Noah Webster defines the word, in the religious sense, as: “A renewed and more active attention to religion: an awakening of men to their spiritual concerns”.
Revivals, although not defined as today, have indeed been present, in the church of Jesus Christ since its conception. A "spiritual" revival could have and has been known in some cases, to go on for years within any given geographical area.
However, few are aware that the “revival meeting”, as it has come to be known today, actually did not have its existence until early in the nineteenth century at which time it was introduced by a one Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875). It may also be noted that Finney was instrumental in the introduction of the call, or invitation, to the anxious bench, later to become known as the "altar call".
This new style of "meeting" brought with it a more heightened and emotional form of what is erroneously considered today as “worship”. It has taken a great stronghold within the church society and is prevalent among almost every denominational and non-denominational religious faction.
Looking into the history of the church, we find that after the conception and rise of the Missionary Baptists in the early nineteenth century, many of the newly established Baptist associations began to acknowledge the revival, which had been introduced only a few years earlier, as an important tool by which more souls could be reached and the growth of the church could be enhanced.
Reading the reports on missionary work from the early nineteen forties, we find in the records of one of the more prominent Baptist associations of northeast Georgia that each church holding membership in this association was expected to “set a goal to add least one baptism per each ten members”. Simply put; each church was expected to boast a ten percent increase to its membership each year.
These churches were provided with a six point program on how to accomplish this goal. One of which was that each church holding membership in the association was to have; “one or more revival meetings per year in each member church in the state”. Other points included “soul-winning meetings in homes, on the street and in other public places”, “a religious census in every community”, or “study courses in soul-winning in every church”. Each of these programs was equally pragmatic, but interestingly enough; the “revival meeting” was number one (1) on the list to be utilized for this particular purpose of adding numbers to the church.
Some churches would eventually become disheartened with the pressure that the associations of this type were putting on them and begin to “pull out” to form more conservative unions. Many felt that the programs with which they had been pressured were much too liberal, but amazingly, one installment that was kept without any hesitation or opposition, even after exiting associations of this type, was the “revival meeting”. Although most every other programs was considered to be non-biblical, unnecessary, or even harmful to the church of Christ, the revival would continue to be embraced as indispensible to the welfare and growth of the church.
Most evangelicals today treat the revival meeting as a biblical installment that was given to the early apostolic church, but, again, we find nowhere in scripture that this can be established. In fact, if we take into consideration that the New Testament church has been in place for over two millennia, we find that the revival meeting is in all reality a relatively new concept. Yet today it is found in virtually every fundamental, charismatic, and Pentecostal circle, including almost all Baptist factions. What is widely accepted today, as a necessity, is in all actuality only one more tradition that has been added to what can be considered as an already over burdened church society.
What is truly disturbing is that the “services” held during a week of “revival” are viewed in an entirely different light than the Sunday worship service. Mindsets are altered by the aura of excitement that is found within the revival service. Emotions run high during these gatherings; usually more so than during any of the other fifty-two weekly services. Prayers become more desperate. The church is worked up into an almost frenzied state. The discourses that are delivered have a tendency to focus on what the sinner must do, rather than the work of Christ and what He has done for the sinner.
In closing, I will stress that assembling for the purpose of worship is biblical as well as needful that the professed Christian may lift up the name of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as well as to grow in the love and knowledge of Him. How often this is done, whether weekly, or even daily, is well within scriptural bounds for the individual church to decide. However, meeting in the name of our Lord should be for no other reason but to adore and worship Him. Anything outside of this purpose could be very dangerous to the health of the church.
In my opinion, the revival meeting, as it is used today, carries no necessity for the growth of God’s true church nor does it have any bearing as to the welfare of the professed Christian. If we believe the scriptures we must also believe that the Lord still has charge of his church and will add to it at His discretion and as He deems necessary (Acts 2:47).
Sam Everett
