³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

I think we must be careful here not to blow things out of proportion. A seasoned evangelical brainwasher from Tennessee is going to speak in Belfast and the word has gone around to all NI evangelical leaders to "pack 'em in".

Revival 11 is keen to attract not only adults but children too. On its website it promotes a club of some sort for children called "Promiseland". The group also provides courses for learners of English and the grief stricken.

I remember events like this from when I was young; earnest gatherings where the mood and the feeling whilst at the event was strong and positive, worship sessions and meetings full of promise and heightened emotions, commitments to life and society changing plans.

And then the real world came back and the groupthink that dominates such closed-in events evaporates. I remember feeling the exact same emotions at the first proper gig I went to, and then again when present for life-changing news stories in large groups (like 9-11).

Despite the attempts by religous groupings to enter some form of 'revival', it inevitably fails when confronted with the real world and cannot stand upto either the apathy of the masses or the scrutiny of the critics.

However (and with no sense of irony at all, promise ;-), an event like is totally different and makes real change with real people.

Honest

"Despite the attempts by religous groupings to enter some form of 'revival', it inevitably fails when confronted with the real world and cannot stand upto either the apathy of the masses or the scrutiny of the critics."

So now we know! Natman - the 'omniscient' - has spoken! Tremble tremble....

"You have been warned you 'little (unreal) people', who dare to entertain the idea of going to an event not approved by the 'Ministry of Culture' (a.k.a. The European Politburo of Atheists).

But please, oh pleeeeease, come to our form of brainwashing and groupthink. We're such lovely 'real' people you know... (as long as you don't mention that unforgivable 'G' word)."

(rather than in the cosy world of armchair atheism)...

Re Haiti LSV
would that be to give praise to god for killing all those people in an earthquake? maybe as a punishment for homosexuality or other heinous sins as suggested by pastors and bishops? or perhaps just an old fashioned smiting by a jealous and ill tempered omniscient being. Then again a voodoo revival would be worth seeing.

Hmmmm,

That was quite an amusing post there, LSV. You managed to take a fairly neutral and light-hearted post of my own (complete with sarcastic connections to a secular event), based upon observations of my youth (which are no way comprehensive) and managed to spin it into an evil atheist propaganda rant. Of course there are countless documented cases of such revival events turning the tide of relentless secularisation in the areas in which they were held. Cases like... um... no, wait, I've got one here someplace...

Quite amazing.

As for the Haitan story, I'm sure all those newly devout survivors are giving god the credit for killing 220,000 people and, praise the lord, saving them instead.

How is it that god gets the credit for the (miraculous) survival of a some, but not blamed for the deaths of others? Do these people even register the irony of returning to worship a god that (if doctrine is to be taken literally) created and sustains a world that actively kills them?

I won't even go into the lack of a secular alternative in a lot of lesser developed countries leaving the church the only option of collective grief.

I will also avoid using vulture analogies to describe the descent of religous groups into such areas to expand their own belief base, all in the name of 'relief'. I'm sure the Catholic Church is dipping deeply into its pockets on the ground there to make sure houses and hospitals are repaired first, before church buildings.

Anyway... back to the subject of the thread....

(and PS, don't you have posts from Richard to refute?)

Let's keep things in perspective. A well known evangelist comes to Northern Ireland and Christians fill a building to hear him speak. This is no Christian revival, just some Christians having a day out.

Churches spend a lot of time and energy trying to make us think that they are very important to our lives; but they are not. Brian Feeny made this point well in this week's edition of Sunday Sequence.

paul james -

Four sentences in one post! Feeling alright, pal?

As for Haiti: I notice that the Haitians are not all falling over themselves to convert to this wonderful 'real world' thing called atheism. Hardly surprising considering that atheism provides no answers to anything in the real world, which is rather proven by the fact that the harder life is for people, the more likely they are to believe in God, and the converse is often true! So Natman's analysis in #2 is nothing other than delusion.

When it comes to suffering, I prefer to listen to those who suffer rather than the self-appointed opinionators who feel they have the right to speak on behalf of such people. Certainly no one has the right to speak on behalf of those who died. Such smug representation is really the exploitation of suffering for ideological reasons. I prefer to allow the people of Haiti to speak for themselves.

(But I suppose some 'glorious higher beings' of the 'advanced nations' will just dismiss these people as uneducated peasants, whose opinions are worthless - thus adding to their suffering.)

Natman -

"...don't you have posts from Richard to refute?"

Such as? (Unless you haven't quite worked out that knocking sentences together to say, in effect, that "I disagree with you" does not count as a refutation. That's all I can see in those posts I am supposedly still to refute!)

"I will also avoid using vulture analogies..."

Not that the purveyors of that highly moral philosophy called materialistic reductionism would ever dream of such an approach. Oh nooo!!

Perhaps you would like to provide some evidence for your insinuated accusation, and prove also that the Haitian people are incapable of thinking for themselves? Come on 'evidence man'... cough it up...

Sorry, William, I've taken your thread off topic, so if this discussion needs to continue, I guess we'll have to find an Open Thread.

"...the harder life is for people, the more likely they are to believe in God, and the converse is often true!"

Correlation does not imply causation.

I also never said that the Haitians are incapable of thinking for themselves. That's your words, not mine. I merely pointed out the irony of worshipping the same god that is responsible for killing over 200,000 people. Unless you saying that god isn't responsible for earthquakes? (and if he isn't, who is?)

Keeping racking up the ad hominem attacks, you're really showing us what a master of the arguments you are here. Sometimes I think there's two people throwing out posts under the moniker 'logica_sine_vanitate'.

Natman post 2, I think you have a point. I suspect Gubbio in the Missal thread is experiencing the same euphoria and buzz that these *closed-in* events stir up. I think you hit the mark when you say ..."it inevitably fails when confronted with the real world and cannot stand upto either the apathy of the masses or the scrutiny of the critics"

On another note, it would be really nice if LSV and Natman made up. You both tend to make good points!

Natman #2

I can’t remember agreeing with you more. Actually, I can’t ever remember agreeing with you at all before, but I so get where you are coming from.

And the Atheist Conference, love it! I love the Atheist ‘A’ (I hope you have a badge! If you ever become a Christian you can turn it on it's side and pretend it's a fish!), I love that you have international speakers and I love that you have an ‘Atheist Alliance’ - (an AA for our EA) fantastic! I love that it’s on a weekend, I love that you have entertainment (music, I suppose, and if that included the whole audience singing a song or two, that would be just brilliant). And most of all, I love that purpose driven Atheists (you do need a sweet little soundbite like this, you know) learned it from us; and, if you look closely at the background of that poster, at the little wispy weed plant thingy, you can just, if you close your eyes to a squint, just, make out a cross with a halo. It must mean something, I’m sure of it! :-)

You guys should also consider taking the next step and have revival gatherings, you know, a revival of the values of free thought and rationalism - I've even got a name for you - '20:20 Atheism' - clarity of vision and all that, with the added benefit of a few years to get the event oragnised.

Andrew

With regard to the comments you made on the other thread (I’m assuming you have seen that I switched threads).

The three points first; I hope you don’t have to flick back and forth too much.

(1) On biblical literacy - we agree.

(2) No need to worry about the qualifier - my concern is that we make faith and repentance into works - and what particularly interests me is how this faulty thinking on our part effects how we relate to others and the kind of ‘gospel’ we communicate.

(3) I’m not sure I’m getting your point about ‘jeremiads’. I see little to disagree with in what Alan Jacobs says. My initial comments were trying to raise a concern, not primarily about our theology or about the state of the church, but about how we go about living and communicating and being the church, and this latest revival malarkey (and it is a malarkey) is a perfect example. Our approach to the, how should we communicate our faith question is always the same - organise a meeting! We organise meetings at the drop of a hat, and then we announce another one, and, as Natman has pointed out, if you’re *really* committed, you organise a revival meeting. (sorry for the cynicism, but some of my cynicism is just the truth, and I've been to a bundle of these meetings and events and they're all the same).

My concern boils down to this, when people (people who are not christians) see the church, most of the time they see our subcuture: they see the meetings and the music and our bookshops and our TV programmes and our tracts on the street and our T-shirts and our events, events with coolio names like Revival 11, and somewhere in the middle of all this we have hidden Jesus (the carpenter from Galilee who spent time with people and saw their broken hearts) - we of all people have mistaken the medium for the message. Here’s the thing, remove the trappings of the subculture and ask, what’s left?

Your other points about idolatry and counter culture and selfishness I’ll probably pretty much agree with you on - but those issues weren’t really my point and they only make sense to the biblically literate anyway; my point had more to do with *seeing and doing* grace as the way of *talking* about grace. By all means lets talk, but the community needs a context for the talk, otherwise they’re not going to listen, and I don't think we can blame them for that.

If there is a Revival this year, can we pencil in a 150 year anniversary event for 2161?

Peter

On (3), my comments should be read in context of #96 and some of my other posts in that thread. I know I didn't directly deal with a lot of the points you raised in (3). I don't disagree with much of it but perhaps where I do disagree - if disagree is the right word - it is because I think the gospel is inherently offensive. If we are talking about how we can make the gospel more appealing to unbelievers I'm not sure this can be done. The 'seeker sensitive model', for this reason, is bunk.

Being terse or harsh, self-righteous maybe, these are all off putting, and if you're looking a hearing these things will usually close hears. So it's a good idea to take stock, repent even. On the other hand, if someone's problem is not the medium but the message, they are offended by the gospel, this isn't something we can or should do much about. All we can do is tell it again and trust in God's grace.

The revival stuff is something of a hobbyhorse of mine. Jacobs, in his essay, mentions Charles Finney and conversion by technique, revivalism has a leg in Finney. If one leg is in Finney - don't ask me how many legs there are - another is in 19th century Anglo-American pietism. It's amazing just how much we are influenced by all of this without ever realising. There's a particular grammar that comes with it that I can't quite convey, or stand, but since you're familiar with 'revival' meetings you probably know what I'm getting at.

Sure, why not? You could probably pencil in an anniversary or two before 2161 as well.

Andrew

"The 'seeker sensitive model', for this reason, is bunk."

And for a lot of other reasons I can think of too!


I'm not thinking about being 'seeker sensitive', I'm thinking of things like forgiveness, social justice, kindness, patience, love, hope (things that are in the bible!)... a 'sleeves rolled up, dusty feet kind of love'. I'm thinking of things like getting noticed for 'loving our enemies', returning a rebuke with kindness, being generous, helping out when no one else will. Giving stunningly important theological concepts like justice, mercy, grace and humility - flesh. Is the gospel an offence, yes; but it's also good news, too often we leave to good news bit out.


On Revival. (why am I using a capital 'R'?)

Do you know how dangerous your comments are?! With your hobbyhorse and mine we'll probably have enough for a merry-go-round!

"revivalism has a leg in Finney" - Revivalism doesn't have a leg to stand on!

"There's a particular grammar that comes with it..." Yes, it kinda goes like this... Actually, never mind!

"Conversion by technique" - Like a three step plan? You see, when I read things like, "We believe Revival ‘11 is an initiative inspired and led by God towards the beginning of the realization of this dream in three simple steps." I want to say, "God already has a plan, it's called, Jesus"

Peter

Not sure if this is the best place to post this but just saw you're comment over at the other thread:

So if we want to communicate something about the faith we believe to be important (and I think it of utmost importance) we’re going to have to find a way of doing it which might cause them to take notice.

When I said 'all we can do is tell it again and trust in God's grace', I don't mean to proscribe one method, and one only, of communicating the Christian faith (although I would say preaching of the word in the church is primary) but however we 'tell it' it had better be faithful to what the gospel is.

Andrew: rather than preaching or telling people what to do or not do - how about living it? For me the people that made most impact on me are those who by their words, actions and deeds and even eyes convey a love for all of humanity irrespective of sexuality, gender, religion, sin, beliefs, race, nationality or any labels of any kind.

These people accept and love people as they are and do not need or demand they change or follow anybody or anything other than what their own inner voice or heart tells them to. For me, these people are much more Christ like than those who say they are Christian but are quick to condemn or judge another or demand that the only way to God is through Jesus. I know not all CHristians do that - but there are plenty that do.

This is a comment made by someone on another blog about yet another christian being penalised for his discriminatory actions. The quote is from the comments on but the story is also on the and even it can't seem to side with this christian.

"it seems to be that modern relgion is all about what it can do for me, not what it can do to help others. I want to wear my cross, I want to treat who I want, I want to serve who I want. its seems to be three quarters hate and the rest love. When is the balance going to be back to what relgion used to be about. Care, love , understanding and respect to others."

I just thought it was pertinent to this sub debate and apposite to any discussion on revival. Increasingly most people are just seeing the petty and judgemental side of things or the out and out weird. You may disagree that that is what religion is about, but just like the catholic missal, it is what it is perceived to be and that is far more important to the outsiders.

The external perception of your religion has been hijacked by the highly vocal, media savvy and oft hysterical christianity of the biblically literal frothy mouthed evangelicals. And I do not mean all evangelicals, just the loudest ones.

Dave

Thankyou for your comments. Perhaps you'll find a Christian or two who will listen to you, we Christians really need to listen to others. (Preferably others who are not Christians)

I must say though, I'm surprised you don't want to go the the Evening Celebration for Revival - it should be good, and it's free, and there might even be coffee - as it says on the promo, "Please book as soon as possible to avoid disappointment!" - I really do hope you won't disappointed!

I hope not to be disappointed either... so I'll be staying at home; I plan to light the fire (for those in the know there's a pun in there), rent a DVD, make some popcorn and enjoy the movie with the rest of the family - spending some quality time at home is an under-rated spiritual activity. In fact I'm pretty convinced that enjoying some rest *is* in the bible while 'Revival' meetings are not.

Peterm2,

You are welcome, always happy to provide a glimpse from beyond the Pale, as it were.

Unfortunately Thursday is a no go as I have a late afternoon engagement with a pint or two in the lovely Cathedral Quarter (not that far from the venue). This may seem like I am just saying I have better things to do with my time but I too believe in the spiritual restorative of good company and friends. I'm not sure if that is in the bible or not, but I am sure you can imagine how concerned I am about that. I probably could look in after the pub but I am not sure they would be ready for that level of open and frank debate.

It is sold out anyway, damn !!!

Have a pleasant evening in front of your pun.

Peter

I'm not sure if we settled anything but I enjoyed the discussion. I had typed up another comment, heartily Calvinistic, but decided not to post it.

Anyhow, I'm going to drop out of commenting on this blog for a while (I'm thinking I will have to unsubscribe otherwise I will end up commenting ).

Andrew

Thanks for the conversation, enjoyed it. And I just love the irony! - "I had typed up another comment, heartily Calvinistic, but decided not to post it."

Andrew, surely you know... :-)