of a prebyterian church in Newberryport, MA.). I've also read plenty of Ravenhill, Tozer and Spurgeon.
The question was not is revival biblical or is revival necessary but is the modern emphasis (and I'm thinking typical IFB here) biblical. I can't deny that American Christianity is weak and anemic, but I don't think a lack of zeal is the cause. I think our churches are full of unregenerate people who got there, in part, because of an emphasis on certain aspects of revivalism. I think unchecked revivalism keeps christians ignorant and brings in all kinds of bad practice. I think that if you want to fix that we should emphasize what the Bible emphasizes for Christians which is not revival. Revivals are great for getting people saved, I don't think that they are supposed to normative to the Christian life.
