Talk:Christian revival

This article needs links to be added to the many Wikipedia articles whose subjects (people, organisations etc) are mentioned in its text. --PeterR 21:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Snake handling is hardly a common part of revival, and was not a significant feature of any of the revivals discussed in this page. Snake handling is generally considered a fringe Christian activity, often associated with sects and cults.

'pride' in revival context is not about intellectual pragmatism, but rather stone cold hearts, i.e. that God is a theoretical part of life rather than an active and living part. Revival seeks to bring the balance of God to all parts of the perosn -- mind, will, emotions, spirit. Many of the great revival preachers were highly intellectual in their teachings (as evidenced by their writings).

The first paragraph is so much in error, it should be deleted altogether. Revival is more of a movement than an event. Food, drink, and music as entertainment do not enter in to the definition of revival. Revival is basically a restoration of the spiritual experience that is easily obscured by institutionalism and other factors of spiritual declension. Restoration of spiritual fervor does not by any means require substituting zeal for practical and pragmatic expressions of faith.

This article's section about the SGA has NOTHING in common with the SGA's article. Which is correct? If both are correct (which is unlikely since they talk about different dates), the content unique to each one should be added to the other. That is, everything.

Additionally, the supposed influence to (continental) Europe, stated in this article, doesn't mention sources. I'm European and never heard about those awakenings... --euyyn 01:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

The Great Awakening describes the trends in the religious climate of Christianity in colonial North America in which churches worked out ways to minister in the new burgeoning political, cultural, and religious freedoms of the new world. Its primary emphasis was revival of religious energy and personal piety. A key figure was Jonathan Edwards, Congregational preacher in Northampton, Mass., and later president of the College of New Jersey (Princeton). The themes of the GA stressed personal piety.

The Second Great Awakening emerged in the 1790s and early ninteenth century as a response to the exigencies of ministry in the new nation: (1) churches were free of government control, (2) the influence of Enlightenment rationalism was undermining the foudations of Christian Religion, (3) immigrants challenged cultural and religious hegemony, and (4) democracy and personal liberty encouraged personal opinion and schism. Now that freedom of religion was codified in the laws of the new nation, would purely voluntary religion be able to address these challneges? The trend of the SGA was to address these challenges through asserting the church's relevance and authority. Toward that end, churches and denominations began to found schools, hold camp meetings to encourage commitment and evangelism, and charter agencies for social change. The SGA had a similar goal as the GA, namely, to stress personal piety and religious revival, but this similar response came from different stimuli and played out in very different political and cultural milieu.

This article needs an intro paragraph. Soemthing like "Revivalism is ...". RJFJR 16:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

There is widely accepted revival activity (eg. Argentina, China and Africa) and controversial revival/outpouring activity (eg. Toronto and Brownsville). Neither seem to be addressed in this article as yet. I've started on the former. Natebailey 13:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I would like to suggest that the title of the article be changed from "revivalism" to something like "revivals" because it seems to be more descriptive of the content of the article. To me, an article on revivalism would focus more on specific practices in what is known as "revival" services. Just a thought.

Hasbeard 02:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

No, don't combine these with this article. Firstly you folks have the numbering all wrong in the American Great Awakenings. You've left out "The First Great Awakening", and Renumbered "The Second Great Awakening" as the First Great Awakening. You seem to have done this in an attempt to latch English onto the American Protestant Religious History, and You just can't do that at least in the way you have. Religion may even come from America to England during the first great awakening, but, I'm not sure of that, just that you forgot number one, and well, I will try to fix it, but maybe all I can do is write a few comments for now. John5Russell3Finley 02:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, I don't think I can fix this, and after some honest examination of all the mess I've come up with why: An entire field of "Religious Scholarship" has grown up around me and the rest of US Americans who actually were involved in this while we were actually involved in it, and the scholars don't see things the same way that we did and do, and I guess that I am stuck with the situation that way. According to my father, who was a serious examiner of the minutia of this, our uncle, Rev Samuel Finley was part of the Second Great Awakening, and that appears to also be what the Rev Samuel Finley himself thought. He would not have thought of himself as being involved in "The First Great Awakening", because "The First Great Awakening" had occured before that time, and its participants some of whom were still alive, would be called "Old Lights", whereas he was a New Light.John5Russell3Finley 21:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Even as a member of the Mergist Wikipedians, I'm also opposed to the proposed merger. The Great Awakenings are worthy of their own articles, though admittedly they need some work. I'll delete the tag for now. --Flex (talk|contribs) 19:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

The "noncompliant" tag (the box at the top with the "stop" sign) has been on this article since 6 July 2006 without, so far as I can tell, a word of discussion about it's presence. It should be either deleted or defended. It was placed by 69.138.207.13 in one of two edits ever made from that IP. This appears to be either some kind of a drive-by or an established user inadvertantly editing under an IP. (I do that a lot - too much.) I don't really have the knowledge to judge whether the tag actually belongs, I was just disambiguating and chanced on it. Please use this space to start a discussion. Alternatively a knowledgable user can delete if he thinks it's warranted. --Steven J. Anderson 20:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you look at the "Definition of Christian Revival" section in this version of the article, you can see why the "noncompliant" tag was put on the article. That section is no longer part of the article and so I think we can remove the "noncompliant" tag. Thank you for drawing our attention to this obsolete tag. --Richard 21:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

In looking for this article, I searched for "Religious Revival" and was directed here. Revivals are a religious phenomenon in Christianity. The term "Revivalism" seems almost perjorative to me; that is, I do not like the "ism". Is there not a better title available? Clearly "revival" cannot be used becasue that has unrelated secular meanings. Furthermore, do we not need a category for it, of which this article would be the "main article"? If so what should it be? I came to look at this subject when I found that the article on Duncan Campbell (revivalist) was nominated in WP:AFD. It is perhaps unfortunate that almost any evangelistic campaign in USA is called a "revival", and I certainly do not want to cheapen the use of the term in British Christianity to that level. I hope some one else is watching this page, who is able to address some of these issues, as I am not sure that I have time. There are a number of articles that seem to be missing or only exist as redirects on specific revivals. For example Evangelical Revival is a redirect to Evangelicalism, which has only a paragraph on the rivival led by John Wesley and George Whitfield. Comments would be appreciated. I suspect that we ought to start with a List of Christian Revivals as a means of getting this going. It may need a WP project, but I have neither the time nor the expertise to lead it. Peterkingiron 08:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

• The section "National Revival within Jewish History" should be moved to a separate wiki article, since it has nothing to do with "Christian Revival" or Christianity, rejected by Judaism as "idolatry" for 2000 years. Added by 'ProtestantDisciple' 24 Nov 2019
• The section "First Great Awakening" is good, but it refers to a "main article" of the same name, which is in fact only about the movement in what becamne the USA. A main article is needed on the equivalent movement in England, possibly Evangelical Revival - Evangelical revival currently exists as a redirect to Evangelicalism.
• The section "Background to the 1857-1860 Revival in America, Ireland and Great Britain" probably ought to be forked inot a separatate article or possibly merged with Third Great Awakening, though that is a bad article that fails to deal adequately with this revival, and brings in the Christian Science sect, which surely has no place in it.
• Similarly "Revival in Nagaland" does not fit well where it is - possibly a separate article or a subsction in the stub-section. Peterkingiron 09:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
• Add some reference to the Fulton Street Revival lead by Jeremiah Lanphier in New York City in 1858. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.15.209.209 (talk) 23:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nothing here about the Korean church, which was partly the result of a 'revival' sparked by 'revivalist' missionaries, sent out as a result of one of the 'revivals' in the western church. 218.214.18.240 04:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

In that case why do you not add a short section to the article about it? This should preferably be when you are logged in. Alternatively, why not write a new article about it (with sources) and then inclide a summary in this article. Peterkingiron 15:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

A section on this has just been remvoed for the article. I am not sure whether what it said was in fact correct, but rthere certainly has been a great turning to Christ in Nagaland. which I understand now to be a predominantly Christian state. However the section did not fit well with the rest of the article. We either need a main section on "Revivals around the world" to which this, the Korea Revival, and other similar mass-conversion phenomena can be subsections, or we need a separate article to whcih the present one will cross-refer. The nagaland movement was (I believe) a mass conversion from some other religion, rather than the coming to faith of weak or nominal Christians. Comments please. Peterkingiron 21:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think you're correct--this shouldn't be a catalog for every place where revivals have happened. I mean, it would be 100 pages long! A see also section could help, but even that could be humongous, given the spread of Christianity. Part of the problem here is the amorphous status of a "revival." Lots of preachers use the term, and there's no fixed meaning. I don't think it should just mean "mass conversion" or an area with lots of Christians. I think the term is supposed to point to a period of time when religious activity hugely increases. The Nagaland part was not encyclopedic--more like a pamphlet preaching the gospel. I think the focus here should be on what a revival is in general, without mentioning every example. --Dylanfly 13:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I subsequently reinstated the text removed, but as a separate article. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I cannot claim to be an expert, but are Jehovah's Witnesses and the Latter Day Saints really cases or Restorationalism? Both hold doctrines that differ significantly from standard Christianity and reject (and are rejected) by those adhering to traditional Christian doctrines, almost universally agreed by most denominations. They may conceivably have begun as part of a Restorational movement, but they have clearly departed from such. Peterkingiron 22:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I trimmed this: The books Revival Fires and Awakenings - 30 Moves of the Holy Spirit [1](2006) and Revival and the Great Commission - 36 Revivals from the Mission Field (2007)- both by Mathew Backholer [2]document a combined total of 66 revivals spanning 400 years on 6 contients.

Revival Now is all about revivals witn some interesting revival prophecies, revival presentations and the Scriptures to back it up.[3] because I think the contributors should summarise some relevant content from these books with a reference to the book to support it, rather than just spruik the books. I've added a comment to the author's talk page. Natebailey (talk) 12:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

what is revivalism,festival,gog, places of worshship —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.27.22.140 (talk) 02:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

This article is all about Christian revival. Revivalism is something else: the commitment by Christians to the idea of revival. Many of the stories of revival in this article did not happen to people who were intentional in creating revival - it just happened. So they were not "revivalists," yet revival occurred. I hope the distinction is clear... In any case, revivalism is not the name anyone would use for this topic who was a revivalist! Hyper3 (talk) 19:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

• Support -- I have not been happy with the title, but have done little work on the subject and had thus not interfered. Revival (as I understand) the term refers primarly to the sovereign work of God (usually following prayer) of a restorationa dn deepening of faith. Sadly in America, the term has been devalued to refer to any old evangelistic rally. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't think this is strictly relevant, and in any case, this material is presented better elsewhere. Anyone else? Hyper3 (talk) 22:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

• I agree -- Many groups have sought to revert to Primitive Christianity, for example the forms of worship adopted by Plymouth Brethren. Several of the groups mentioned in the section are regarded by mainstream Christians as heretical. I was toubled by the appearance of this section when I first saw this article, and remain so. However, this is not my academic field, and I lacked the courage to remove it. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

The last sentence of the second paragraph reads", "The word "church" here referring to the body of believers in Christ as a whole and not to any particular group or denomination among them." Should this be "The word "church" here referring to the body of believers in Jesus of Nazareth as a whole and not to any particular group or denomination among them"? The latter links more accurately. Tyrannophobe (talk) 17:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm currently trying to edit a page called Benevolent Empire. Just wanted to list it here in case there is someone interested in developing that page. I came to it to 'wikify', but it is in need of a lot of editing. More facts required, and a more neutral tone. I've added a photo and rewritten the intro for neutrality. However, I don't know enough about the subject to bring any more factual detail to it. Nihola (talk) 04:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've extracted this comment from a recent edit (which I've reverted) by a new editor, PilgrimPundit (talk · contribs).

Note: Any Reference to the 7th Day Baptist/Adventist/Millerite Movement is Missing? How? This is the Fastest/ Largest Growing Denomination in the World still today. Should we know their History in American Revivalism? Help Me. 1st Edit

Mitch Ames (talk) 06:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Is the rise of the Russian Orthodox Church in the close of 1990s a revival? If so, why is it absent here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.135.146.234 (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Shorten description per WP:SDSHORT. Editor2020 (talk) 03:39, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply