Richard M. Riss
A Defense of the Revival
Date: 08-Jul-1994 12:26pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%NEW-WINE@UIUC.EDU )
Subject: God's Restructuring
I'd just like to post a few reflections and/or observations.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I sent summaries of the news items on
this list to 57 people who I thought would really benefit, or who would
probably be very interested in what God is presently doing. Occasionally
I get responses in the mail, asking me whether I believe that this is of
God. In my answers, I state that I believe that it is of God, and that
tremendous fruit is becoming manifest in the lives of the people who are
touched by what is happening. I also point out that what has been
happening conforms to just about all of the characteristics of revival
that I have written about in my books and articles over the past decade or
two. I have in my possession a huge notebook which has over 200
pages in it. Each page is devoted to a different characteristic of
revival, and contains many historical examples of that one particular
characteristic of revival. Over the course of twenty-three years of
research, I have added to the notebook whenever I have encountered a
description of a revival. The current move of God conforms to the vast
majority of these characteristics of revival, but I should hasten to add
that in no case has EVERY characteristic been evident, and in every case,
there are always unique elements.
Some of the leaders of the current move of God prefer to refer to what
is happening as a renewal, not a revival. This would be incorrect, in my
opinion, based upon what I have observed to be the characteristics of
revival over the centuries. Ironically, this hesitancy has caused some
confusion in some quarters. I have received letters from people who were
prepared to consider this a genuine move of God, but when they discovered
that some of the leaders were referring to it as a renewal but not a
revival, they balked, probably because they associated "renewal" with
man's attempts to bring about spiritual awakening, while they thought of
"revival" as a genuine move of God's Spirit.
I understand the concerns of the leaders. We have not seen a lot of
evanglism or mass conversions. While these things have characterized
many revivals, they have not characterized all of them. And in many
cases, these things have taken place many, many months after the initial
stages of a revival.
One characteristic that many revivals have had in common is what I would
call God's restructuring. That is to say, when revival hits, man cannot
control it, and an entirely new leadership is suddenly raised up by God
within the church. Older leaders are sometimes raised up to greater
prominence, while others seem to fade into obscurity (of course,
obscurity can be a tremendous blessing from God, and prominence a terrible
snare). Related to this is the fact that revival causes absolute chaos in
regular church programs. In the third chapter of my book on the Latter
Rain Revival of 1948 [by the way, Patti, that was the revival that spawned
Bible Temple in Portland, Oregon and also Shiloh in San Francisco pastored by
Violet Kitely--you were wondering about this], I chose to open as follows:
"At the opening of the First World Pentecostal Conference in Zurich,
Switzerland in 1947, general secretary David J. DuPlessis preached an
address that ended with the following words:
There is nothing that can ever take the place of the Holy spirit in
the church. Let us pray for a greater outpouring than ever, and
remember when the floods come it will not keep to our well prepared
channels but it will overflow and most probably cause chaos in our
regular programs."
I believe that, already, this year's revival has been causing chaos of
this kind in the regular programs of churches that have been affected, and
this "problem" will probably increase in its effects.
I could go on discussing multitudes of characteristics of revival,
and how they are now being fulfilled, but it would take up an
enormous amount of space, and it would take a great deal of time, perhaps
infintitely so!
Oh--Keith--you asked for a list of my publications. I've really been very
remiss about this--I haven't really been keeping close track of them. Why
don't you start with whatever I've mentioned on this list? I could list
them if I spent a lot of time trying to compile them, but I don't have
time to do that at present. Sorry--I hope you'll understand. A far as
major books go, I think the only only I haven't mentioned so far is THE
EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST (Minneapolis, Minn.: Bethany
Fellowship, 1977).
By the way, thank you so much for your responses to my question. I'm
looking foward even to more input. Patti, I loved your analogy with
respect to 3-D pictures. It appears as though God was sovereignly
preparing you with that incident. Don't you love it when things like that
happen? Increases in the frequency of such coincidences is another
important characteristic of revival.
God bless every one of you!
Love,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.DREW.EDU
Date: 11-Aug-1994 07:48pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%NEW-WINE@UIUC.EDU )
Subject: Hub-and-Spokes Phenomena
Christiaan Balke has asked whether it is the case that, in general,
outpourings of the Spirit begin at a specific geographical location
and then spread as people travel to and from that location. Yes, this
is often the case for revivals, or outpourings of the Spirit. In fact,
I haven't mentioned this yet, but one of the first indications to me
that what we are now experiencing is a genuine move of the Spirit was the
fact that people kept referring to Toronto as a place from which this has
been springing forth. I saw an immediate parallel with previous revivals,
such as the Azusa Street revival, which emanated from Los Angeles, and the
Latter Rain revival, which originated in North Battleford, Saskatchewan.
In such cases, the way the revival spreads is exactly the same: people go
to a specific location from all over the world, then return to bring the
revival to their home churches; those who are on the scene of the initial
impetus of the revival begin to go to many different places to spread it
wherever they go. Note that it is not only a specific city or town that
is involved in the origins of a revival, but a specific church (or prayer
meeting) within that town. It is almost always in a humble, unexpected
place from which these things originate, and there is such a sense of the
presence of the Lord that huge numbers of people are drawn from all over
the world.
I spent several years studying the parallels between the Azusa Street
revival (1906) and that at North Battleford (1948), and when I started
reading
the archives of this list it was clear to me almost immediately that we had
yet another parallel movement going on. It was exactly the same story again.
It was quite stunning--seeing the comments of the very first participants
of this list. It's like having been away on a voyage, lost, and suddenly
finding familiar territory again when you would least have expected it.
There's simply no way to describe the thrill of finding something so
precious so unexpectedly. To use another analogy, it would be very much
like a jeweler finding a rival to the hope diamond during the course of
normal, everyday humdrum activities--perhaps windowshopping at a pawn shop
at which one normally finds only costume jewelry, or perhaps only a few
semiprecious stones. If the jeweler is experienced and well-trained, he
recognizes the stone almost immediately. That's how it was for me. I was
absolutely stunned, and excited beyond imagining.
I had studied the pattern for years, and so many times, somebody would
come along and say, "such and such is a revival," and I would say to
myself, "no, not really, it can't be--it does not follow any of the
characteristics of revivals as we have seen them in the past." Then, when
I read the archives of this list, even though this movement was only being
referred to only as a" renewal," I knew that I had found a real revival--the
first geniune one we have seen in North America for many, many years.
Along with one (or more) fountainhead fellowships or churches, there are
usually a few individuals who, themselves, function concurrently as
springs of revival. For example, in 1948, there was North Battleford,
Sask., but there was also William Branham. Branham was an individual whom
God was using at the same time to foment revival, but his only connection
with North Battleford was that some people had gone to some of his meetings
in Vancouver and brought the anointing back with them to Sharon Orphanage
and Schools in North Battleford. In the same way, Randy Clark and the
Arnotts seem to have brought the anointing from Rodney Howard-Browne to
Toronto. It was exactly the same story all over again.
There are certain patterns in the way God has worked in history. I was
planning to write a book about that some day, but now maybe we should be
concentrating on the present move of God's Spirit. I say "we" because it
always takes several people working independently to do these things. It
took four gospel writers to give us the life of Christ, and it will always
be in the mouths of several witnesses that a thing will be established.
But, getting back to my amazement, I'd like to use one further analogy. I
am a violinist. I can take a violin and play it, and know immediately
whether it is a good instrument. A friend of mine, John L. Rossi of Long
Island, once allowed me to play a Stradivari instrument in his shop. I
have never played any other instrument like it. It practically played
itself. It took very little effort on my part to make it sound absolutely
gorgeous. Stumbling across this revival was just like it would have been
if I had been in a pawn shop, trying out violins, and suddenly, there was
an instrument that could really only be a Stradivarius violin! Can
you imagine the excitement! To those who were not familiar with various
violins, this would probably not have been discernible. But to
someone who has spent his lifetime familiarizing himself with these
things--what a world of difference! And how exciting!
God bless all of you!
Love,
Richard
RRISS@DREW.DREW.EDU
Date: 24-Sep-1994 08:13am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%NEW-WINE@UIUC.EDU )
Subject: Misc. Topics
Through a variety of circumstances I had to take a brief brief break from
reading messages that I have received by E-mail, from noon Thursday until
5:00 Friday, eastern time. It is astonishing how much happens in the period
of about 29 hours! I came back to about fifty messages, and there were many
discussions that I could have contributed to, but they were over already!
Truly amazing!
Here are a few brief comments on some of the things that have transpired
during that time:
Jon posted a brochure describing a VCF conference in Valparaiso, IN,
which stated that "Christian leaders in the USA have documented well over
1000 significant 'hot spots' that are experiencing an unprecedented
outpouring right now--today!"
I have a few questions on this: (1) Who wrote the brochure? (2) Which
Christian leaders have documented this? (3) Where have they made a
statement to this effect? (4) Is there a listing somewhere of these 1000
significant "hot spots"? If so, where?
Don Wilkerson made reference to an article, "An Investigation Into the
Experience Known as 'Slain In the Spirit' by Alan Morrison. Where was
this article published, and/or where is it available? Don noted that the
article's author stated that the falling experience originated with Maria
Woodworth-Etter, who "falsely prophesied that San Francisco would be
destroyed by an earthquake in 1890."
It is not true that this experience originated with Maria Beulah
Woodworth-Etter. I'll elaborate on this point in a moment, but first, I'd
like to mention that, in the Zondervan Dictionary of Pentecostal and
Charismatic Movements, p. 896, it is stated of sister Woodworth-Etter
that "in 1890 she was thought to have incorrectly predicted an earthquake
in San Francisco, and her ministry went into relative obscurity until
April 18, 1906, when San Francisco received one of the worst earthquakes
in reecorded history just a few days after the initial outpouring of the
Holy Spirit in Los Angeles. During these sixteen years there had been
continued manifestations of unusual power at her meetings."
Maria B. Woodworth-Etter had one of the most powerful ministries we've ever
seen on this contintent. But the phenomenon of people falling under the
power of Spirit certainly did not originate with her. It happened during
the Evangelical Awakening in England in the 1700s, and it happened
extensively during the second awakening in the United States. It also
happened quite a bit under the ministry of Charles Finney during the
early nineteenth century. In his Memoirs, for example, he wrote, "The
congregation began to fall from their seats in every direction, and cried
for mercy. If I had had a sword in each hand, I could not have cut them
off their seats as fast as they fell" (p. 103). Elsewhere, he writes,
"Before the week was out I learned that some of them, when they would
attempt to observe this season of prayer, would lose all of their strength
and be unable to rise to their feet, or even stand upon their knees in
their closets" (pp. 44-45).
When I read Catharine C. Cleveland's book, THE GREAT REVIVAL IN THE WEST,
1797-1805 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1916), I found
thirty-four references to people falling under the power of the spirit
(pp. 59, 60, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 72, 73, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 88,
89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 97, 107, 109, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 174, 179,
195).
In one post, Daniel Dick mentioned that he would like to see various
things, including stories of revival. I'll see what I can do along these
lines, time permitting.
I'd like to make one other comment, and that has to do with the nature of
revival. Traditionally, revival has been understood to involve a
reawakening of faith in the church. If we are seeing that now, then we
are in the midst of revival now. Webster's dictionary doesn't say
anything about mass conversions with respect to revival, although such
things sometimes do happen as a result of revival. The relevant
dictionary definitions of revival are as follows: "restoration to life,
consciousness, vigor, strength, etc.," and "an awakening of interest in
religion." Another use of the word, not directly relevant here, is
"an evangelistic service for the purpose of effecting a
religious awakening." Really, though, historians have traditionally
referred to revivals as outpourings of the Holy Spirit, times of
refreshing, and times of divine visitation. Revivals can be localized, or
than can cover a broad area, and in such cases, are often known as
awakenings.
It confuses people to say that we are not in revival, but that we are in
the midst of something that can become revival. A few weeks ago, I sent a
copy of Bill Jackson's paper to John Stackhouse, professor of Religion at
the University of Manitoba, and he was trying to figure out why Bill was
saying that this is a renewal but not yet a revival. He feels, as I do,
that this is a false distinction.
In closing, I'd like to thank you all for all of those wonderful posts!
Keep them coming. I believe that the body of Christ is really being
blessed through what you are all saying through the medium of this list.
Praise God!
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 19-Nov-1994 11:19am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RICHEYP@CSOS.ORST.EDU )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%PATTI@CV.HP.COM )
Subject: Mike Courtney's Paper
Patti, thanks for forwarding Michael Courtney's critique of the
Toronto Phenomena. I feel badly for him, because, at least when
he wrote the critique, he seems to have had an attitude toward
the leaders in his church which was not gracious, charitable, or
generous. And I feel even more badly for him because of the fact
that we really need to be very, very careful, let we be found
fighting against God, or quenching His Spirit.
I'm not sure whether it's really necessary to address the
specific issues that he discusses, because they are all easily
answered, and the revival really does speak for itself. Not only
that, but as Jesus said in Matt. 18;7, it's always inevitable
that stumbling blocks will come, but woe to the one through whom
it comes. My hope is that Michael Courtney will reconsider his
critique, so that someone else can be the "fall guy" for the
stumbling blocks that will necessarily come. It is a very
serious thing to be found opposing God.
I believe that critiques of these things will always be
inevitable, for the simple reason that God allows it in order to
test us, to determine whether we are willing to be "fools" in the
sight of men for His sake. It was either Paul Cain or John
Wimber who has said that the Lord sometimes offends the mind in
order to test the heart, and I would agree with this. Mike
Bickle and Michael Sullivant have echoed this, by saying that
"this 'way of God' challenges our improper 'control issues' and
breaks down our unsanctified inhibitions and pride."
I don't know whether Michael Courtney was simply attempting to
amass whatever he could in order to discredit what is happening,
or whether he is genuinely misled, but I do hope and pray that it
is the latter. Perhaps as we continue to pray for him he will
have a "road to Damascus" experience similar to that which
happened to Paul and to what is happening to increasing numbers
of people even in our own day in the context of what is happening
right now.
You expressed concern with his comments about Kim Anthony Gentes'
statements, so I'd like to begin with that, even though it is at
the end of his critique. He writes, "Kim Anthony Gentes has also
stated that while ministering to a woman in Toronto, 'I felt that
God wanted to be a mother to her (in contrast to a father
figure).' This false prophecy was passed on by a member of the
trained ministry team. God is not a woman. He does not behave
as a mother to his children. The picture of God as a mothering
figure is a frequent component of false revelation and it has its
origin in pagan religions."
Certainly, though, Michael must realize that God doesn't really
have gender at all, and that God as father is just a way of
illustrating certain principles about our relationship with Him.
Because God does not have gender, it is ridiculous to make this
sort of criticism. I'd like to know what he does with statements
in the Bible like Isaiah 66:13, where it says, "As one whom his
mother comforts, so I will comfort you; and you shall be
comforted in Jerusalem." God nurtures, as does a mother, and
this is a also Biblical image. Surely Michael must be aware of
this.
He also criticizes Kim Anthony Gentes for saying that the love of
Jesus Christ is unconditional. He writes, "the lie that God's
love is unconditional frequently characterizes false revelation."
My response to this would be to simply to say that, if whether
God loved us depended upon our own abilities, then we would be in
deep trouble! No, it is God's unconditional love that leads us
to repentance.
Mike seems to be particularly troubled by some of the phenomena,
and he says that they are not manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
He then says that God commands Christians to test teachings,
experiences, and spiritual gifts. This is certainly true. We
must therefore put HIS assertions to the test, to see whether
they, also, will hold up, and if not, we must reject them.
Whether the phenomena we have seen in this revival are
manifestations of the Holy Spirit can really only be known by the
Spirit. The things of the Spirit are foolishness to the natural
man (I Cor. 2:14). God will only reveal the genuineness of this
revival to those to whom He wishes to reveal it.
Mike states that, according Ecclesiastes, there is nothing new
under the sun, and that therefore, whatever God is doing now must
have happened before. I don't know how he interprets Isaiah
43:19 ("Behold, I will do something new, Now it will spring
forth; Will you not be aware of it? . . ."), but even if we grant
him this, it doesn't answer the question as to whether the
phenomena are of God. If there is nothing new, then neither is
anything new about the way the devil works.
The fact of the matter is that most of the phenomena that we see
now are not really new, but in every age, people have had
different ways of interpreting them. What we must be very
careful to avoid is the trap of attributing the works of God to
the devil, because if we persist in doing that, there's no way
out of the trap!
One of the things that he asserts is that the long-term effects
that these phenomena will have on peoples' character are not yet
known. I would disagree with this, because I think that some of
the long-term effects are already known, and that they are very
positive. In May of 1994, Bill Jackson said in WHAT IN THE WORLD
IS HAPPENING TO US: A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE ON RENEWAL, that
"reports are coming from every corner about people falling in
love with Jesus in a whole new way, about a new love for the
Bible, about being taken up into heaven in the form of visions
and dreams. In the arms of Jesus is fullness of Joy." He also
says, "Reports too numerous to count tell of physical healings,
deliverance from demonic influence and deep emotional wounds
being touched." You and I both know enough about this revival to
know that Bill Jackson is not making these things up. We are
constantly getting reports of this nature, and we have seen these
things happening in our own lives and in the lives of our friends
and family members.
Mike goes on to say that the correct response, when the Holy
Spirit reveals the presence and holiness of God, is fear,
distress, and mourning over our sinful nature. Well, he is right
about this up to a point. In fact, this is sometimes what causes
the shaking and trembling before God that we have seen in this
revival. But fear, distress, and mourning over our sinfulness
are not the ONLY correct responses to the presence of God. In
fact, in many instances throughout the Bible, people are told
"fear not" when they are in the presence of God. Is laughter
appropriate? I certainly think that it can be, if it is the
result of God-given joy. Outward manifestations can always be
interpreted in many ways. Laughter can be the result of God-
given joy, and it can also be the result of scornfulness. But
just because laughter can sometimes be a result of scornfulness
does not mean that it always an indication of scorn. Certainly,
I see no Biblical warrant for asserting that laughter is an
inappropriate response to the presence of God.
Mike writes that "People who are dull to their need for
repentance laugh at the thought of renouncing their sin and often
feel that the love of God removes the necessity of character
change in their lives." But this assumes that EVERYONE who
laughs is dull to his or her need for repentance. There is a
laughing that comes from joy in the Holy Ghost, which is quite
different from the laughing that arises from the scorn of God.
It arises from the assurance that one's sins are forgiven through
the shed bled of Jesus Christ, and is a natural fruit of
repentance and renunciation of sin.
He also cites Luke 6:20-25 (". . . Woe to you who laugh now, for
you will mourn and weep") in order to assert that laughing is not
generally indicative of blessing from God. But really, it all
depends on the REASON for the laughing. If people laugh because
they feel that they are in need of nothing, then they cannot
receive God's blessings. On the other hand, laughing may also
indicate that God has already bestowed upon a person the blessing
of joy in the Holy Ghost.
He cites passages like Jeremiah 51: 37-45 to assert that roaring
like a lion and laughing uncontrollably as if you are drunk can
indicate a curse and judgment from the Lord, as in the case of
God's judgment of Babylon in this passage. Well, it CAN indicate
these things, but it can ALSO be an indication of God-given
inebriation in the Holy Spirit.
He tries to distinguish the laughter mentioned in Psalm 126 ("He
who goes out weeping, carrying seed to sow, will return with
songs of joy, carrying sheaves with him") from what is happening
at the present time. He says that "the explicitly stated
condition for reaping this laughter (going out weeping) has not
generally been fulfilled by those receiving the 'gift' of
laughing in the spirit." SAYS WHO? It certainly was the case
for my wife, Kathryn. She came out of many years of depression
when she received the gift of laughter. Not only that, but there
is absolutely no reason to conclude from this passage that
weeping beforehand is always a necessary prior condition for joy.
Mike then goes on to say that those who have defended this
revival have done so with "a superficial and self-serving usage
of select passages regarding the work of the Holy Spirit." My
question to him would be whether he, himself, has scrupulously
avoided the methodology of using select passages from Scripture
simply to prove his own point. I think not.
He then considers the Acts 2 passage, particularly Acts 2:15,
where Peter says "these men are not drunken as you suppose . . ."
Mike says that "the comparison of being filled with the Holy
Spirit with drunkenness is being made by wicked people," and that
Peter did not have slurred speech and the inability to handle
Scripture, but delivered a sermon which led many to repentance
and salvation. First of all, it is of no consequence whether or
not the people making this observation were wicked. It was a
valid observation that Peter thought required an explanation.
And Peter says "THESE men'; he wasn't necessarily referring to
himself. It is plain that these people appeared to be drunken,
and that some sort of explanation was in order.
In examining Ephesians 5:18 ("Do not get drunk on wine, which
leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit"), Mike
says that "this verse is actually drawing a sharp contrast
between being drunk on wine and being filled with the Holy
Spirit. Being drunk on wine leads to a lack of self-control and
all kinds of sins. Paul summarizes this as debauchery. Being
filled with the Holy Spirit leads to worship and love of God. It
leads to obedience and the fruit of the Spirit, including self-
control. So we see that there is no mention of spiritual
drunkenness in the verses which speak of the Holy Spirit's work."
I would say in answer to this that these verses very clearly
compare the effects of the Holy Spirit to the effects of alcohol.
As it happens, drunkenness in the Spirit does lead to the worship
and love of God, obedience and yes, even to self-control. It
should be obvious that when self-control is mentioned as a fruit
of the Spirit, the reference is to preventing oneself from
sinning.
Mike then refers to a number of passages which speak of spiritual
drunkenness in the context of God's judgment, such as Isaiah
19:13-15, Isaiah 29:9-10, Isaiah 51:17-21, and Jeremiah 51:7.
But certainly these verses do not imply that spiritual
drunkenness is always the result only of God's judgment. Nowhere
is it stated that spiritual drunkenness can only be an indication
that a person is being judged by God, and can never be an
indication of anything else.
Mike then talks about fruit. But there has certainly been
abundant evidence that good fruit has resulted in the lives of
those who have had these manifestations. He should read the many
testimonies that we have seen of abundant good fruit in peoples'
lives everywhere, throughout the world.
He talks about a situation that took place in his own church, but
we certainly have no way of evaluating it without cross examining
the people against whom he makes certain accusations. This is a
troubling section, because he is saying bad things about people,
and in view of the Golden Rule, I would think that one should
avoid saying bad things about people to others. If you have a
complaint about someone, talk to the people who you think are
doing the wrong thing. Don't talk to everyone else about it.
Especially if they are the leaders in your own church!
In any case, one church situation, or one pastor's ostensible
mistakes, does not discredit an entire movement. And in general,
if PEOPLE do wrong things, this does not discredit what God is
doing.
Mike then states that "the Holy Spirit does not manifest in a
lack of self-control. Order and discipline must be maintained in
the church." However, our own understanding of order and of
discipline may be quite different from God's understanding of
these things. John White has pointed out that although we say
that God is a God of order, sometimes the process of bringing
order is a disorderly process, and "chaos and darkness flee but
they create a ruckus as they leave."
We need to realize that what APPEARS to be disorderly has been
imparting grace and power to people, enabling them to overcome
inner bondages such as fear, lust, pride, envy, greed, deceit,
and bitterness. If this is not repentance, I don't know what is.
Those who criticize this revival for lack of repentance obviously
don't know too much about what is happening!
Mike provides various Scriptures on self-control. In many
translations, the word used in some of these passages is "sober."
For example, in I Th. 5:6-8, it says "So then, let us not be like
others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled.
. . ." The Greek word here, nepho, literally means "not given to
wine," and it is talking about getting drunk on alcohol. But
these Scriptures should not be used to imply that we should not
allow ourselves to get drunken in the Holy Spirit.
In some of these passages, it would seem to me that "self-
control" has to do with preventing oneself from falling into sin
or restraining oneself from evil, and not with whether or not one
can prevent oneself from laughing or being stricken to the floor.
It is natural to fear change and to be afraid of losing control
of what is happening, but we must remember that God is always in
control. It's also natural to fear emotions and bizarre
behavior. But, although phenomena of this type are not necessary
to revival, it does seem that they do tend to be present just
about whenever there is revival.
Mike complains that participants in these phenomena have freely
admitted that they are not in control of themselves. He is right
about this. Some people find that they are unable to get up off
the floor, even when they want to do so. An evangelist, Scott
Thomas, told be about one person who was pinned to the floor, and
could not get up until he agreed with God that he would act in
obedience to Him in a certain matter. This is just the sort of
thing that we have seen quite frequently in this revival.
Mike then says that revivals are always accompanied by repentance
on a grand scale. He is absolutely right about this. But then
he says, "the calls to repentance have been few and far between
from today's pulpit. The notion that God is angry about sin and
might actually send someone to hell is largely absent." Mike is
wrong about this. Calls to obedience have been a hallmark of
this revival. I could cite a myriad of examples. I attended the
conference in Toronto that Mike's pastor went to, and at that
conference, Mike Bickle called us to repentance from adultery,
fornication, AND the extra-marital romances which can lead to
these things. And this is only one example. There are many
others. We have been called to follow the Lamb whithersoever He
goeth, and to be willing to lay down our lives, even unto death,
if necessary, in doing so. That was the theme of another one of
the evening meetings at that conference, where there was a series
of prophecies to the effect that we must be willing to face
persecution for the sake of Jesus Christ.
Mike says, "in the absence of calls to repentance, we would be
foolish to think a revival is coming." This is certainly true,
but there has been no absence of calls to repentance and
obedience in this revival.
Mike says, "the pastor and others have been deceived into
thinking that laughing in the spirit is a work of God." He then
goes on to say of laughing in the spirit that "it is demonic in
nature and is the result of God's judgment." If this is so, then
why is it that the ones being affected are being brought back to
their first love of Christ? Do demons cause this to happen? As
Martyn Lloyd-Jones has said, why should the devil suddenly do
something that calls attention to the things of God and the Lord
Jesus Christ?
Extreme caution would be advisable in making statements of this
kind, because whenever there is a danger of attributing the works
of God to the devil it is a very serious matter, and I believe
that if one continues to do that, that comes a point at which
there is no longer any hope for a person. We really need to pray
for Mike. He makes certain unfortunate remarks about his pastor
and the leaders of his church, which should really be directed to
them, and not to a third party.
My own questions to him would be, "and how about you? Do you
have the humility to identify with a movement that, to human
appearances, looks ridiculous? Do you have the humility not to
criticize something that you do not understand? Are you willing
to bear the reproach that necessarily comes in identifying with
what God is doing?" My advice to Mike would be to refrain from
criticism. Either what is happening is from God or it is not.
If not, it will pass. But if it is, then there is the very real
danger of opposing God Himself.
Date: 04-Jan-1995 10:52am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RSAL@CLSI.US.GEAC.COM )
Subject: #2
Patti, thank you for sending me a copy of THE TORONTO PHENOMENON
from Banner Ministries. As I'm sure you're aware, this paper is
based upon several false premises and makes many incorrect
pronouncements, so it really can't be taken very seriously.
It begins by stating that, "some are waiting for the genuine
hallmarks of revival to develop" in what is happening, as though
those hallmarks are not already present. But the fact of the
matter is, the characteristics of revival have been in evidence
in what has been happening from the very beginning. The article
then states that "disruptive and outrageous manifestations . . .
have never been signs of genuine revival," but in fact, most
genuine revivals have been accompanied by manifestations that
have been considered disruptive and outrageous.
The article then states that "revival is primarily for the
unsaved," but this is also false. Revival is really primarily a
reawakening of faith among Christians. Mass conversions are
often, but not even necessarily always, a by-product of such
reawakenings.
The author states that "this is a 'revival' that has so far
affected only Christians." Yet, at every Rodney Howard-Browne
meeting, hundreds of people come forward to become Christians for
the first time. Moreover, in June of this year, John Arnott said
that at the Toronto Airport Vineyard, 2,000 people had been saved
and 1,000 rededicated during the preceding six months, while
previously, no more than 200 had been saved and 100 rededicated
in any given year. The numbers of conversions are of a new order
of magnitude. This is exactly the sort of thing that often (but
not always) happens during a revival. In view of these facts, it
is clear that the author was writing in ignorance when he said
that this is "a move that involves no evangelism, has no
foundation of repentance." Repentance among believers has been
one of the key components of this revival. In many cases, God
doesn't give people much choice. He sometimes pins them to the
floor until they yield themselves in obedience to Him with
respect to various areas of their lives in which they have been
living in rebellion.
The article then says that there is a "scramble to travel to a
place where the manifestations are occurring, in order to 'get'
it. . . . A genuine revival . . . cannot be passed from one to
another like an infection." Again, this is spoken in ignorance.
One of the primary characteristics of revival is that it is
spread in exactly this way, just as can be observed, for example,
in a forest fire.
In section six, the author states that "the manifestations,
particularly the laughter, are not happening in response to the
ministry of the Word of God." Yet, it has been my observation
that the manifestations have been taking place as a direct
result, not only of the preaching of the word of God, but also of
the very presence of the Word of God Himself.
Section eight states that "the scriptures do not predict a
widespread revival, but they DO predict a great falling away from
the truth." This is also a false statement. In the Scriptures,
there are many prophetic glimpses of the great revival that will
take place at the end of the age. For example, the Lord said to
Moses, "For as truly as I live, all the earth will be filled with
the glory of the Lord," (Numbers 14:21), and in Habakkuk 2:14 we
read, "For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the
glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea."
Another patently false statement appears in section 9, where it
says, "any genuine outpouring of the Spirit should have affected
all churches alike." This has never been the case for any
awakening in all of church history. There are always churches
that accept a revival, and others that resist it. That is why we
have so many denominations. The established churches, for the
most part, tend to reject new outpourings of the spirit. The old
wineskins are usually incapable of containing the new wine.
In section 10, it says "revivals in the past were conducted in an
atmosphere of great reverence and awe of God. When the presence
of God came, it was to bring a holy awe, and those who cried out
did so in deep conviction of their sinfulness." This statement
is made as though there were some sense in which this were not
the case for the current awakening. But, once again, the author
is mistaken. Great reverence and awe of God, and conviction of
sin, are two major characteristics prevailing in the current
revival.
The author then says that "the tone of today's laughter is
mocking and maniacal, and excites nothing but amusement or
disgust in others." If he means that the laughter mocks satan
and his works, then he is correct. However, to my knowledge, in
no instance has there ever been a mocking attitude towards God or
to the works of God in the current revival.
In section 11 we read, "this phenomenon did not start
spontaneously, but was promoted by Rodney Howard-Browne."
Actually, it did start among several ministries simultaneously
(e.g., those of Cindy Jacobs of Colorado Springs, Mahesh Chavda
of Charlotte, North Carolina, Joe Jordan, and others), and in
Rodney's case, it did start spontaneously. In 1980, while still
in his native country, he was travelling in ministry with a group
of denominational people, and one day, when they were in the
vestry of a Methodist church, a woman who was in terrible pain
asked for prayer. He said, "I got up from my seat. . . . I was
going to put my hand on her head. . . . And I lifted my hand and
got it about here. Just like it looked like you'd pull a six-gun
out of a holster and point it at somebody. And when my hand got
about HERE, it felt like my fingertips came off, and out of my
hand flowed a full volume of the anointing and the power of God,
and it flowed right out of my hand and it went right in to her
forehead and she crumbled in the floor. . . . There was nobody
in the room more amazed than me. . . . And that anointing
stayed again for a period of two weeks." Then, in December of
1987, he arrived in the United States to engage in evangelistic
work, but it was not until April of 1989 near Albany in upstate
New York that he began experiencing continuous revival during his
meetings. He later said of the outset of the revival that, while
he was preaching, "The power of God fell in the place without
warning suddenly. People began to fall out of their seats. . . .
rolling on the floor. The very air was moving. People began to
laugh uncontrollably while there wasn't anything funny. . . .
The less I preached, the more people were saved." This was as
surprising to him as it was to everyone else, and from this point
onward, these phenomena accompanied his ministry regularly.
In section twelve, the article states that "there is no biblical
warrant for calling on the Holy Spirit, or praying to Him -- as
in 'Come, Holy Spirit.'" This also is patently false. In I
Corinthians 12:13, for example, it states that "we were all made
to drink of one Spirit," and in John 7:37-39, Jesus said "If any
man is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in
Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being shall flow
rivers of living water.' But this he spoke of the Spirit. . . ."
If we are thirsty, we are to come to Jesus and drink of the
Spirit. Then, we become fountains of the Spirit, as His presence
and power overflow from us to others.
In the Conclusion, it is stated that "if the root be bad, then
the fruit will be rotten . . . If we look at the roots, at
Rodney Howard-Browne's ministry . . . [etc.]" The author is
attempting to discredit Rodney Howard-Browne, and also the
Vineyard Churches, but there is really nothing that can be said
that to discredit either of these two vessels. Nevertheless, the
fact of the matter is, we are to look to God and not to the
vessels that He uses to bring His blessing and anointing.
When all is said and done, this work of God speaks for itself.
It is manifestly His work, and those who deny this do so at their
own peril. It is inevitable that the stumbling blocks will come,
but woe to those through whom the stumbling blocks come. May God
grant the author of this article a fresh anointing and
understanding, that he may escape the fate that awaits those who
attribute the works of God to the devil.
Date: 04-Jan-1995 10:54am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RSAL@CLSI.US.GEAC.COM )
Subject: Your Message
Rick, thank you very much for your message, and also for sending with it
David Wilkerson's sermon, "The Solomon Church!" I'm glad you sent it
because, even though I do receive David Wilkerson's sermons by "snail
mail," I had only skimmed this one, and I hadn't read the very last
portion of the sermon, in which he states that "most of the so-called
spiritual revivals today are mere cardboard structures. They're all going
to burn in the chaotic days ahead. What Christian will be laughing when
our cities are in flames? Who will be giddy and foolish when the economy
collapses?" and then, "when I think of the 25 million babies aborted in
this country and all the lost people who are going to hell, I don't
understand why multitudes of Christians are laughing. Why are millions
of Jews weeping and millions of hellbound, disillusioned sinners crying
themselves to sleep while charismatics are laughing? When the revival
comes, the joy will be because of repentance and because of the
ingathering of the last harvest of lost souls."
I believe that David Wilkerson is speaking in ignorance here, and I'm sure
he would be very embarrassed at his statements if he knew more of the
details of what God is actually doing in the current revival.
The answers to his questions, are of course, fairly obvious--the reason
that multitudes of Christians are laughing is because satan has been
defeated. We are laughing because we are all being delivered. In fact,
all of creation is being delivered from oppression, sickness, and from
all of the effects of the fall, through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
This is something that was provided for us at the cross, and deliverance
has always been available, but God, for some reason, has chosen the
present moment to bring about a shout of rejoicing about it in the camp!
Perhaps this means that the full realization of the deliverance will be
brought about shortly!
Have you ever seen the Star Wars film, THE RETURN OF THE JEDI? I do not
subscribe to the dualistic theology of the Star Wars films (God does not
have a "dark side," and any Christian should be fully aware of that), but
the very end of that film shows everybody rejoicing with GREAT REJOICING
because the powers of evil have been vanquished. Any idiot can see that
when the powers of evil are vanquished, there will be great rejoicing!
It is incredible to me that anyone could think that Christians should not
be ecstatic, in view of the fact that satan has been vanquisehd, and that
redemption that has been purchased for us by Jesus Christ!
David Wilkerson is right that judgement is coming. But we, as Christians,
are specifically told in the Scriptures that when these things happen, we
are to lift up our heads [rejoice], because our redemption is drawing
near (Luke 21:28).
It would not be at all surprising if we were living close to the time of
the end, when that redemption does draw nigh. Is this not reason enough
for us to lift up our heads and rejoice?
It is true that the judgements of God are sad, and sobering. In my
opinion, this is why He is granting us the gift of laughter at this
time--so that we can make it through the time of judgement without going
crazy! The Scriptures state that, as it was in the days of Noah, so shall
it be at the time of the coming of the son of man. Well, although Noah was
not judged, he sure witnessed the judgement. I'm sure that going
through the ordeal of the flood was very, very stressful to him. In fact,
when it was all over, he went out and got drunk. Maybe as we see the
judgements of God being poured out over all the earth we need some sort of
anesthesia to see us through it. Perhaps that is why God is now making so
many of us drunk in the Spirit!
In any case, Wilkerson's critique is certainly not Scriptural. The Bible
specifically commands us to "Rejoice in the Lord always, and again I say
rejoice" (Phil. 4:4), while Wilkerson seems to be asking us to do just
the opposite.
Well, I guess I've said enough about Wilkerson's comments. You asked if
any attempts had been made to answer the various criticisms of the
revival. I've made two such attempts, and I'll send them to you.
May God BLESS you!
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 08-Feb-1995 12:46pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%OLSROG@HOMER.ACS.BETHEL.EDU )
Subject: RE: RE: More on the Revival
Roger, thanks for your message in response to mine, entitled
"More on the Revival." You are right that what is happening now
has happened before. It has happened, not only in
Pentecostalism, but also in other earlier awakenings and
revivals. And, of course, you are right that there are many
lamentable excesses in what happens in these situations. As
Jonathan Edwards pointed out, revivals of this kind are always a
very mixed bag, with many bad things happening along with the
good things.
It has been my impression that, while there may be an anti-
intellectual emphasis in many circles in which this revival is
taking place, it need not be that way (and in fact, it is not
that way in every case). When people say, implicitly or
explicitly, that one must discard one's intellect to receive from
God, I take it with a grain of salt, knowing that intellect is
God-given, and that God has a greater intellect than anyone could
possibly imagine, and that we are made in the image of God.
Of course, anything God-given can be twisted. For example, anger
is a God-given emotion, yet we do, at times, become angry
inappropriately. Scripture refers to the wrath of God, and it
should not be surprising that if we are made in His image that
we, also, should experience anger as an emotion. Yet there are
times when anger on our part in certain situations would be
inappropriate, due to the fallenness of humanity. It would seem
to me that the fall has tainted everything about us, mind, will,
and emotions. Therefore, it would not be surprising if there
were cases in which people were misguided in their use of God-
given intellectual capabilities. One problem is that, very often
(although not always) pride is bound up very tightly with the use
of the intellect, and of course, pride can certainly be a
hindrance in receiving anything from God.
My advice would simply be to try to separate the precious from
the vile in these matters. If somebody doesn't bless, but puts a
kind of curse on others, then just take it with a grain of salt.
It would seem to me that people will only suffer harm from the
excesses during these revivals when they fail to use their own
God-given common sense and/or discernment about matters of this
kind.
Thanks very much for taking the time to interact with me on these
matters. Whether or not you participate in the current revival,
may God continue to BLESS you abundantly, as I'm sure He already
has. It is also may prayer that you not miss anything that God
might have for you in the current wave of His blessing.
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 08-Feb-1995 01:40pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%SATHRE@POGO.DEN.MMC.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%OAKMA001@MAROON.TC.UMN.EDU )
CC: Remote Addressee ( _in%SCICHR-L@NETCOM.COM )
CC: Remote Addressee ( _in%CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU )
Subject: Response to Tom H. Sathre
Thanks, Scott, and Tom, for your respective observations.
Tom, when you originally posted your comments on my paper to the
Christia list, I assumed, perhaps inappropriately, that you were
simply making some observations, and that there was no need for
any interaction. I also saw your briefer comments on the Science
and Christianity List.
When writing my paper, I did not expect that anyone would assume
that Scripture was not an important part of the revival. As it
happens, Scripture is an important part of the revival, and is
used often. One of the things that Rodney Howard-Browne does
frequently is to read entire chapters of the Bible at his
meetings, sometimes without any comment on what he has read. For
example, he did this on the Tuesday evening session of his winter
Campmeeting in Lakeland, Florida, last month.
The reason that I included many direct quotations from leaders in
the revival is that primary sources are far more valuable to the
historian than secondary accounts. The reason that I have very
little commentary on these accounts is because I had hoped that
the reader would be able to form his or her own conclusions,
negative or positive, based upon the primary source documentation
that I have provided.
Although it is true that I happen to be sympathetic to the
revival, I should point out that some people have used my paper
to try to demonstrate that the revival is not a good thing. I
think that this demonstrates that there is at least an element of
objectivity in what I have written, although I doubt that any
historian has ever succeeded in writing anything without bias
becoming evident in some way, if only in the selection of the
material to be treated.
The fact that there is a lack of critical perspectives in what I
have written is simply an indication that the paper, as it stands
at present, is merely an account of the self-understanding of the
movement as it has unfolded until the present time. This is a
valid historical methodology; it is the same methodology that I
have used in my other works on Pentecostalism--a methodology
which was praised by Walter J. Hollenweger when he acted as
"second reader" for my M.A. thesis on the Latter Rain Movement of
1948, done at Regent College (Vancouver, BC) in 1979.
Elsewhere, I have interacted with Hank Hanegraaff's criticisms of
the revival, but for the purposes of outlining its history, to do
so seemed to me to be outside of the scope of the immediate
objective of outlining the history of the movement.
If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.
May God BLESS you!
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 04-Jan-1995 04:55pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
Subject: David Wilkerson's Comments
In response to Mike "Moon" Wills on David Wilkerson (he cc:ed me, or I
would not have seen his comments), I'd like to say that if I
were a part of the lost and dying world, I would be far more likely to
respond to the message of the gospel if it were delivered to me by people
who had found true happiness and joy in the Lord, than I would if it were
delivered by people who seemed to disdain having a good time. So why are
we so down on ourselves for laughing in the Spirit?
One of the things that has amazed me about the current revival has been
the incredible change in order of magnitude of people coming to the Lord
for the first time. The only thing about it that has amazed me more is
the number of critics that talk about a lack of results in this regard!
To take only one example, Randy and Paula White (pastors of South Tampa
Christian Center in Florida), after being touched at a Rodney Howard-Browne
meeting in July of 1993, reported a year later that within that year, God
had brought to fruition a vision that Paula had when she had gone down
under the power of the Spirit, and the Lord had asked her, "how many
souls do you want?" and she said by the Spirit "fifty thousand." After
this had happened, in her own natural thinking, she thought, "how can I
ever get fifty thousand souls?" But it did happen, partly as a result of
RHB's financial backing, that fifty thousand people, mostly children, came
to the Lord through Randy and Paula's ministry, within a year after the
time that Paula White had this experience.
Examples of this type can be multiplied many times over. I don't
understand where people are coming from when they say that there is very
little fruit of this kind in this revival. Statistically, this revival
may already be one of the most successful in all of history with respect
to multiplication of believers (in terms of the ratio of believers to
converts), and I suspect we're only just getting started!
BTW, I'm not faulting Mike Wills--he's just repeating something that I keep
hearing over and over again, but which is completely untrue as far as I
can see. The instant the revival hit Toronto, immediately there was a
different order of magnitude in the number of conversions to Christ at the
Toronto Airport Vineyard than what they had previously experienced at that
church. The same has been true in countless other churches that have also
been hit by the revival.
So, keep laughing! Don't let them tell you that you can't laugh if you
want fruitfulness! And we'll laugh together all the way down to the
close of this age, knowing that the enemy has been totally defeated. You
know, Martin Luther always used to say that the thing that the devil hates
most is to be laughed at. When the devil appeared to him, Luther
laughed at him, and that alone was sufficient to cause the enemy to depart.
The devil wants to be taken seriously. He wants US to take it
so very, very seriously that such terrible, terrible things are happening
in the world. But God wants us to rejoice, and, in fact, COMMANDS us to
do so! Aren't you glad?
Take care, and God bless you--
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 12-Feb-1995 07:24pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%FORTL@PIPELINE.COM )
Subject: Your Message
Frank, thanks for your message, received here a few days ago. I'm sorry
that I do not have any abstracts to send you on the materials that you
received. The only thing that I could do would be to re-send anything
that you would want to peruse further.
You were asking about long term results in the lives of people who have
had various pentecostal experiences, and you mentioned that you were
having trouble understanding the value of pentecostal experiences, except
that they might be interesting in the same way that a haunted house is
interesting.
In my study of Pentecostalism, and of revivals in generally, including the
present revival, I have found that people change dramatically as a result
of these experiences. In most cases, they do not become great leaders,
scholars, champions of social causes, or scientists, but they do change
for the better in their daily lives as Christians. To give you a case in
point, my wife, Kathryn, came out of many, many years of depression as a
result of her involvement in the revival. With respect to her
personality, many people do not even recognize her any more. She is
cracking jokes for the first time, and it just isn't like her. Her
quality of life has improved, and as a result, her relationships with
others have improved markedly. We have a friend, Richard Swanson, who was
away for two years. He returned Friday, and visited us yesterday. He
hardly recongizes Kathryn, and he is rejoicing in the change that has come
over her. Testimonies of this kind are very, very frequent from within the
current revival. This has also been true in previous revivals. We have a
friend in Vancouver, BC, Ruth Welsh, who says that her life was changed
for the better in a most dramatic way as a result of the Latter Rain
revival of 1948. I know of many others who have said similar things
with respect to many different revivals.
I'm sorry that this aspect of things did not seem to come through in my
history of the current revival. I will have to re-read it and see what I
can do to address this important aspect of revival. Should you wish
another copy, feel free to ask.
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 12-Feb-1995 07:52pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%AMCBRYAN@CIX.COMPULINK.CO.UK
)
Subject: Your Messages
Arthur, thanks for sending the article by Tricia Tillin of Banner
Ministries and the Vision by Richard Smith, warning that the Toronto
Phenomenon is satanic in origin. Separately, I am sending you a response
of mine to some of Tricia Tillins's criticisms of the revival.
The vision by Richard Smith, if genuinely from God, would be very
disturbing. But this vision is extrabiblical. Don't the critics of the
revival take extrabiblical dreams and visions with a grain of salt? I
don't often take dreams and visions with a grain of salt, but in this
case, I will do so, because the fruit that I have seen resulting
from this revival has been excellent. People are becoming Christians
by the thousands. The lives of multitudes of people are being turned
around for the better. People are being healed of longstanding
physical and emotional wounds. Satan doesn't do these things.
Not only that, but people are re-orienting their lives in such a
way as to put God first. Their passion for Jesus is being renewed.
Why would satan want to do these things?
May the Lord enlighten the eyes of your understanding with respect to
these things.
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 12-Feb-1995 08:16pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%JDOUGD@AOL.COM )
Subject: Your Message
Doug, thanks for forwarding Joseph A. Nigro's article, "Holy Laughter or
Wholly Error." I disagree with your statement that it is balanced in its
criticism. I believe that its criticisms of the revival are unfounded,
and that many of its statements are false and misleading.
Many of the arguments he uses are from Tricia Tillin of Banner Ministries
and from recent messages by David Wilkerson. Separately, I am sending you
some of my responses to David Wilkerson's criticisms of the revival.
The statements that Joseph A. Nigro makes with respect to sensuality in
the meetings are utterly unfounded. I have been to many, many
Howard-Browne meetings and Vineyard meetings, and I can assure you that
there are no signs of sensuality in any of the meetings. In my opinion,
Mr. Nigro has put himself in a very dangerous position by making
statements of this kind. God is very severe in His judgements against
false accusations with respect to what He is doing, and I really do fear
for him because of this.
The "Holy Laughter" has been healing the wounds of many people, making
them whole once again. If this is evil, then what is good?
I pray that the Lord might enlighten the eyes of your understanding, so
that you may see His work for what it is.
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 19-Feb-1995 12:02pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%PRITCH@SYBASE.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%TERESA@CCNET.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RCLARK1781@AOL.COM )
Subject: Response for Mark Pritchard
Dear Mark,
Teresa Seputis forwarded to me your query concerning the Toronto
Vineyard and the manifestations associated with it, and asked me
if I might interact with you on some of the things that you asked
about.
You mentioned that you had some superficial doubts about the
manifestations, and that, beyond that, you also had more serious
doubts, and you asked, "I wonder what good the people at your
church, and the others which are experiencing them, think is
being done, aside from a certain fun-thrills spiritual feeling.
Do the manifestations prove God's presence to anyone besides the
recipients? I don't think so. Are they having any effect
outside these churches? I haven't seen any. Are they causing
the recipients to act with more charity, love and as peacemakers?
I don't know."
I'll attempt to interact with you on these more serious doubts,
and then I'll say a little bit about the more superficial ones.
You'll be happy to know that what is happening is having a
tremendous effect upon the outside world. I'll give you a few
examples.
(1) Here's a quotation from Steve Witt's testimony at the CATCH
THE FIRE Conference at the Regal Constellation hotel, Wednesday
evening, October 12, 1994, sponsored by the Toronto Airport
Vineyard (Stephen Witt is pastor of the Vineyard in St. John, New
Brunswick): "The final thing of this phase is that we're
beginning to pour it out now into the streets. And last week we
heard about--I call that a prayer walk to MacDonald's. That was
my destination. And I got there and there . . . the manager of
the MacDonald's was arguing with some teenagers--about 12 or 13
of them out in the parking lot. And they were giving them a real
problem, so I walked up, and said, 'Is there a problem?' And she
said, 'Well, there's always a problem.' And I knew about the
problem she was talking about. Every Friday night there's about
150 to 200 teens that gang up at the MacDonald's--there's been
gang fights--there's been all kinds of drugs and everything else
that takes place and they can't do anything about it. The police
have tried to get rid of them--they can't get rid of them. So I
said, 'You know what?' The Lord gave me a plan at that point. I
said, 'I've got a plan that will get all the teens off this
property.' She said, 'What's that?' (Well, first of all, she
said, 'It's impossible. We've tried everything.') I said,
'We'll send a team up here and tell them about Jesus.' She said,
'That might work.' [laughter from the audience].
"So last Friday night during our renewal meeting, this, at the
advice of John Wimber, actually began to pour it out. We called
a team forward of guys--I thought we would send the guys first,
since it was a pretty rough situation. We laid hands on them.
They were not a macho-looking group at all, but we sent them over
to MacDonald's. They got to minister to over 150 teens in the
MacDonald's parking lot! One came to the Lord Jesus Christ. And
then one of our other prophetic-type individuals--he started
ministering and praying for people, and they started trembling,
and all the kids started saying, 'We want that! We want that!'
"So--there was a real touch of the Spirit of God and . . . this
Friday now we're doubling the team; we're sending men and women
out to go back. The police came up to our building because that
night a gang of kids had run in to our renewal meeting, fleeing
another gang of kids that had baseball bats. We had just prayed
the week before that God would make our church a refuge and that
the teens would come in. So we ARE a seeker-sensitive church.
They're running in now. And the police showed up with their
lights going and everything, and I thought, 'Oh, no!' you know,
this is--they had showed up before--but they came this time and
he got out of the car and he says, 'I can't tell you guys how
much we appreciate what you did at MacDonald's tonight.' He
says, 'You'll never know.' This is the policemen in our city.
'You'll never know the impact that made. This morning I called
my secretary and she said, we've got a call at the office today--
one of the mothers of one of these teens who the parents were
concerned. They knew they were down there but they didn't know
how to stop them from going and she says, you know, he came home,
he told us all about what had happened, and she says, "Do you
have a youth group that I can get him involved in?"'
"So we're just seeing now a real breakout in evangelism and you
know for us, that wasn't even the ultimate thing. The ultimate
thing for us is to develop a passion for Jesus. That, to me, is
higher than evangelism. But when you get the heart of Jesus
Christ, something of evangelism comes into your heart because
that's His heart, so hopefully that's beginning to pour out in
our church more."
(2) Randy and Paula White (pastors of South Tampa Christian
Center in Florida), after being touched at a Rodney Howard-Browne
meeting in July of 1993, reported a year later that within that
year, God had brought to fruition a vision that Paula had when
she had gone down under the power of the Spirit, and the Lord had
asked her, "how many souls do you want?" and she said by the
Spirit "fifty thousand." After this had happened, in her own
natural thinking, she thought, "how can I ever get fifty thousand
souls?" But it did happen. Their "Operation Explosion" program,
in which they take a truck into the inner cities for evangelism
especially among children, has been highly successful. Operation
Explosion is a highly energetic and entertaining show on wheels
for kids, where there is a high level of audience participation,
in which Jesus is lifted up as savior. Because of the success of
this program, their church has been identified as the second
fastest growing church in the United States. When they took a
truck to Los Angeles in October of 1993, several thousand were
saved as a result of this ministry.
(3) Mike and Kim Francen (pronounced Franceen) of Tulsa,
Oklahoma, are such pace setters in the area of world missions
that they have been called "the T. L. Osborne of the 1990s."
Since 1985, they have been holding crusades worldwide, with
10,000 to 100,000 people in attendance per night. As of the
summer of 1994, they had been to forty-three countries and over
one million people had accepted Jesus Christ through their
ministry. They have a vision to win 500,000 people to Christ per
year, to flood the mission field with Christian literature, to
train national leaders, to provide 100 mobile evangelism units,
and to plant churches worldwide. At his summer campmeeting in
Louisville, Kentucky in July of 1994, Rodney Howard-Browne asked
Mike Francen to say something about the "frog boy," who was a boy
who came to the crusade who was lame, and had never stood in his
life. He had had polio at three or four months of age, and had
crawled on the ground all of his life. At one of their crusades,
the Lord enabled this boy to walk, and as a result of this, tens
of thousands more people came to Christ.
(4) Bob and Rose Weiner have a ministry among university students
in Russia. They had 1,200 people in attendance in a Charismatic
Conference in Moscow in July of 1991. They sent out fifteen kids
to every major center in Russia, and told them to start cell
groups. Various churches arose from these cell groups. Three of
the largest of these churches grew to 800 members, one thousand
people, and three or four thousand members respectively. Now
they are working in China, where they are getting one thousand
people to teach English and distribute Christian literature in
the process. Rose Weiner spoke on this at Rodney Howard-Browne's
July campmeeting.
Examples of this type can be multiplied many times over, but let
me get on to some of your other questions. You asked if what is
happening is causing the recipients of these experiences to act
with more charity and love, or as peacemakers. In my study of
Pentecostalism, and of revivals in generally, including the
present revival, I have found that people change dramatically as
a result of these experiences. In most cases, they do not become
great leaders, scholars, champions of social causes, or
scientists, but they do change for the better in their daily
lives as Christians. To give you a case in point, my wife,
Kathryn, came out of many, many years of depression as a
result of her involvement in the revival. With respect to her
personality, many people do not even recognize her any more. She
is cracking jokes for the first time, and it just isn't like her.
Her quality of life has improved, and as a result, her
relationships with others have improved markedly. We have a
friend, Richard Swanson, who was away for two years. He returned
a week ago Friday, and visited us the following day. He hardly
recongizes Kathryn, and he is rejoicing in the change that has
come over her. A few months ago, when my parents were visiting,
they were amazed that Kathryn was joking about things. She had
never done this, in all of the years that they have known her.
There has been a major change in her quality of life as a result
of what has happened to her during this revival. The result of
this is that she has become more loving toward those around her.
Testimonies of this kind are very, very frequent from within the
current revival.
This, I would say, does constitute proof of that God has been
present, so, yes, I would say that what is happeneing does prove
God's presence to people beyond the recipients. Wouldn't you say
that, indeed, if these testimonies are genuine, that plenty of
good is being done, aside from the fun-thrills spiritual feeling
that you described?
Now, lets go back to the more superfical doubts that you
expressed. Wouldn't you say that the hypothesis of demon-
possession would be highly unlikely in view of the results that
we're seeing? People are becoming Christians by the thousands.
The lives of multitudes of people are being turned around for the
better. People are being healed of longstanding physical and
emotional wounds. Satan doesn't do these things. Not only that,
but people are re-orienting their lives in such a way as to put
God first. Their passion for Jesus is being renewed. Why would
satan want to do these things?
And finally, the question as to whether the phenomena we're
seeing isn't really a manifestation of lower-class rural
superstition. No, actually, in the U.K., it seems to have been
manifested among the highest classes. Holy Trinity Brompton is
attended by many in the very highest classes in London, and that
church has become a center of this revival (with all of its
attendant manifestations) since late May or early June of last
year. Nevertheless, even if no such manifestations had taken
place among the highest echelons of society, that, in and of
itself, would not be a good argument against the revival. God
would have us to be humble about these things, and lower
ourselves, as did Jesus. After all, Jesus was God Himself, yet
He did not disdain that which pertained to the lowest strata of
society.
I hope that these considerations will be beneficial; feel free to
contact either Teresa or myself if you have further questions.
With every good wish to you in the Lord,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Erling, thanks for the message that you passed on to me and the new wine list
from someone named Patty, who wanted your reaction to a critical testimony
posted to a Christian list to which her husband subscribes.
This same "testimony" was posted to the religion forum on Compuserve many
months ago. At the time that I read it, I didn't see much of a need to
respond to it because it was so contrary to all that I had seen and heard
first hand with respect to the revival. But I'll be glad to interact with
it, since you seem to think that this would be helpful.
One of the things that I don't like about this particular account is that it
does not provide specifics. It mentions a small Vineyard church, but the
church is not identified. This means that any clarification of
misunderstandings or correction of erroneous information becomes nearly
impossible. It gives the writer the liberty to say anything, no matter how
incorrect, without any possibility for others to evaluate the charges
objectively.
In any case, here are some comments on specific statements:
(1) "I felt that our church was straying more and more from God's Word,
delving more into the mystical, combined with suspicious interpretation of
the Bible." This seems to me to be a false distinction. In my opinion, the
Bible is mystical, and most of the authors of the Bible had supernatural (or
mystical) experiences. In many cases, the certain parts of the Bible were
actually written as a result of these experiences. It would seem to me that
the mystical would lead a person to study the Bible more closely.
I would like to know what this person considers to be a "suspicious"
interpretation of the Bible. Suspicious in what way? I have not encountered
suspicious interpretations of the Bible in the meetings that I've been in
since June, when I first found out about the revival.
(2) "The messages were long, unclear, and void of Biblical content." The
messages I have heard have been quite the opposite. They have been clear,
rich in Biblical content, and as lengthy as would be appropriate in a
situation in which people have been hungering and thirsting for more of God.
(3) "We were encouraged not to pray, just to receive." In the meetings I've
attended, this was done as a way of helping a person to receive from God.
Many people seem to think that they have to work in order to receive from
God. Receiving from God is not based upon works, even works of prayer.
Martin Luther learned the hard way that this is not the way God operates.
Now this does not mean that we are never supposed to pray. It simply means
that, when receiving of His Spirit, we need to stop talking to God, and let
Him talk to us, and minister to us.
(4) "To be honest, if someone came up to me and said they went to a meeting
where the above occurred, I would instantly think it was cultish." The
current revival seems to me to be the very antithesis of cultishness. In a
cult, there is usually a strong central leader who wants everybody to follow
him. In the current revival, we have what has been popularly called a
"nameless, faceless revival," and this is an accurate description. No one is
attempting to take credit for what God is doing, and nobody is insisting that
people must be a part of their particular group. There are people in the
current revival from every denomination. Cults are just the opposite. They
consist of people who refuse to be a part of any other group.
(5) "It was like junior high girls giggling, but for all the wrong reasons."
There is a lack of specificity here, which leaves to the imagination what
these "wrong reasons" might be. Is a person laughing for the wrong reasons
if God has touched them? That is the reason people are laughing in the
current revival.
(6) "The hysterical laughter continued its mocking tones." I have not
witnessed any laughter in mockery at any meetings associated with the current
outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Here again, with a lack of specificity, any
charges can be made, however poorly substantiated.
(7) "Was this in order? You may have different interpretations of order, but
this was chaotic." The fact of the matter is that every genuine revival of
history has brought about what seemed to most people to be chaos.
(8) "The Bible became closed. Instead, there were new topics that were more
important: like getting drunk, blasted, filled, floored, changed. Instead
of the Gospel, came the 'microwave theology': 'come up here for 10 min., land
on the floor, and years of praying, and work will be taken care of.'" In
point of fact, God can and does heal instantaneously (spiritually,
emotionally, and physically), and this is particularly the case during times
of revival. When God comes in power in this way, the Bilbe does not become
closed. Rather, the Bible becomes an open book. People go back to the Bible
to see how and why such supernatural phenomena might be occurring. "Getting
drunk, blasted, filled, floored, changed" is not something apart from the
Bible. The infilling of the Holy Spirit is one of the core messages of the
Bible. Becoming totally immersed in God's Spirit, even drunken in the
Spirit, enables us to understand and appreciate the Bible all that much more.
It is the Spirit of God who brings about this understanding and appreciation
of God's word, and it is one of the direct results of the experiences of
drunkenness and infilling described here.
(9) "The pastor talked about 'out-of-body experiences' as something to be
expecting, and other lewd things I care not to mention." The reference to
"out-of-body experiences" is probably a reference to translation from one
geographical location to another, such as that which happened to Phillip the
evangelist in the books of Acts. Or, it could be a reference to the type of
thing that happened to the apostle Paul, when he said that he went to third
heaven, "whether in the body or out of the body, I do not know." In any
case, it is highly unlikely that it is a reference to astral-body travel
(which is associated with the occult), even though the author apparently
seems to imply this.
The reference to "other lewd things I care not to mention," may well be a
complete falsehood. There is certainly no way of substantiating this claim,
which, to my mind, makes it suspect. Certainly I've not heard any reference
to lewd things in the meetings that I've attended.
There is much given here by way of innuendo that remains unsubstantiated.
But of course, the other side of the coin is that not every single last thing
that takes place in a revival is necessarily of God. But when there are
imperfections, people all too easily seem to have a tendency to throw the
baby out with the bathwater, and reject what God is doing.
I hope this helps!
With every good wish to you in the Lord,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 28-Feb-1995 05:09pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%HUNTER44@MAIL.FLEXNET.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RCLARK1781@AOL.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%NEW-WINE-NEWS@UIUC.EDU )
Subject: RE: Questions from Bob Hunter
(I'm posting this to new-wine-news, assuming that Bob Hunter's
post also appeared here. If not, then, Jon, this need not be
posted here either.)
Bob, thanks for your inquiry, addressed to Randy Clark and me.
I'll be glad to provide you with some of my own opinions on the
questions you asked, but I would be speaking only for myself, and
not necessarily on behalf of Randy (nor necessarily on behalf of
anyone in the Vineyard).
In general it is the case that, during times of revival, there is
usually a lot of speculation on eschatological matters. There is
also a very heightened expectation of the immediate fulfillment
of various eschatological portions of the Scriptures, especially
the coming of Christ.
My guess is that if you posed these questions to various
proponents of the current revival, you would get a variety of
answers. It would seem to me that, at least for some of these
questions, we are really only in the realm of speculation. It
may be that a lot of these things really won't get cleared up
until the events that have been prophesied have actually been
fulfilled.
I don't even claim to have answers for your questions, so I'm not
even sure that I can answer them correctly, but I'll do what I
can to try to interact with them.
You asked about the relationship between what is happening now
(including the expectation of a coming great harvest) with
certain Scriptures, particularly II Thess. 2:12, Matt. 24:21-27,
and I Thess. 4:13-18. There are, of course, other Scriptures
that specifically quote Jesus to the effect that there will be a
harvest at the end of the age, so the question is really a
hermeneutical one, i.e., how do we interpret these Scriptures in
light of the fact that there will be a harvest at the end of the
age and/or in light of the fact that we are currently
experiencing revival.
The question seems to assume: (1) that proponents of the current
move of God believe (a) that there will be a final, huge revival
at the time of the end, and (b) that the present revival is
indeed the revival that will usher in the end of the age, (2)
that II Thess. 2:12 would imply that anti-Christ will be made
manifest before any final harvest, and (3) that Matt. 24:21-27
implies that there will be false Christs, lying signs and
wonders, and unequalled distress before any such final harvest.
(But I wasn't quite sure why you were asking about the
relationship of I Thess 4:13-18 to what is happening at the
present time.)
There are thus a lot of assumptions here, and I'm not equally
comfortable with all of them. To be specific, I have not decided
yet whether I agree with assumptions (a) and (b) above, despite
the excellent writings of Rick Joyner. But one of the things
that I like about the Body of Christ, and also about the current
revival in particular, is that we can be in full fellowship with
one another as Christian brothers and sisters, yet not
necessarily be in total agreement on every single issue.
Now, if I understand your general question, it is, "shouldn't
certain things happen prior to the harvest at the end of the age,
like the coming of the anti-Christ, unequalled distress, false
signs and miracles, and false christs?" My answer to this
question is, yes, certain things of this nature will happen, and
I expect them to happen very soon--momentarily. How all of this
relates to the current revival is an interesting question. My
own personal opinion is that the present move of God is His
method of preparing us for very, very difficult times that lie
directly ahead for all Christians. I believe that we live in
very perilous times. I say this, not as a theologian, but as a
historian. I see the signs of gravely serious peril because of
our own particular historical situation, regardless of what the
Bible may or may not say about these matters.
The only way many of us are going to MAKE IT through the imminent
perilous times is with extra oil in our lamps, so to speak. God
is providing that oil right now. We can either take advantage of
it, or not. If not, then life will be much more difficult (but
theoretically not impossible) for those of us who reject what God
is giving to us at the present time. God loves us, and He wants
us to be prepared for what is about to happen. But if we reject
that help, that does not necessarily mean that He'll have no
compassion upon us when faced with the coming peril. It just
means that things will be that much more difficult.
You asked whether we believed that there is an antichrist coming
as a single individual. Yes, I do believe that the antichrist
will be (or perhaps already is) a single individual.
You also asked whether we believed that there will be a rapture.
I'm not sure why are you asking this. Is there some reason why
you think that we might not believe that there will be a rapture?
(I'm not sure how this particular question relates to the other
questions--and it's quite possible that I'm missing something
here.) My own personal interpretation of I Thess. 4:13-18
differs markedly from the usual twentieth century interpretation,
and is more along the lines of the understanding of such people
as Jonathan Edwards (and the understanding that prevailed during
his time), and that of Ireneaus, bishop of Lyons. But to
elaborate upon this would not be directly relevant to the
discussion (unless I'm missing something).
Finally, you asked about William DeArteaga's statements about
heresies, and whether we think that those who oppose this move of
God are heretics. There are two possibilities. Either what is
happening now is a move of God or it is not. If, indeed, it is a
move of God, then, in my opinion, anyone opposing it is opposing
God. Whether or not those involved in opposition to it are
called heretics is, in my opinion, basically a matter of
semantics. According to the quote you provided, Bill DeArteaga
says, "Phariseeism is the heresy of orthodoxy, which is basically
correct ideas . . . The Pharisees didn't have wrong theological
ideas." This, I suppose, is one way of definining heresy. But
if you define heresy in terms of what is believed theologically,
then those who oppose the current move of God are not necessarily
heretics. But what I think Bill is saying here is that you don't
even necessarily have to be a heretic in the traditionally
understood sense to be opposed to God, and that, I think, is
true.
Now it is important to remember that, during times of revival,
many of those who begin as opponents of a revival later become
its defenders. Sometimes this is a result of dramatic
supernatural events that are experienced by these people. So
it's never appropriate to "write off" opponents of a move of God
as intransigently opposed of God, nor should they be treated in
that way.
I hope this answers most of your questions. As I said, I can't
speak for Randy, or for any other leaders, but I do value and
welcome their perspectives and yours, and hope to seriously
consider all of these perspectives prayerfully, even if they
might differ from my own, for that is how we learn, and grow.
May the Lord continue to BLESS you abundandly!
Most sincerely,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 02-Mar-1995 02:53pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Press SH to view recipients.
Subject: Hank Hanegraaff's Criticisms-A Note to Randy Clark
Randy, thanks for your query concerning my evaluation of Hank
Hanegraaff's criticisms of the current revival. I have listened
to his tape, "The Counterfeit Revival," and I'll attempt to
interact with it here.
Hank begins by saying that throughout history, the Church has
experienced genuine revival, but that "today, we are experiencing
what might best be described as 'the counterfeit revival.'"
It would seem to me as a historian that this is an a-historical
statement. To my knowledge, at no point in the past have we ever
experienced a counterfeit revival. Now, all of a sudden, we are
asked to believe that, for the first time in two thousand years,
a counterfeit revival has been born. Every revival has had its
fierce critics, but thus far, the verdict of history has been
that every revival of the past has been genuine, despite the
inevitable problems and imbalances.
Hank also says that "lying signs and wonders are not a
demonstration of revival. It will come when each one of us is
deeply committed to worshipping God in Spirit and in truth.
Where we get back into the word and get the word back into us.
And without the word, we have no barometer for truth and error."
I have been observing carefully the current revival for nine
months, and it seems evident to me that this it is causing
multitudes of people to do just these things--to become deeply
committed to worshipping Him God in Spirit and in truth, to get
back into the Word of God, and, especially, to get the Word back
into each of us. Really, that's what this revival has been all
about--people have been transformed after doing "carpet time" on
the floor, slain by the Spirit. They have become new creatures,
dedicated anew as servants and disciples of Jesus Christ.
I would agree that signs and wonders, in and of themselves, are
not a demonstration of revival. But we are seeing far more than
miracles. We're seeing people returning to obedience to Jesus
Christ, and we're seeing this on a large scale. Because this is
the case, I see no reason to refer to the miracles of the present
revival as "lying signs and wonders."
Hank attempts to draw an analogy between what is happening now
and what happened during Jeremiah's time, when false prophets
were declaring "peace, peace," and there was not peace. He says,
"They're declaring 'revival' when revival is far from reality in
our lives." But on the contrary, revival has indeed become
reality in the lives of multitudes of people over the past year
or more.
Hank describes a Rodney Howard-Browne meeting that he attended at
Melodyland Christian Center. He says that he was with an expert
in mass hypnosis, and that this expert said that Rodney was using
psychological and sociological manipulation, and sleight of hand.
At one point, when the crowd responded in a certain way, he said,
"he's using an embedded command," implying that Rodney had
conditioned the crowd to respond in a certain way when he used a
certain word, much the same way a person who had been hypnotized
would perform a given action upon hearing a certain word embedded
in a sentence.
I would encourage anyone who really takes this charge seriously
to read the fifth chapter of SIGNS OF REVIVAL by Patrick Dixon,
who is a physician. He brings to bear his own medical expertise
to help explain the manifestations, and he carefully examines,
and dismisses after careful consideration, charges that leaders
of the current movement are being manipulative or that people are
being brainwashed, or that the movement is nothing but a
manifestation of mass hysteria or mass hypnosis.
Hank later observes that Rodney once preached on hell, and that
he said that "the more I told people what hell was like, the more
the people laughed." Hank contrasts this to the preaching of
Jonathan Edwards on this topic, which, he says, elicited weeping
and repentance. But God does work in different ways at different
time and places, and in my opinion, one cannot conclude from this
that Rodney's meetings are part of a "counterfeit revival." As
Christians, we know that nothing can separate us from the love of
God, neither height nor depth, nor the things of the world, nor
the powers of hell itself. For this reason, we are able to laugh
in the face of the powers of hell, for we know that they have no
power over us. Really, when all is said in done, it is indeed
laughable that the enemy should even attempt to make any attempt
to overcome us. He doesn't have a chance against the living God.
I think what Rodney was pointing out when he made this statement
was that God was sovereignly causing the people to laugh; it
could not possibly have been a situation in which he was
manipulating the crowd into laughter by telling jokes or by
telling funny stories. His critics have taken this and twisted
it to make it appear as though the current revival does not
concern itself with repentance. Yet, repentance is what this
revival is all about. As you know, when people fall under the
power of God, God deals with them to become obedient unto him,
and this has been happening on a very large scale.
Hank Hanegraaff then takes issue with the idea of a great revival
immediately preceding the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. He
says, "In Biblical eschatology, the precursor to the coming of
the Lord is great apostasy." This idea is actually a fairly
recent one. In Jonathan Edwards' day, it was assumed that great
revival would precede Christ's coming, and that all the earth
would be filled with the Glory of the Lord, as Scripture states.
It was really only after the pessimism following World War I that
large numbers of Christians began interpreting the Bible in such
a way as to expect a great apostasy prior to the Lord's coming.
Hank takes issue with Rodney's comments to the effect that, more
and more, dramatic healings will become a part of this revival.
He says, "I believe God can and does heal. However, where is the
evidence this is taking place? Where are the people who have
been raised from the dead? We don't need to tell stories of this
kind to authenticate the Gospel." Essentially, he is charging
Rodney with telling falsehoods, and that is a serious charge,
especially in light of the fact that there actually is plenty of
evidence that people are being healed. Moreover, he's asking for
evidence of things that Rodney says are soon to come. How can
anyone produce evidence of things that have not yet happened,
even if they will be happening soon?
Hank then says that "God never, never tells us to set aside our
rational thinking processes. . . . Feel. Don't think. This is
the age old lie of satan." There is some truth to this
statement. However, God does tell us that His thoughts are not
our thoughts, and that, as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are His ways higher than our ways, and His thoughts than our
thoughts. Scripture also states that the natural man does not
accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness
to him, and he cannot understand them. It is true that God has
given us the ability to think, and that we should use that as a
God-given gift. But it is also true that man, in his fallenness,
often uses that gift improperly.
He then goes on to say that "such awful, devilish manifestations"
as are taking place in the current revival are being used to
sensitize us, as Christians, to the world of the occult. He
quotes John Wimber to the effect that, formerly, he considered
some of the current manifestations to be demonic, but that now he
is taking a wait and see attitude; if the fruit in the peoples'
lives turns out to be good, then he will acknowledge that these
things are of God. Hank says that "This is a far cry from a
pastor protecting his sheep against wolves." It would seem to me
that Hank is missing something very important here. The pastor
is to protect the sheep against wolves, but those wolves are
people, not manifestations. The wolves are those who would lead
people astray into evil, not people roaring like lions in church
services.
Hank then quotes a couple of verses from Ecclesiastes and from
Luke 6:25 to the effect that sorrow is better than laughter. I
believe that he is taking these verses out of their proper
context, however. When Jesus says "Woe to you who laugh now, for
you shall mourn and weep," he is talking to those who are
enjoying the pleasures of the world at the expense of obedience
unto God. The laughter in the current revival has nothing to do
with the pleasures that the world offers. It is a result of God-
given joy.
Hank then observes that you can get laughter from Transcendental
Meditation, and eastern religions. This may well be, but this,
in and of itself, does not demonstrate that laughter among
Christians must therefore be of satanic origin. He says that
Mahareji Mahesh Yogi twists the Scriptures and says "be still and
know that you are God." This may be the case, but this does not
demonstrate anything, whether positive or negative, about what
goes on in Rodney Howard-Browne's meetings, or in Vineyard
meetings.
Hank then states that roaring like a lion is not an indication of
the presence of the Holy Spirit. He quotes some statements by
John Arnott concerning Revelation 4, and a manifestation in one
meeting of the lion, the ox, the eagle, and the warrior. John
was addressing the fact that "it scared people so bad that many
of them ran right out of the meeting," and reassured someone by
saying that if you asked for bread, you would not be given a
stone (Luke 11:11), i.e., if you asked for the Holy Spirit you
would not be given something demonic (Luke 11:13). Hank
contrasts this with the admonition in Scripture to test the
spirits and see if they be of God. But while it is true that we
are to test the spirits, this does not invalidate Luke 11:11-13.
If we ask God for something good, he will not substitute it with
something bad.
Hank says that "in genuine revivals there has always been an
acute awareness of Satan's seductions. . . . The Gospel must
approach the heart through the intellect in direct response to
understood truth. . . . Rodney Howard-Browne authenticates his
messages through signs and wonders. . . . A self-induced altered
state of consciousness is exceedingly dangerous--a doorway into
the occult." The fact of the matter is, in the genuine revivals
of the past, many of the same things happened that we are now
experiencing in the present revival. People experienced the
supernatural power of God, knocking them down to the ground, just
as is happening now. God often approaches the heart directly,
sometimes bypassing the intellect altogether, at least in the
beginning of what people experience. These things are not "self-
induced." In many cases, particularly in the Vineyard, people
were not seeking these things and didn't even know about them
until they experienced them.
Hank complains that there is no Biblical precedent for people
being slain in the Spirit, and that, in the Scriptures, those who
worshipped Christ fell forward, and His enemies fell backwards.
But the Bible does not claim to be exhaustive. Just because
something is not in the Bible does not mean that it is
illegitimate. In many of the revivals of past history, people
have fallen over backwards, overcome by the power of God. Taken
to their logical conclusions, some of Hank's statements would
imply that most of the previous revivals of past history were
also counterfeit revivals.
He then says, "What is being pronounced as a work of God is
merely a deception in our midst. . . . Rodney Howard-Browne
glues you to the floor in the Spirit. . . . He causes you to go
dumb and to get drunk in the Spirit, along with many other lying
signs and wonders." Rodney never claims to be doing these things
himself. Rather, he says that God in manifesting His power in
the midst of the meeting. Also, it appears that Hank really
doesn't understand what is meant by "lying signs and wonders" in
the Bible. "Lying signs and wonders" will cause people to be led
into works of evil. But that is the exact opposite of what is
happening in the current revival. In May of 1994, Bill Jackson
said in WHAT IN THE WORLD IS HAPPENING TO US: A BIBLICAL
PERSPECTIVE ON RENEWAL, that "reports are coming from every
corner about people falling in love with Jesus in a whole new
way, about a new love for the Bible, about being taken up into
heaven in the form of visions and dreams. In the arms of Jesus
is fullness of Joy." He also says, "Reports too numerous to
count tell of physical healings, deliverance from demonic
influence and deep emotional wounds being touched." You and I
both know enough about this revival to know that Bill Jackson is
not making these things up. We are constantly getting reports of
this nature, and we have seen these things happening in our own
lives and in the lives of our friends and family members.
Hank then goes into a discussion of the second chapter of Acts.
He attempts to maintain the thesis that the people were accused
of drunkenness, not because they were acting drunk, but because
they were speaking in tongues. "There is absolutely no evidence
that anything else [other than the speaking in tongues and the
tongues as of fire] occurred." This really seems to me to be
stretching things. Where in the world would these witnesses get
the idea that the apostles were drunken if they were only
speaking in other tongues? Why would such a thing even occur to
them? It should be fairly obvious that it was supposed that they
were drunken because they were acting as though they were
inebriated.
Then he says, "Paul of course in Ephesians 5 is not saying that
drunkenness is desirable and has some kind of a Biblical
counterpart. Paul no more wants you to get drunk in the Spirit
than he wants you to have a sexual affair in the Spirit or to use
obscene language in the Spirit. Rather, he says, have nothing to
do with the fruitless deeds of darkness. Instead, manifest self-
control, not drunkenness. Self control is the Fruit of the
Spirit." It would seem to me that Hank is being a bit ridiculous
here. Surely he must know that it is impossible to have a sexual
affair in the Spirit or to use obscene language in the Spirit.
But this has nothing to do with Ephesians 5:18, which
specifically says, "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to
debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit." It would seem
to me that this verse very clearly compares the effects of the
Holy Spirit to the effects of alcohol. As it happens,
drunkenness in the Spirit does lead to the worship and love of
God, obedience and even to self-control. It should be obvious
that when self-control is mentioned as a fruit of the Spirit, the
reference is to preventing oneself from sinning. "Self-control"
has to do with restraining oneself from evil, and not with
whether or not one can prevent oneself from laughing or being
stricken to the floor.
Hank then says, "They're shaking so fast that the only thing that
I've seen remotely close to it is what you find in the Ashrams in
Puma, India, later transported to America, to Oregon under Bogwa
Shri Rashvej. So they did what was called dynamic meditation to
work themselves into an altered state of consciousness. The same
thing you see there can be seen in the Church." But more than
anyone, Hank should know that the enemy can counterfeit that
which is genuinely of God. If some of the same phenomena are
observable among adherents of eastern religions or of occult
groups as can be seen in the midst of revival, this does not
invalidate the genuine article of which these things are
counterfeits in the occult groups.
Of course, it seems to me that there are obvious differences
between what happens in a revival and what happens among
adherents of the occult or of eastern religions. While Hank
indicates that those who practice "dynamic meditation" work
themselves into an altered state of consciousness, in the case of
those involved in the current revival, there is certainly no
attempt to work oneself into any given state. It just happens
spontaneously as God moves sovereignly.
Then he says, "Most of what you see in the Vineyard, in other
churches under Rodney Howard-Browne and in the counterfeit
revival can be explained through human phenomena. But there
certainly is a demonic element to it as well. We see the
acquisition of power to manipulate people into certain actions.
We ought to be reminded once again of Deuteronomy, chapter 18."
He then quotes from this chapter, which speaks against such
things as divination, sorcery, and those who consult the dead.
But these things are far removed from what is happening in the
revival today. When was the last time Rodney Howard-Browne or
John Arnott consulted the dead, or practiced divination? As far
as I am aware, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone in
leadership in the various streams of the revival has ever done
anything associated with the occult.
He then expresses his incredulity about various accounts that
Rodney Howard-Browne gave about Smith Wigglesworth, especially
one in which there was a resurrection from the dead. He says,
"Does that stretch your credulity at all? It does mine. I
believe that God can raise someone from the dead, but, my
friends, if that had happened, why is it that Wigglesworth was
better known for supposedly healing appendicitis than raising
people from the dead? And if that had happened, I guarantee you
it would be front page news in every newspaper in the world."
Why Hank Hanegraaff would think a resurrection from the dead
would be front page news is totally beyond me. I am familiar
with approximately twelve cases of resurrections from the dead in
modern times, and in no case was the media willing to say or do
anything about it. Many of these cases are well substantiated,
but the western world does not seem to want to hear about such
things, and most of the organs of the media were silent.
Hank later goes on to say that "during the Welsh revival, in
1904, laughter was actually associated with the demonic." This
may have been true in some cases, but in other cases during the
Welsh revival, the phenomena were considered to be of divine
origin. For example, David Matthews, in his book, I SAW THE
WELSH REVIVAL, takes issue with Jessie Penn-Lewis for dismissing
many of the phenomena as demonic. Furthermore, if laughter was a
part of the Welsh revival, why does Hank consider the Welsh
revival to be of God, yet reject the current move of the Spirit?
If it was possible at that time to have "satanic" manifestations
during a true move of God, then why is it not possible now?
Then he says, "Past revivals were conducted in an atmosphere of
reverential awe for God. Revival was consistently accompanied by
the powerful proclamation of the word of God. There was a
conviction of sin and a desire for repentance." I would say that
the present revival is also being conducted in an atmosphere of
reverential awe for God. And it is certainly the case that it is
being accompanied by the powerful proclamation of the word of
God. I have witnessed this at Rodney Howard-Browne meetings, at
CATCH THE FIRE in October of last year, and at individual
Vineyard churches, such as Lance Pittluck's in Rockville Centre,
L.I.
Hank continues by saying, "never in history has there been a
revival that's genuine that's characterized by Christian lined up
to receive a dose of holy laughter." This may be true, but many
revivals of the past were criticized for their own "new
measures." Hank seems to be afraid of doing anything differently
from the way it was done in the past. But God is creative, and
often moves different ways at different times.
Then he says, "In fact, leaders of past revivals were guarding
against physical manifestations, lest satan get a foothold in the
work of God. Jonathan Edwards believed that the great awakening
was actually squelched, not by theological correctness, but by
spiritual fanaticism and extremism." Edwards may have spoken
against fanaticism and extremism, but he never spoke against the
physical manifestations. He was completely neutral with respect
to whether they were "distinquishing marks" of a work of the
Spirit of God. And, as far as fanaticism and extremism are
concerned, those things are always part of revival. There has
probably never been a revival that did not have fanatical and
extremist components.
Hank then complains about Rodney's meetings by saying, "Altar
calls in Rodney Howard-Browne's meetings--altar calls for people
to come to Christ--are not preceded by the powerful proclamation
of the word of God. Rather, they are preceded by a manifestation
or a demonstration of supposed power." Hank seems to fail to
realize that, throughout almost all of history, people have been
brought to repentance and faith when confronted with the power of
God. Moreover, Rodney does proclaim the word of God. Sometimes
he reads entire chapters of Scripture at his meetings without
comment. Hank then complains that Rodney's altar calls are not
preceded by a "clear, cogent presentation of the Gospel." This
may be true in some cases, but his primary concern seems to me to
be to minister to believers, that they might have a deeper,
fuller walk with God. His meetings are at churches, and are more
pastoral in nature than evangelistic. It really isn't necessary,
in such a situation, always to give an altar call, but he does so
anyway, with surprising results. And what Hank may not realize
is that, after Rodney does give an altar call, the people are
given a clear, cogent presentation of the Gospel in a separate
place while the main meeting is drawing to a close.
Hank goes on to say, "when people come forward, they don't hear
the gospel. They come forward because they've seen what they
think is a demonstration of the power of God." Yes, that's
Biblical. When the jailer saw that Paul and his companions had
been released from the prison by an earthquake, he asked, "what
must I do to be saved." He, too, was confronted by an awesome
manifestation of the power of God. This is what happens when
God's power is released--people suddenly realize that there is an
omnipotent God who will judge them unless they make drastic
changes in their lives and are reconciled to Him.
Hank says, "They're coming into an experience, not the
everlasting savior." If he thinks that coming into Christ does
not involve an experience, he's missing a lot. Very decidedly,
Christianity has an experiential component, and that's nothing
new. It has been the case for two millennia.
Finally, he says:
The impact of the counterfeit revival upon our culture has
indeed already been massive. Worship is being replaced with
entertainment. Fellowship is being transformed into
individualism. Instead of the fellowship of the saints
drawing people into the Church, it's the experience that's
drawing people into the Church.
Revival comes when the world sees the love that we
demonstrate for one another in such a wonderful, passionate
way that they are constrained to come in. They say, "see
how they love one another." It is the love of Christ that
constrains them to come in to the fellowship of the
believers. They see the tangible demonstration that we
really care for one another. When one cries, we all cry.
And when one laughs, we all laugh. We're bonded together.
and when that happens, true revival will break out. Bonded
together around the Word. Deeply committed to the Lord in
prayer. Willing to share the truth of Jesus Christ with a
lost and searching world. Indeed, the Biblical concept of
every believer a witness for Christ is being replaced by the
dubious witness of men like Rodney Howard-Browne. Indeed,
the very form and function of the Church has been
dramatically altered.
As I close let me say that we will know that genuine revival
has come to the Church when we are devoted to the sharing of
our faith rather than the seduction of our feelings. When
the Church is known for selfless love rather than for
seductive laughter. When Christians are passionately
committed, through equipping the saints, rather than
experiencing the sensational. When we come to church, and
are saturated in Scripture, rather slain in the Spirit. And
finally, when we become truly committed to His story rather
than becoming another casualty of history. The choice is
yours. We can re-live history or re-commit ourselves to His
story. [He then quotes from Chronicles and from the book of
Hebrews.]
I do agree that it is lamentable that in the contemporary church,
worship has been replaced by entertainment. He implies that this
is a result of the revival, but that is far from the case.
Rather, it is a result of the influence of the secular culture
upon the American church, and this sorry state of affairs was at
least as true before the revival began as it is now. There's no
need to blame Rodney for the fact that "the form and function of
the Church has been dramatically altered." To do so seems to me
to quite inappropriate. The revival that God has brought through
Rodney may well help to alleviate these imbalances, as God
continues to work supernatural healing in peoples' hearts and
transformation of their minds.
If the thrill of an experience is drawing people to meetings
rather than the fellowship of the saints, then this may be
unfortunate, but it seems to be where many people are at. This
is not a fault of the revival, so much as it is a result of the
current spiritual condition of the Church as it existed before
the revival began. Perhaps God can meet people where they are
at, and use the desire for the thrill of an experience as a way
of drawing them into greater maturity. Undoubtedly, this is what
He has been doing.
Hank speaks of the love of Christians for one another as the
means by which God draws people into the fellowship of the
saints. I do hope that this means that he will love those of us
within the Church with whom he disagrees, and treat people like
Rodney Howard-Browne, John Wimber, John Arnott and yourself
according to the dictates of the golden rule, continually doing
unto the proponents of the revival as he would have them do unto
him. And of course it is also my hope that those of us who are
in favor of the revival will treat Hank equally charitably, with
a tremendous dose of Christian compassion, as I know you have
already been doing in your attempts to contact him. May God
bless you in this endeavor of building bridges!
With every good wish to you in the Lord,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 28-Mar-1995 10:56am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee (
_in%KATHI_MCINTYRE.PARTI@ECUNET.ORG )
Subject: Notebooks and Peter Jennings
Thanks for your note of March 23. You might be able to get a used
notebook from the Drew University computer services--I'm not sure. Try
sending an e-mail message directly to Bill Beyer at bbeyer@drew.edu, or to
Scott Wood at swood1@drew.edu
I saw a videotape of the Peter Jennings Special, and I did not feel that
Mr. Jennings realy understood what was going on with repsect to Rodney
Howard-Browne or with respect to the Toronto Blessing. At the end of the
program he talks about how the various groups he interviewed are trying
different approaches in order to attract people, but in the case of Rodney,
and of the Vineyard Churches, the concern is not how to attract people, but
how to please to God. Who would be attracted to things which the natural
mind often finds repulsive?
There is also an extensive clip of Hank Hanegraaff criticizing the
revival, but Hank's criticism, also, I feel, is without foundation. He
says, basically, that the revival is off-base theologically, since it
is self-centered; people are seeking a blessing rather than seeking to
bless, and that this is completely contrary to true Christianity. I think
he's wrong about this. I think that the only way that we can really be a
blessing to others is if we have been blessed ourselves. Otherwise,
whatever "blessing" we try to impart to others is empty, or void.
Hank makes his comments while they are showing people falling to the floor,
receiving a blessing. What I said to my father as he and I were watching
this and listening to Hank's comments, is that those people, when they get
up off the floor, are completely changed people, and any self-centeredness
tends to be eradicated as a result of the work that God does upon them
while they are on the floor.
How about you? What are our thoughts on the program?
Take care, and God BLESS you.
Sincerely,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 28-Mar-1995 11:34am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%MARK@MATHS.FLINDERS.EDU.AU )
Subject: Falling Down under the anointing
Mark, thanks for your note of March 24. Separately, I have sent you
information regarding the location of the events at FM92. It was in
Melbourne, Florida, in the USA, and it took place in January of this year.
I first heard about it from Randy Clark when it had just happened, and at
that time I couldn't figure out why he kept talking about Florida and
Melbourne interchangeably--until I realized that the Melbourne he was
talking about was actually a city in Florida, and not Melbourne,
Australia!
You were asking about falling out under the Spirit. This has been a
common phenomenon throughout history during times of revival. Your report
is just about the only report I have heard of anyone being hurt as a
result of falling in this context. The only exception is a rumor I heard
to the effect that Charles and Frances Hunter were being sued because
someone had been hurt when falling this way in one of their meetings. I
have no idea whether there is any basis to this rumor, and I don't know
the extent to which the person may actually have been hurt. I do know
that in the vast majority of cases, it seems that nobody gets hurt. And
I'm talking about hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of cases. If
God is able to knock somebody down, He is also able to prevent the person
from getting hurt. And I've seen this in action many times. I've seen
people fall, and in those unusual cases in which there is nobody there to
catch them, God also seems, sovereignly, in one way or another, to prevent
injury. They'll fall on a cushion, or on another person, or the fall will
not be as sudden as most falls, or some such thing. It's almost uncanny
the way it happens. But in the vast majority of cases, someone is there
to catch the person.
I hope this helps!
Sincerely,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 04-Apr-1995 06:31pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%RBAKER@DELTANET.COM )
Subject: Your note
Thanks for your recent message. I have suspected for some time that
there has been some tension between Toronto and Anaheim, but that is
not new--I first began to suspect it after the LET THE FIRE FALL
Conference in Anaheim last summer. But my suspicion has also been that
this is not a serious tension, but simply a difference in viewpoint between
John Arnott and John Wimber with respect to the lion roaring. John Wimber
is probably afraid of causing honest seekers to turn away because of this
particular manifestation, while John Arnott recognizes its prophetic
significance, and has observed that there has been a noticeable increase in
deliverances when this has occurred. John Wimber feels that, to be
culturally relevant, we can't go too far "overboard," while John Arnott
feels that the work of God should not be hindered for any reason,
particularly if the fruit demonstrates that it is indeed the work of God.
It would seem to me that when the dust settles, it will become clear
that there has been indeed a very vital purpose for what, to the natural
man, seems absolutely unneccesary abhorrent. The natural man has a tendency
to try to stretch out his hand to steady the ark, but the consequence is
to incur God's judgment. The ark, of course, typifies the presence of
God. Attempts to "help" God with our own ideas of what is, or is not,
appropriate when His presence is manifested would be presumptuous. We must
not presume to dictate to God how He will operate.
Discernment is needed to know whether it is indeed God that is operating.
We can determine whether or not something is of God by what results from
what happens. Is God glorified? Is Jesus glorified? Are people healed
and delivered from spiritual, emotional, and physical problems? Do people
learn to walk more closely with the Lord as a result of what happens? Do
they have a greater interest in obeying God? Do people commit themselves
more fully to Jesus Christ? Satan wouldn't want to do anything that would
cause these things to happen.
The fruit that we've seen, even as a result of the lion-roaring, has been
very good. So I would say that we must be very careful, lest we grieve
the Holy Spirit by shying away from what God may be doing through all of
this.
At least, this is how I see it. How about you? Thanks for writing. I'll
look forward to getting your own views on what's happening.
With warm personal greetings in the Lamb,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 17-Apr-1995 08:49am EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%SATHRE@POGO.DEN.MMC.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%SCICHR-L@NETCOM.COM )
TO: Remote Addressee (
_in%SCHIMMR@HERCULES.GEOLOGY.UIUC.EDU )
Subject: Reply to Tom Sathre
Tom, thanks for forwarding your questions of me, posted to the Christia
and Science & Christianity lists. I'll be glad to interact with you on
these questions to the extent that I'm able to do so.
I had mentioned that Rodney Howard-Browne has read entire
chapters of Scriptures at his meetings, and you asked, with
respect to this, for my estimate as to the number, or
percentages, of people who had been convinced by these Scripture
readings.
At first, I didn't understand the question, since most of the
people who attend these meetings are believers (and it therefore
wasn't clear to me why there would be any doubt that anyone would
be convinced by the Scriptures). Then it occurred to me that
perhaps you were referring specifically to Scriptures that
mention laughter. I'm sorry if I misled you--although many
Scriptures are read at these meetings, it is only on an
occasional basis that Scriptures are read that have to do
specifically with laughter.
In other words, I am not aware of any attempts that have been
made to justify the laughter using proof texts, although I
haven't been to every meeting associated with what's happening,
so it's quite possible that this may have been done in some
instances, but I have no first hand information on this, one way
or another.
While it is true that there are some Scriptures that associate
laughter with mockery against God, I think it would be wrong to
conclude on the basis of those passages that all laughter is a
sign of mockery, or derision, of God and His works. I think that
most people would agree that people laugh when they are happy,
and that since Jesus came that we might have life, and have it
more abundantly, that laughter would not be inappropriate for
those who are partaking of His abundant life.
You asked about the number, or percentage, of people who are
converted to Christianity as a result of meetings associated with
what is happening. There are many people who either re-commit
their lives to Christ or who are converted for the first time to
Christianity at these meetings--several hundred at just about
every Rodney Howard-Browne meeting (i.e., between five and ten
percent). However, most of the people who go to these meetings
are already Christians, so there is not a large pool of potential
new converts. Also, I have no way of knowing what proportion of
these people are re-committing their lives to Christ, and what
proportion are coming to the Lord for the first time.
At the Toronto Airport Vineyard, 2,000 came to Christ and 1,000
recommitted their lives to Him during the first six months of
1994, out of 60,000 visitors, 30,000 of which were first time
visitors. During the six months previous to the revival, there
were 200 conversions and 100 recommitments. This is a different
order of magnitude.
You later asked about allegations to the effect that some of the
same phenomena that we've seen at these meetings have taken place
among non-Christian groups. If this were the case, it would not
surprise me, since it is often the case that the enemy will
imitate the things that God does. We've seen holy laughter,
drunkenness in the Spirit, and falling down under the Spirit's
power in many revivals of past history, and it would not be
surprising if the enemy has also been simulating some of the same
things within the context of Eastern religions or occult groups.
This has certainly been the case for many, many years with
respect to such things as the gift of tongues and the word of
knowledge.
I hope you're doing well. My best wishes to you in the Lord!
Take care and God bless.
Sincerely,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 18-Apr-1995 06:03pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%JENNIB4@AOL.COM )
Subject: Rodney Howard-Browne; Vineyard
Jenni, thanks for your note inquiring about the relationship, if any,
between Rodney Howard-Browne and the Vineyard.
Before I answer it, I just wanted to let you know that I answered your
earlier message of April 8, but I was having technical problems at the
time, so I do not know whether you received my reply. My answer was that
we did not make it to the meetings at the Manhattan Vineyard, but that if
we do finally get there, Kathryn and I will be sure to try to look for
you--I'm pretty sure that I would recognize you.
Now for your question. Yes, Rodney and the Vineyard do handle things
quite differently, and the differences are both stylistic and theological.
While it is the case that Rodney does things that the Vineyard would never
endorse, it is also the case the the Vineyard does things that Rodney
would never endorse. The relationship that exists between Rodney and the
Vineyard is simply that they are, as far as I know, the two most powerful
streams in North America of what God is doing right now. I think God is
emphasizing through this that what He is doing now is not a matter of
theology, or of style, or of affiliation, but that He is simply doing a
sovereign work through different, imperfect vessels.
Here are a few specifics: Rodney always teaches on giving before taking an
offering, and his teachings along these lines have tended to be heavily
oriented along the lines of what is normally taught in the Word of
Faith Churches, i.e., give, and it will be given to you, pressed down,
shaken together, etc. Of course, the problem with proceeding in this
manner is that it can easily give people the impression that one's purpose
in teaching about these things is not to help people to learn to be
generous, but rather to finance the ministry that is talking about these
things. It would certainly seem that, at the very least, practices of
this kind do not succeed in avoiding the appearance of evil.
Rodney comes from the Word of Faith Movement--this is what he trusts, so
this is what he is flowing in. But, of course, the Word of Faith movement
does have its weaknesses. It emphasizes faith, which is good, but one must
always be careful not to emphasize one thing so much that one's teachings
become imbalanced.
Rodney, on the other hand, is uncomfortable with the Vineyard for many
reasons. First of all, in the Vineyard, the leadership allows things to
happen that Rodney would not like to see happen--for example, roaring like
lions. At one point, this was upsetting enough to him that he almost made
a formal pronouncement against the Vineyard. And he also feels that it is
important that only a VERY few people lay hands on others. The Vineyard,
on the other hand, although careful about this, allows much more body
ministry.
The relationship between the Vineyard and Rodney and his associates is,
and has always been, tenuous. Last year, in Providence, Oregon, a
Vineyard pastor named Denny Kline invited Sam Dalin, a close associate
of Rodney Howard-Browne, to come and minister in his church. This caused a
lot of stretching for both of them, and for the people of the VCF in
Providence. Everybody was able to stretch far enough that God did move
mightily, but it took a few days, and a lot of stretching, both for Denny
Kline and for Sam Dalin. But I think Sam may have gotten some flack from
Rodney, and Denny from John Wimber, for this.
Sam Dalin has wanted very much to interact more with the Vineyard
leadership, to bring correction both to himself (and Rodney) and to the
Vineyard on various issues. He has made some progress on this, but only
some.
When Randy Clark wanted to host CATCH THE FIRE in St. Louis, at one point,
Rick Shelton, a close associated of Rodney Howard-Browne, offered to let
him do this in his enormous church. However, due, I think, to the huge
number of registrations, the conference was finally scheduled to take
place at the King George Hotel there in St. Louis. This is coming up next
month, May 3-6--you should try to get there if you possibly can.
So, there is cooperation on an informal level, but, yes, there are
definitely two separate vessels that God is using structurally. However,
I would be wary of any "warnings" by members of one of these vessels
against the other. We all have our imperfections and shortcomings,
but we should all be mature enough to separate the precious from the vile,
and to receive the precious from whatever vessels God may be using to
dispense
His grace, annointing, and gifts. This was shown to us by example in the
person of Randy Clark, who, despite his theological differences with
Rodney, went to Rodney's meetings in obedience to God. God then honored
him by using him to bring the anointing to Toronto and beyond.
When Rodney fails to avoid the appearance of evil (by preaching about money
all of the time), I just ignore it. I receive what I can, and ignore that
which seems improper to me, trusting that God will deal with him in His
time if what he's doing is inappropriate. Similarly, if there are things
that happen at Vineyard meetings that don't seem quite right to me, I
don't let that interfere with what God might be trying to do for me, and
for others, trusting Him to guide the leadership, as appropriate. I know
for sure that if I myself were leading the meetings, the imbalances would
probably be a lot worse.
Here's an interesting sidelight--Patti Richey has mentioned that David
Minor of Coudersport, Pennsylvania prophesied years ago that there would,
at some future time, be an outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and that there
would be two winds of the Holy Spirit involved, one of faith, and one of
love.
Thanks for writing. Keep in touch. God bless you!
In His Love,
Richard
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 25-Apr-1995 12:55pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%HEVAN@OCF.BERKELE.EDU )
Subject: RE: Acknowledgement of article (fwd)
Evan, thanks for the message you sent yesterday, with its attachment. I
I share with you your concern about Kjell Olsen's comments, and I certainly
agree with you that Modesto, Toronto, and Wheaton are only pieces of a
much larger work of God.
To my own way of thinking, what God has been doing recently on the college
campuses is a further indication that what he has been doing in places like
Toronto is His work. Both during the mid-twentieth century revival, and
during the Charismatic renewal, there were campus revivals of this kind
preceded by other manifestations of revival which many people rejected. I
see God doing something very similar once again in the context of the
current revival. In other words, it's the same pattern all over again,
and it's no coincidence that the campus revivals are happening at THIS
particular time. The campus revivals seem to be part and parcel of the
larger outpouring of revival that we have been experiencing.
Thanks for writing. Kathryn and I remember you and Cheri with great
fondness.
Sincerely,
Richard
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 25-Apr-1995 01:13pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%JCLAUNCH1@AOL.COM )
Subject: Your Message
Jim, thanks for your message of April 22. From my perspective, you need
not fear that there is any lack of concern for righteousness and holiness
in the Toronto movement, for I have seen quite a bit of emphasis on these
things within its context. There has been plenty of conviction of sin
before a Holy God in what I've seen of the revival, and an emphasis upon
God's mercy fond in Christ Crucified, and upon the resulting chaged life,
growing in love and humility. That's what this revival has been about
throughout the time that I have been familiar with it, which is why I have
been following it so closely.
I am not aware that Kenneth Copeland has anything to do with the Toronto
Blessing. I know that he is a personal friend of Rodney Howard-Browne's,
but Rodney doesn't have much to do with the Toronto Blessing, except that
Randy Clark seems to have taken his anointing and brought it from Rodney's
meetings to the Vineyard churches. There is a considerable difference in
emphasis between Rodney and the Toronto people.
Nevertheless, I have found from my study of outpourings of God's Spririt,
that He does not withhold His mercy and grace from people just because
they do not have the correct theological doctrines, or the proper
emphases. That is why He's pouring out His Spirit on many different parts
of the church that have different doctrines, different ways of doing
things, and different ways of understanding How He works.
You asked whether the focus of the Toronto revival is something that
centers on the Spirit to the extent that, seeing God's great majestic
holiness and our own sinfulness, people are convicted of sin, brought to
repentance, and melted down, so to speak. That is exactly what I have
found in Toronto, and that is exactly why people are being drawn there
from the far corners of the earth.
In my opinion, the College Revivals are further evidence that what has
been happening in Toronto and elsewhere until now has been of God.
Both in the mid-twentieth century, and in the early 1970s, there were
college campus revivals taking place in the midst of a larger outpouring
of God's Spirit. I see the same thing happening now.
Anway, that's how I see it. If you see it differently, that's okay--I
don't pretend to see everything perfectly, or infallibly. Thanks for
writing, and God bless you!
Sincerely,
Richard
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 25-Apr-1995 03:36pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%PY101663@STUDENT.UQ.EDU.AU )
Subject: Jonathan Edwards
Jan, thank you for your note, and thanks for sending the series
of ten messages which you sent in response to the messages I
posted from Evan Howard on Jonathan Edwards.
You indicated that you felt that the comments in the ten messages
that you sent were more along your own thoughts on Edwards'
writings than what Evan had written, and you asked, "could it be
that he [Edwards] is being grossly mis-represented [by Evan
Howard]? Would hate to think so."
The summaries of the three works by Jonathan Edwards that I
posted from Evan follow an outline that Jonathan Edwards himself
incorporated into his text. You should take a look at these
three works for yourself, and you'll see that the same Roman
numerals were used for the same topics, and that what Evan has
done is simply to quote the first sentence of each section of
what Edwards wrote.
Evan is sound in his scholarship. When he and I and my wife
Kathryn were all students at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
in Deerfield Illinois (1980-1985), he and his wife Cheri lived in
an apartment directly below us. We spent a lot of time together,
and he was in many of the same classes that Kathryn and I were
in. His scholarship was always sound, and he always did very
well as a student.
Contrary to some of the statements in the ten messages you sent,
I don't think that the Toronto movement maintains that feelings
and physical manifestations necessarily prove a person's
sprituality, any more than Jonathan Edwards did. In and of
themselves, the manifestations mean nothing. When good fruit
results, it is then we know that God has been at work in those
who have experienced them.
There are several reasons why Edwards is quoted so often by those
involved in the Toronto blessing. First of all, the writings of
Jonathan Edwards demonstrate that many, if not most, of the
manifestations that we've seen in the past several months were
also observable during the great awakening, indicating that what
we're now seeing isn't some great aberration, or deviation from
the general stream of God's workings. Secondly, Edwards was a
champion of the Great Awakening, and defended it against the
attacks of some of its enemies, such as Charles Chauncy. And, of
course, he was a tremendous theologian of the revival, and was
able to interepret things in such a way as to satisfy many of the
critics of the awakening.
Jonathan Edwards was not against the manifestations, but in
fairness, I must also concede that he also advocated restraining
them to a degree, in order not to cause to much of a stumbling
block for those who really didn't understand what was going on.
He wrote, "I am far from ascribing all the late uncommon effects
and outward manifestations of inward experiences to custom and
fashion, as some do; I know it to be otherwise. . . . It would
be very unreasonable, and prejudicial to the interest of
religion, to frown upon all these extraordinary external effects
and manifestations of great religious affections--A measure of
them is natural, necessary, and beautiful, and the effect in no
wise disproportioned to the spiritual cause, and is of great
benefit to promote religion. Yet I think they greatly err who
suppose that these things should be wholly unlimited, and that
all should be encouraged in going to the utmost length that they
feel themselves inclined to. There ought to be a general
restraint upon these things, and there should be a prudent care
taken of persons in such extraordinary circumstances" (SOME
THOUGHTS CONCERNING THE PRESENT REVIVAL OF RELIGION IN NEW
ENGLAND, Part IV, Section III, part II [vol. 1, p. 414 of the
Bannner of Truth Trust's edition of THE WORDS OF JONATHAN
EDWARDS]).
So, while Edwards accepted the manifestations, he did not think
that they should be completely unlimited. It is probably because
of this that both advocates and opponents of the current revival
have seen Edwards as supporting their views.
All of this is complicated by the fact that Edwards is often hard
to follow, and sometimes seems both to accept and reject some of
the same things. For example, toward the end of his SOME
THOUGHTS CONCERNING THE PRESENT REVIVAL OF RELIGION IN NEW
ENGLAND, he discusses the informal, spontaneous singing by groups
of people going to and from church meetings in such a way as to
sound as though he both approved of this and also disapproved of
it because of the criticisms of the awakening that this new,
unheard-of practice was generating. Whenever I read this, I can
never quite figure out whether he is defending this practice or
warning against it. In some places it definitely sound like he's
defending it, but in other places, it sounds just the opposite.
The same sort of thing could be said about his views on some
other issues, including cessationism. Sometimes he talks like a
cessationist, and at other times, it sounds like he believes that
the gifts of the Spirit, including prophecy, are still in
operation.
So, Edwards can be used as ammunition by advocates of the
revival, and he can also be used as ammunition by those who do
not think that what is happening is a genuinely of God.
I haven't taken the time here to interact with many of the other
specific criticisms of the revival in the ten messages you sent,
but it does seem clear to me that most of them tend to
misrepresent what is actually happening, and can therefore easily
be answered. But if you wish me to interact with them at some
future time, I'd be glad to do that.
Thanks for taking the time to write, and to be willing to
interact with me on these questions.
With every good wish to you in the Lord,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 25-Apr-1995 08:51pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%STACKHS@CC.UMANITOBA.CA )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%CETA-L@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA )
Subject: RE: Incapacitations
John, thanks for cc:ing me on your message to the CETA list
concerning the Toronto Blessing.
As you know, every awakening and/or revival of history has had
its share of impurities and intense controversies, but this has
not prevented God from working in marvelous ways despite these
things.
I did not answer your questions when you first posed them to me,
largely because at that particular time, I and many others
involved in the renewal/revival were finding that many people who
had initially criticized what was happening were later changing
their minds about all of this, and I had hoped not to get into a
debate with you over these things if I could help it.
Nevertheless, since you've raised some of the same issues again,
I'll do what I can to interact with what you've asked, although I
don't claim to have all of the answers.
It's true that there have been reports of cases in which peoples'
laughter and/or drunkenness in the Spirit have become evident in
restaurants, and that people have, at times, been stopped by
policemen for "drunken" driving while under the influence, not of
alcohol, but of "drunkenness in the Spirit." You mentioned that
you didn't understand how Christ is glorified by this. My
response would be that perhaps God is trying to get peoples'
attention, using these incidents in order to demonstrate His
power, not only to the Church, but also to the entire world.
After all, He has compassion upon the world, and He therefore
wants to see all people come to a knowledge of the truth and to
repent before Him. Incidents of this kind have a tendency to
call peoples' attention to the power of God. In general, people
do have a tendency to repent and believe the Gospel when His
power is demonstrated in this way.
Another question you brought up was related to my account of a
Rodney Howard-Browne meeting in which an entire choir was
rendered so drunken in the Spirit that they were unable to sing.
This isn't quite what I said; when they were going up into the
bleachers prior to singing, many of them were falling out "under
the power" of the Spirit. But they were eventually able to get
back up again, and after a time, begin singing.
You also mentioned that I wrote about a string of about a dozen
pastors who were prepared to speak on God's work in their various
churches, and that each, in turn, was "rendered unintelligible by
a spiritual fit." This isn't exactly what I said--I didn't see
any "jerking, gasping preachers," but I did see some laughing
preachers, and other preachers who were so overcome by the Spirit
that they were unable to say anything for quite a while. Some of
them were finally able to share their testimonies, but others
were not able to do so that evening.
You said that you were wondering how the Body of Christ is
edified by these things. My answer would be that I believe that
such things are signs and wonders which: (1) cannot help but
increase the faith of the Church, and (2) cause us to realize
that God is powerful, and therefore to be awed, or feared, i.e.,
we are to live lives that are holy and we are not to take it for
granted that anything goes with respect to our attitudes and/or
behavior as we walk out our daily lives. Indeed, this is the
effect that these incidents have had upon many people present at
those meetings, including myself.
I really don't see how all of this is contrary to Scripture.
Throughout history as recorded in the Bible and in the annals of
Church History, God has performed miracles, demonstrating His
power and majesty, thereby bringing people to repentence, and a
greater appreciation of who He is.
In any case, that's how I see it. I realize that not everyone is
going to agree with me on all of these things, and I certainly
recognize that people have a prerogative to differ with me on
them. And certainly, regardless of how we might differ on such
matters, I am glad to have fellowship with you, and all others
who reverence Him as you do.
With every good wish to you in the Lord,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Date: 26-Apr-1995 12:01pm EST
From: Riss, Richard M
RRISS
Dept: GRAD
Tel No: (201)-408-8207
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%HURTADO@CC.UMANITOBA.CA )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%CETA-L@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA )
TO: Remote Addressee ( _in%458507@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA )
Subject: Transformed Lives and Witness to the Community
In his reply to my comments in response to John Stackhouse, Larry
Hurtado said that the power of transformed lives and communities
under the impact of the Gospel and the Spirit will be the most
winsome witness to the reality of what we testify to in the
Gospel. I wholeheartedly agree with this, and I also believe
that some of the manifestations that we've seen in the current
revival have precipitated these very transformations. Here's a
typical example of how this happens; in this case, one person
trembling under the power of God in the streets caused many
members of a gang of teenagers to come to Christ:
At the CATCH THE FIRE Conference at the Regal Constellation
hotel, Wednesday evening, October 12, 1994 sponsored by the
Toronto Airport Vineyard, Stephen Witt, pastor of the Vineyard
Christian Fellowship in St. John, New Brunswick, said: "The final
thing of this phase is that we're beginning to pour it out now
into the streets. And last week we heard about--I call that a
prayer walk to MacDonald's. That was my destination. And I got
there and there . . . the manager of the MacDonald's was arguing
with some teenagers--about 12 or 13 of them out in the parking
lot. And they were giving them a real problem, so I walked up,
and said, 'Is there a problem?' And she said, 'Well, there's
always a problem.' And I knew about the problem she was talking
about. Every Friday night there's about 150 to 200 teens that
gang up at the MacDonald's--there's been gang fights--there's
been all kinds of drugs and everything else that takes place and
they can't do anything about it. The police have tried to get
rid of them--they can't get rid of them. So I said, 'You know
what?' The Lord gave me a plan at that point. I said, 'I've
got a plan that will get all the teens off this property.' She
said, 'What's that?' (Well, first of all, she said, 'It's
impossible. We've tried everything.') I said, 'We'll send a
team up here and tell them about Jesus.' She said, 'That might
work.' [laughter from the audience].
"So last Friday night during our renewal meeting, this, at the
advice of John Wimber, actually began to pour it out. We called
a team forward of guys--I thought we would send the guys first,
since it was a pretty rough situation. We laid hands on them.
They were not a macho-looking group at all, but we sent them over
to MacDonald's. They got to minister to over 150 teens in the
MacDonald's parking lot. One came to the Lord Jesus Christ. And
then one of our other prophetic-type individuals--he started
ministering and praying for people, and they started trembling,
and all the kids started saying, 'We want that! We want that!'
"So--there was a real touch of the Spirit of God and . . . this
Friday now we're doubling the team; we're sending men and women
out to go back. The police came up to our building because that
night a gang of kids had run in to our renewal meeting, fleeing
another gang of kids that had baseball bats. We had just prayed
the week before that God would make our church a refuge and that
the teens would come in. So we ARE a seeker-sensitive church.
They're running in now. And the police showed up with their
lights going and everything, and I thought, 'Oh, no,' you know,
this is--they had showed up before--but they came this time and
he got out of the car and he says, 'I can't tell you guys how
much we appreciate what you did at MacDonald's tonight.' He
says, 'You'll never know.' This is the policemen in our city.
'You'll never know the impact that made.' This morning I called
my secretary and she said, we've got a call at the office today--
one of the mothers of one of these teens who the parents were
concerned. They knew they were down there but they didn't know
how to stop them from going and she says, 'you know, he came
home, he told us all about what had happened,' and she says, 'Do
you have a youth group that I can get him involved in?'
"So we're just seeing now a real breakout in evangelism and you
know for us, that wasn't even the ultimate thing. The ultimate
thing for us is to develop a passion for Jesus. That, to me, is
higher than evangelism. But when you get the heart of Jesus
Christ, something of evangelism comes into our heart because
that's His heart, so hopefully that's beginning to pour out in
our church more."
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU
Return to Revival Now
Page
Return to Revival Page
Return To Homepage.
Last Updated: June 23, 1995