We need revival

El Guero I completely agree with you that the Church needs revival, but here is the biggest problem...Church folks do not want to remove the sin from their lives. And because of the false teaching of many of our "spiritual" leaders they are taught they don't have to because everybody gets their piece of paradise pie and there are no consequences for sin outside of a little discipline here on earth.

But if you can just hold on and endure what little discipline you will get here then all will be okay there, so just go live it up.

Or the other side has people so utterly confused about what salvation is all about because they keep telling them that they have to have good works in order to prove they are saved, but they never qualify that by how many or what kind or for what length of time, and so there is another set that just continues to wonder day to day whether they are really saved or not.

We desperately need a revival, but we are going to have to get back to Scripture in order for that to happen. And if we do that then the multitudes are going to fall away just like the multitudes did when Jesus got into the "hard teaching." And I'm afraid some just don't want to get rid of the mega-following

 

HP: Why don’t you start this road to revival off right by defining sin for the list. We have made sin every trifling cloud of dust we can stir up with our own vain imaginations, that sin has lost its meaning and its penalty its justice and real import.

You say that you are the chief of sinners, yet start to compare yourself with others you see as committing more or far worse sins. Does not Scripture warn us not to compare ourselves among ourselves or to ourselves, for to do so is not wise? What ever happened to this testimony? 1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”

It seems apparent to me that if we cannot make a clear distinction between the righteous and the sinners, all such talk of real revival is somewhat meaningless. If a revival of religion in ones heart does not end in the cessation of sin in ones life, what practical good is it? Sure a sanctified believer once on fire for God in the midst of a revival can fall back into sin, but would not the least that could be said about an individual that claims to love God and is walking in sanctification be that he sins so little that it can rightfully be said of him he does not sin? Should it not be true a of a believer that has his or her heart fixed upon God that sin is the totally unusual thing for them to be found doing and only under extreme temptation? Should it not be rightfully said of them that they are righteous before God, walking daily in obedience as saint, not as sinners?

If we are ever going to see revival, we are going to have to start thinking right about religion again. We are going to have to start distinguishing clearly between sin and righteousness, between sinners and those born again and in love with God.

We need to make the following verses the watchword of our lives, “Ro 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
Ro 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

God, may it ever be so. Start a revival in my life Oh Lord!

 

I agree with you absolutely.
We also need to do something about what is being taught in some Baptist Colleges. A former pastor of mine said that when he went to a Baptist College here in England he was told to forget about Genesis 1-11. If that is what our pastors are being taught then no wonder the churches are in a mess. Yes, we badly need a revival.

Blessings

followinghim

 

I agree that a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit would be dynamite in our lifeless assemblies. However, one thing I would like to point out is that my status before God is not "sinner", as these scriptures clearly state. Yes, I sin, but clean before Him I stand. Therefore, I will not refer to myself, my status, as "sinner," but as saved, justified, sanctified, that when He looks at me He sees not "my sin," He sees Jesus.

 

Ro 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Ro 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

HP: How do the verses in question clearly state that ones status before God as a believer is a sinner?

 

Amen!!

Preach

 

May I make an observation or two without anyone taking offense? I am not trying to belittle anyone or attack a doctrine in particular, but I simply don’t get it. We hear almost on a daily basis in church and on the job the notion that nobody is perfect, and that we all sin, and that if any man thinks he or she can live above sin they are a liar. Almost every Sunday we hear the pastor state that he sins every day. Now, we hear those on this list speaking of revival. I just don’t get it. If we are nothing but sinners as believers, and nothing we do in any way affects are standing before God, and nothing we can do can in any way separate us from our God, and all has been settled for eternity on who in fact is saved and who is not, and even the pastor sins every day, why worry or even consider a revival? What earthly good could it possibly accomplish? Are we now to assume that a revival of religion can accomplish something that God can not or will not accomplish with or without such a revival?

If we are sinners before a revival, and sinners after a revival, and we sin every day before a revival and sin everyday after a revival, what is all the hype of revival really all about? Nothing really changes does it? ……………or could something really change if we started thinking differently about religion once again as they have at a few brief periods in Church history, such as the revivals in the N. Eastern US, and even England to a degree, in the middle of the eighteenth century? What could have possibly been taught during those brief periods differently that would have served to initiate those mighty movings of the Holy Spirit?

 

We will probably never have a revival like in the `Old days.' One reason is changes in the culture. The second is the church's unwillingness to do one thing that it takes.

First, Americans no longer trust the Bible as much as they did 150 years ago. 150 years ago a preacher could come to a town and tell people what the Word says, and people would pay it proper respect. Today, a person who believes the Bible is often considered ignorant or under-educated. Many churches do not stand behind the authority of Scripture anymore either. It is going to be hard to convince people to follow the Bible when even some Christians do not believe the Bible is what it is -- it will be hard to convince those Christians to follow the Bible when it contradicts their non-Scriptural opinion.

Second, in a revival, we need masses of Christians all getting together and encouraging each other to revitalize our Christian lives to a higher level. That is not happening; many Christians are more interested in squabbling over denominational distinctives and party lines than in about pushing themselves and encouraging others in their regular everyday Christian lives. Many would rather stay separate to protest each other. If one group starts to `catch fire,' the others will refuse any part of it. We forget the Hebrews 10:24-5 purpose for churches even meeting.

If I attend Congregation A of `Fellowship of Churches' Alpha, but when traveling I hear a wonderful sermon by a preacher of Congregation B of Denomination Beta that pushes me to go out and do some good things for some people during the week, I may not agree with what is happening in the congregations of Denomination Beta, but I am going to be grateful for the admonishment and I hope I act on it for the Lord. I am not sure enough other Christians feel this way.

Widespread revival is not going to occur in a divided church, many of whom refuse to repent of indulging in the διχοστασια of Galatians 5:19-21. The word is one of the strongest Greek words translated "division" in the KJV and literally it means “standing apart” -- Vine, et al, Expository Dictionary, page 179 NT. I do not believe there is much hope of a largescale repentance from this in our churches.

 

So true!
I call this "one-upmanship". "Revival" is often preached as what everyone else should do better.

 

HP: Possibly I do not understand you here. Is there not room for us to ‘do better’ and often that might not happen apart from some outside influence such as a revival might offer in order to bring that to pass, even though the revival effort might be just in a single assembly as opposed to a general revival among many?

 

HP: There has been much opposition to every revival of religion. God has simply moved despite the opposition.

HP: I see it as willing disobedience to the clear truths of Scripture. The Holy Spirit is well able, just as He has done before, to convict and re-enlighten the hearts of men and women.

HP: Revival does not start that way. It starts with a man or a women, and then two men or women, and spreads from there. It stands to be mentioned that in many revivals it has been in some instances that the women were the forefront of minding God, with the men following.

HP: Such was true in times of revival as well. There was much bickering, and open rebellion to the moving of God among some. Immediately following the revival, the bickering increased with party spirit trying to capitalize on the revival efforts. Just the same, God accomplished much in spite of the bickering and party spirit.

HP: This is true, but just the same, in the midst of the revival, God simply over ruled the opposition, and they were powerless to stay separate. The Holy Spirit’s moving became a far greater draw for those in the community, and they had to just stand still and allow the Holy Spirit to move. They were at times afraid to do anything. There were clear instances were some opposed to the revivals were simply taken out of the way. This, I am sure, made many opposed to the revival efforts to think twice about their outspoken opposition to the revivals.

HP: The Church has always seen division, even in the NT era. I believe God is still able and willing to do a work in and among His people in spite of all odds against it. Whether or not it will happen is yet to be seen.

It is I oh Lord that stands in need of prayer and revival! May it be the prayer of each one of us, Oh Lord, let the revival begin in me!

 

how will revival exist when Christians are falling for the same trap that forums and blog hosts are setting up; that any opinion you make is worth anything?

 

I agree with Dispens. Those scriptures point out that we are not sinners. We have been set free from sin. Our status, as he points out, is not sinner. Heavenly misinterpreted his post. As born-again believers we should be experiencing revival in our hearts daily. I agree as well that revival comes to town and lots of folks are revived, but then revival fever passes. Why? I guess I have to ask, how do we sustain the fervor of revival in an ordinary town in the U.S.? How do we keep it going? Anyway, I'm prone to say something like "something has to happen" in our churches, when all along it is God who makes things happen. How does he do that? So that answers my question. We DON'T keep it going. God does. God does that through individuals who take up their cross after the revival and make a difference, in the community, in the home. It's down at the grassroots where change occurs. It's one thing to say that we had a revival and 26 people got saved. It's quite another to say what happened afterwards to those 26 and the entire congregation. Too often I hear that they just "faded away." I rarely hear that the church is "churching", following up, on that new creature in Christ. Revival produces converts, and "re-dedications," but then what? We need revival plus a committment on the part of the church to vigorously follow up.:flower:

 

In response to various aspects of one of my earlier posts:

Heavenly Pilgrim: it is my genuine hope that you are right and that I am wrong.

 

HP: You are so correct. Sorry Dispens. I took it you were saying that the Scriptures clearly stated that you as a believer are a sinner,so that is why I asked the question for clarification as to what you menat by it. I see now from Gen. post that it obviously was not the position you intended on making. Thanks for the correction Gen.

 

I'm confused over this discussion of whether a believer is a sinner or not. I think I know what Dispens is saying, but I can't be sure I'm reading into his statements the right interpretation, so I'll just say what I think.

When Paul said we as believers were free from sin (Ro 6:18), we have to measure that against his other statement (in Ro 3:23) that no one is without sin, and none of us is righteous. So what is Paul saying?

I think he's saying that believers are free from the slavery of sin which makes it the dominant practice of our lives. Believers will still sin, but no longer is the practice of our lives.

I also think that when God looks at us he does not see us believers as righteous. He sees us clothed in the imputed righteousness of Christ.