Discernment Needed in Examining So Called "Moves of God"

There have been many different sources of revivals since the 1700s. There was the...

1. First Great Awakening
2. Second Great Awakening
3. Charles Finney
4. Welsh Revival
5. D. L. Moody
6. Azuza Street (First Wave of the "Outpouring of the Holy Spirit")
7. Billy Sunday
8. Second Wave (Charasmatic Healers)
9. Billy Graham
10. Third Wave (Super Apostles & Prophets)
11. Calvary Chapel
12. Toronto Airport Vineyard
13. Brownsville

Probably I have forgotten a few, and I know that my chronological order might not be perfect, but this is a pretty good estimate. From what I can see we have 1. Individuals, 2. National Awakenings, 3. Other types of revival, 4. Pentecostal/Charasmatic/Latter Rain/Vineyard/Wave Outpouring type revivals. I think it would be helpful to examine these revivals more closely and see if the following observations wouldn't hold true:

1. Sensationalism is often the producer/occurs during the duration of/product of most revival type movements.
2. Generally, revival movements appear quite rapidly, and their influence fades away into nothing; except they may alter theology, history, memories, and perhaps found a few ministries and things.
3. Oftentimes, there may be men who have true good (Wesley, Whitfield, Edwards, Moody, etc.) yet most of the revival hubub that surrounds them may be a anomalous or undesirable occurance, and not a pattern to be emulated.
4. National awakenings, while having national force (and perhaps producing some good), are never awakenings of the nation itself! (i.e., Just because you '"got religion" doesn't mean that you have Christ!!)
5. Revivals produced by the almost singular ministry of charasmatic men, who give their life to crusades and revivals instead of sound doctrine, tend to glorify the men and create a superficial, exclusively sensationalized, dramatic, soul winning focus which can denegrate sound doctrine, edification of the Saints, Biblical seperation, and even Biblical soteriology!
6. Pentecost was in the First Century...
7. Azusa was a fake, as were Parham's predictions.
8. Slain in the spirit is unbiblical.
9. Teaching people how to speak in Tongues is unbiblical.
10. Giving tongues messages in the corporate church gathering without interpretation is unbiblical.
11. Believing in healing because of the Charasmatic healing movement with men such as A. A. Allen, William Branham (sp?), and others (Who used their teachings to promote themselves, and who were scandalous) is absurd.
12. Believing that modern day healing or tongues has its orgin outside of Latter Rain teachings of divisive heretics is absurd.
13. TBN becomes a Christian network, the day Pharisees stop loving mammon! (I thought of that because of the connect between healing for today and Benny Hinn, who is on TBN).
14. If you say something wrong (TO ANY DEGREE) while claiming to be under Divine inspiration or speaking for God (e.g., Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, et. al.) you ARE a FALSE prophet.
15. Calvary Chapel's revival through the Hippie, Lonnie Frisbee, was phoney.
16. If Vineyard had something to offer the Church, it would have to first denounce Toronto Airport Vineyard's actions, as well as the Brownsville cabal, and oppose vehemently its formative direction to be a Charasmatic/Party/Endtime Movement thingamabob. It would also have to condemn its formative association with IHOP/Mike Bickle/Paul Cain/Rick Joyner/Bob Jones, et al. (NO, NOT BOB JONES OF BOB JONES COLLEGE...this Bob Jones is a DIFFERENT Bob Jones, not to be confused with Bob Jones, Sr. and Bob Jones, Jr.). It would also have to accept common footing with everyone else and give up its elitism and lunatic spirit and have an accountability to the Bible which it has so abandoned (which has explained its abandonment by God - Who actually never called it, at least not into its apostacy).
17. The "Super Apostles" sound an awful lot like the ones Paul mentions in 2 Corinthians. They do nothing all the day but try to glorify themselves, if they may perhaps by any means lead away the elect (e.g., C. Peter Wagner). Also, they seem to openly admit to learning their doctrines from demons...which is especially wierd.
18. Btw, if feasible (i.e., if it is the appropriate thing to do), always try to NAME NAMES. There is no reason why you can't. Besides, no one minds except the people who you name anyway! If you don't give the names of people who are mega-popular, how are believers going to be warned?
19. Brownsville...the stuff that was too zany to put on TBN...
20. Praying for someone to be healed is not healing them (e.g., Todd Bentley).
21. Claiming that believers haven't all been baptized with the Holy Spirit is blantantly unscriptural.
22. Telling me I need to "seek for the baptism" when I already am indwelt and sealed by the Holy Spirit; and when tongues is the least of all gifts and is unprofitable to the Body apart from interpretation, and assuming that the subjective, man-dreamt "baptism" must have tongues following it - - is wrong.
23. So then, individual-led revivals ought to be discerned with a grain of salt.
24. National awakenings ought to be seen as invalid, as such, though possibly valuable in much of their effect (e.g. Edwards).
25. Other revivals, such as campmeetings and tent meetings of a smaller scope, would have to be discerned on an individual basis.
26. Pentacostal/Charasmatic/LatterRain teachings ought to be resisted steadfastly, in the faith. If God were giving the gifts, they would be experienced and used properly, in decency and order, without a frenzied, hyped-up, campaign of unprecendented misinformation and historical cover-up. "What if you are missing out?" Answer: "The Holy Spirit gives gifts to whomever HE wills". "What if the sign-gifts are today?" Answer: "And, praytell, who told you to seek a sign? How do you explain miraculous powers apart from the existence of Apostolic ministers? Do you hold to Wave/Latter Rain teachings? Is your belief founded on assumed musings on the experiences of others or yourself instead of the spontaneous work of the Holy Spirit and the Sound teachings of Scripture? How come the Reformers witnessed no such thing? Is not the Church age consistant as to the possessions, privileges, and gifts of the Saints? What if the sign gifts are NOT for today...I don't think you are prepared to handle that -- so aren't you being somewhat dishonest in implying that you are fair and unbiased when you ask that? Montanists (sp?), Quakers, cults, Word-Faith, Mormons, etc., have claimed as much in the way of "supernatural experience". How does the presence of these "tongues" promote Biblically defined unity of faith and Christ, when everywhere we see the destruction, divisiveness, and Christless focus that they promote."
27. EXAMINE EVERYTHING especially when people tell you that you don't need to, etc.
28. Present day, guaranteed, healing of the body by faith, is NOT a promise of the Scriptures - the redemption of the body is NOT YET.
29. Acts ought to be interpreted without Pentacostal presuppositions (e.g., assuming that the events in the ministry of the Apostles must be characteristic of Christians in general).
30. I remember an incident at a wonderful (people wise - not doctrine wise) non-denominational Pentacostal-flavored church I went to. A man said that a while back he had received the word from the Holy Spirit, "Holy Spirit and Fire Revival Activation". He said that whereas before it was "Holy Spirit and Fire Revival Activation", now the Holy Spirit was giving him the word "Holy Spirit and Fire Revival Activation Activated". So, I supposed God wanted us to know that the activation of the Holy Spirit and Fire (Why do they always say "fire"? I have never even heard Brownsville yet claim cloven tongues of fire!!) revival was now activated. This is how alot of these things work. It's always a, "Now _____ is about to happen!" claim. Those that watched long enough know that it never comes to anything, let alone anything of ministering Christ to His people. Let us avoid the foods which have not profited those who have been filled with them, and rather preach sound doctrine to the glory of Christ!
31. God is love, and bears with His children in their weaknesses. Therefore let me urge the following statements (although it is unacceptable not to be aware of Wave fraud and to consider the sign gifts for today when no one can provide evidence - Physician, heal thyself!) 1. It were better to stop even all tongues speaking if it were to stop this madness and glorify Christ through the proclamation of the Scriptures. 2. I would rather 5 words to be spoken with understanding in the assembly than 10,000 words in a tongue. 3. If I speak with tongues of men and angels and have not love, I am nothing. 4. Since everything we have from God is by grace, and that through faith; which glorifys God's method of working more? - continuing tongues or ceasing to give them? 5. All things are lawfull for me, but not all are expedient. It were better to withhold speaking in tongues than to seek them more than God. 6. If you have to create an opposition between the Bible and what you are doing, which you claim to be spiritual, it is NOT from God! 7. Tongues are proven today to be just as false as the "miracles" and "prophecies" going on today. So, answer me this, if miracles help people - yet they are not happening today - and prophecies Paul claims to be more edifying - yet they are not happening today - then why would God continue tongues, which is so much less edifying to the Church?
32. "Revival" seems to be used among the Reformed to indicate national repentance and blessing, which is impossible for a gentile nation in this dispensation, in the way they wish it.
33. The Founding Fathers were gifted men and students of history with an admirable respect for virtue and moral tenants of the Bible. However...they were Deists in the Age of Elightenment, many of them Freemasons, who did not see the Bible as the exclusively inspired revelation of God, nor Christ to be the One in Whom salvation consisted (i.e., they were children of the devil, by definition).
34. Such "revival" often tends to ecumenialism or neo-evangelical ends.
35. Sometimes the term, revival, is used to denote the reforming or development of the church to a healthy state. But this term carries confusing baggage with it.
36. There is no reason why healthly maturity can't be the focus through the development of sound doctrine in the church. All this without the ambiguity and fanfare of "revival", the term which nobody needs.
37. Also, if we want God to "send revival" don't we often imagine spontaneous external changes, which are unusual, and unnecessary; which we feel the need for because of having wrongly been educated about past "revivals"?

Edwards on immediate revelation:

"One erroneous principle, that which scare any has proved more mischievous to the present glorious work of God, is a notion that it is God’s manner in these days, to guide his saints, at least some that are more eminent, by inspiration, or immediate revelation. They suppose he makes known to them what shall come to pass hereafter, or what it is his will that they should do, by impressions made upon their minds, either with or without texts of Scripture; whereby something is made know to them, that is not taught in the Scripture. By such a notion the devil has a great door opened for him; and if once this opinion should come to be fully yielded to, and established in the church of God, Satan would have opportunity thereby to set up himself as the guide and oracle of God’s people, and to have his word regarded as their infallible rule, and so to lead them where he would, and to introduce what he pleased, and soon to bring the Bible into neglect and contempt.—Late experience, in some instances, has shown that the tendency of this notion is to cause persons to esteem the Bible as in a great measure useless.

This error will defend and support errors. As long as a person has a notion that he is guided by immediate direction from heaven, it makes him incorrigible and impregnable in all his misconduct. For what signifies it, for poor blind worms of the dust, to go to argue with a man, and endeavour to convince him and correct him, that is guided by the immediate counsels and commands of the great JEHOVAH? This great work of God has been exceedingly hindered by this error; and, till we have quite taken this handle out of the devil’s hands, the work of God will never go on without great clogs and hindrances.—Satan will always have a vast advantage in his hands against it, and as he has improved it hitherto, so he will do still. And it is evident, that the devil knows the vast advantage he has by it; that makes him exceeding loath to let go his hold.

It is strange what a disposition there is in many well-disposed and religious persons to fall in with and hold fast this notion. It is enough to astonish one, that such multiplied, plain instances of the failing of such supposed revelations in the event, do not open every one’s eyes. I have seen so many instances of the failing of such impressions that would almost furnish a history. I have been acquainted with them when made under all kinds of circumstances, and have seen them fail in the event, when made with such circumstances as have been fairest and brightest, and most promising. They have been made upon the minds of apparently eminent saints, and with an excellent heavenly frame of spirit yet continued, and made with texts of Scripture that seemed exceeding opposite, wonderfully brought to the mind, and the impressions repeated over and over; and yet all has most manifestly come to nothing, to the full conviction of the persons themselves. God has in so many instances of late, in his providence, covered such things with darkness, that one would think it should be enough quite to blank the expectations of those who have been ready to think highly of such things. It seems to be a testimony of God, that he has no design of reviving revelations in his church, and a rebuke from him to the groundless expectations of it...Why should we not rest in that standing rule that God has given to his church, which, the apostle teaches us, is surer than a voice from heaven? And why should we desire to make the Scripture speak more to us than it does? Or why should any desire a higher kind of intercourse with heaven, than by having the Holy Spirit given in his sanctifying influences, infusing and exciting grace and holiness, love and joy, which is the highest kind of intercourse that the saints and angels in heaven have with God, and the chief excellency of the glorified man Christ Jesus?

Some that follow impulses and impressions indulge a notion, that they do no other than follow the guidance of God’s word, because the impression is made with a text of Scripture that comes to their mind. But they take that text as it is impressed on their mind. But they take that text as it is impressed on their minds, and improve it as a new revelation to all intents and purposes; while the text, as it is in the Bible, implies no such thing, and they themselves do not suppose that any such revelation was contained in it before. Suppose, for instance, that text should come into a person’s mind with strong impression, Acts ix. 6. “Arise, and go into the city; and it shall be told thee what thou must do;” and he should interpret it as an immediate signification of the will of God, that he should now forthwith go to such a neighbouring town, and there he should meet with a further discovery of his duty. If such things as these are revealed by the impression of these words, it is to all intents a new revelation, not the less because certain words of Scripture are made use of in the case. Here are propositions or truths entirely new, that those words do not contain. These propositions, That it is God’s mind and will that such a person by name should arise at such a time, and go to such a place, and that there he should meet with discoveries, are entirely new propositions, wholly different from those contained in that text of Scripture. They are no more implied in the words themselves, without a new revelation, than it is implied that he should arise and go to any other place, or that any other person should arise and go to that place. The propositions, supposed to be now revealed, are as really different from those contained in that scripture, as they are from the propositions contained in that text, Gen. v. 6. “And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos.” This is quite a different thing from the Spirit’s enlightening the mind to understand the words of God, and know what is contained and revealed in them, and what consequences may justly be drawn from them, and to see how they are applicable to our case and circumstances; which is done without any new revelation, only by enabling the mind to understand and apply a revelation already made.

Those texts of Scripture, that speak of the children of God as led by the Spirit, have been by some brought to defend such impulses; particularly Rom. viii. 14. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God:” And Gal. v. 18. “But if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law.” But these texts themselves confute them that bring them; for it is evident that the leading of the Spirit which the apostle speaks of is peculiar to the children of God, and that natural men cannot have; for he speaks of it as a sure evidence of their being the sons of God, and not under the law. But a leading or directing of a person by immediately revealing to him where he should go, or what shall hereafter come to pass, or what shall be the future consequence of his doing thus or thus, if there be any such thing in these days, is not of the nature of the gracious leading of the Spirit of God, peculiar to God’s children...Such a way of being directed where one shall go, and what he shall do, is no more than what Balaam had from God, [W]ho from time to time revealed to him what he should do; so that he was in this sense led by the Spirit for a considerable time. There is a more excellent way in which the Spirit leads the sons of God, that natural men cannot have; and that is, by inclining them to do the will of God, and go in the shining path of truth and Christian holiness, from a holy, heavenly disposition, which the Spirit of God gives them, and which inclines and leads them to those things that are excellent and agreeable to God’s mind, whereby they “are transformed by the renewing of their minds, and prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God,” Rom. xii. 2. And so the Spirit of God does in a gracious manner teach the saints their duty; and he teaches them in a higher manner than ever Balaam, or Saul, or Judas, were taught. The Spirit of God enlightens them with respect to their duty, by making their eye single and pure, whereby the whole body is full of light. The sanctifying influence of the Spirit of God rectifies the taste of the soul, whereby it savours those things that are of God, and naturally relishes and delights in those things that are holy and agreeable to God’s mind; and, like one of a distinguishing taste, it chooses those things that are good and wholesome, and rejects those that are evil. The sanctified ear tries words, and the sanctified heart tries actions, as the mouth tastes meat. And thus the Spirit of God leads and guides the meek in his way, agreeable to his promises; he enables them to understand the commands and counsels of his word, and rightly to apply them. Christ blames the Pharisees that they had not his holy distinguishing taste, to discern and distinguish what was right and wrong, Luke xii. 57. “Yea, and why even of your own selves judge ye not what is right?”

The leading of the Spirit which God gives his children, and which is peculiar to them, is that teaching them his statutes, and causing them to understand the way of his precepts, which the psalmist so very often prays for, especially in the 119th Psalm: and not in giving them new statutes and new precepts. He graciously gives them eyes to see, and ears to hear, and hearts to understand; he causes them to understand the fear of the Lord, and so “brings the blind by a way they knew not, and leads them in paths that they had not known, and darkness light before them, and crooked things straight...But, to return to the head of impressions and immediate revelations; many lay themselves open to a delusion by expecting direction from heaven in this way, and waiting for it. In such a case it is easy for persons to imagine that they have it. They are perhaps at a loss concerning something, undetermined what they shall do, or what course they shall take in some affair; and they pray to God to direct them, and make known to them his mind and will: and then, instead of expecting to be directed, by being assisted in considering the rules of God’s word, his providence, and their circumstances, to look on things in a true light, and justly to weigh them, they are waiting for some secret immediate influence, unaccountably swaying their minds, and turning their thoughts or inclinations that way in which God would have them to go. Hereby they are exposed to two things; first, they lay themselves open to the devil, and give him a fair opportunity to lead them where he pleases; for they stand ready to follow the first extraordinary impulse that they shall have, groundlessly concluding it is from God. And, secondly, they are greatly exposed to be deceived by their own imaginations: for such an expectation awakens and quickens the imagination; and that oftentimes is called an uncommon impression, that is no such thing; and they ascribe that to the agency of some invisible being, which is owing only to themselves.” (Edwards, Jonathan. "X. Thoughts on the Revival of Religion in New England, SECTION II: Wrong Principles." Works of Jonathan Edwards. Vol. One. Avon: The Bath Press, 1974. 404+. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. 1 June 2005? Calvin College. 21 Jan. 2009 .)