The great awakening – blessing or curse?

[RBPerry]

If you have decided to read this thread and question you are aware that I want to focus on the third and fourth great awakening and primarily what came out of the third great awakening.

What happened during these “Great Awakenings”? Christianity got split up into many pieces known as denominations or various Christian movements.

We also had the holiness movement that went right along with the great awakening. What denominations or groups came out of this era? Here is a few, Jehovah’s Witness, Mormons, Christian Science, Quakers, Shakers, Seventh Day Adventist, Nazarene, Theosophy, Thelema, and of course the Pentecostals in 1906. There was also the Millerite movement from 1831 to 1844, but that was short lived.

The fourth was the Jesus movement in the 1960-70s that I was somewhat a part of. Many disputes if this was any kind of great awakening, however it did bring many to Christ that filtered into various churches, long term effects I think are undecided.

Today we have another group that has gained great popularity, and that is the non-denominational churches where the pastors may preach whatever they feel the Lord is leading them to without worrying about conflicting with denominational theology. That is my choice for church attendance.

I wrote a paper in the early 70s. Just a bit of advice, do not write a challenge like this if you are attending a Christian college, it may not be received too well.

I’m not going to post the entire paper. Why, it was handwritten, and I don’t feel like copying it. My question is, was the third and fourth great awakenings a curse or blessing? There is no question it divided the Protestant Christian churches. I am not a theologian, nor a pastor, and in all honesty, I don’t know if it was a blessing or curse or somewhere in between. My opinion when I was in college and close to graduation (early 70) is that it became a curse brought about by Satan break up the Protestant movement. However, in my early twenties I knew everything, that lasted until I was about thirty, by fifty I realized there was more I didn’t know than I do know.

One thing the great awakening did produce was plenty of false prophets, so that confirmed to me that women aren’t supposed to speak in church, be in leadership over men, or spout off about their dreams. I know, good luck making that work.

Please remember, we did not have the internet or computers back then. All research was done by going to the library and digging through books.

I would love to hear some commonsense opinions. Oh, I do believe in progressive revelations, to a point.

 

[RBPerry]

One other thing, please don't confuse the great awakening with the reformation, they are different.

 

[PloverWing]

I think the various Great Awakening movements have been a mix of -- "curse" is too strong, but a mix of human flaws and divine blessing. In general, they provided some needed correctives to the state of American Christianity at the time. When the Christian community gets too dull and complacent, it's good to have a revival movement that emphasizes enthusiasm for God and personal responsibility for one's spiritual life, and the Great Awakenings provided that. And the Social Gospel movement provided an important corrective to the ways that less-wealthy people were being oppressed in the cities.

On the other hand, I'd say that this is one of the hazards of the movements:

the non-denominational churches where the pastors may preach whatever they feel the Lord is leading them to without worrying about conflicting with denominational theology.

This unfettered freedom can be good if God is genuinely speaking through the preacher (and if the preacher has correctly understood God), but it also means that when the preacher is in error, there's no council or bishop or presbytery to offer correction.

By the way, as a side point, I would place the Quakers as part of the Reformation, rather than the Great Awakenings. George Fox was dead by the time the 1700s began.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Look forward to reading it...

 

[RBPerry]

I think the various Great Awakening movements have been a mix of -- "curse" is too strong, but a mix of human flaws and divine blessing. In general, they provided some needed correctives to the state of American Christianity at the time. When the Christian community gets too dull and complacent, it's good to have a revival movement that emphasizes enthusiasm for God and personal responsibility for one's spiritual life, and the Great Awakenings provided that. And the Social Gospel movement provided an important corrective to the ways that less-wealthy people were being oppressed in the cities.

On the other hand, I'd say that this is one of the hazards of the movements:



This unfettered freedom can be good if God is genuinely speaking through the preacher (and if the preacher has correctly understood God), but it also means that when the preacher is in error, there's no council or bishop or presbytery to offer correction.

By the way, as a side point, I would place the Quakers as part of the Reformation, rather than the Great Awakenings. George Fox was dead by the time the 1700s began.

Good point regarding the Quakers, they did come from the reformation. Guess I just lopped them all together, I can use my age and memory as a defense for mistakes.
You are correct about non-denominational churches, they must have a strong church board with well versed believers, or you have a recipe for problems.

 

[bbbbbbb]

So, how do you fit in the various individuals and movements within the Catholic Church that preceded Luther? For example, Peter Waldo and the Waldensians, who continue to the present? Then there is Jan Hus and the Hussites. And what of Girolamo Savonarola?

History, especially Christian history, is far from simple.

 

[RBPerry]

History, especially Christian history, is far from simple.

You forgot the Gnostic Christians. There were many different Christian sects before the Catholic church, then of course the Catholics killed anyone that disagreed with them and we now have what the Catholics wanted us to have for orthodox Christianity, but of course us Protestants didn't like some of it so we through out what we didn't like. We know have parts of the apocrypha's that can shed a different light on certain beliefs. You are right, Christian history isn't simple, and can be a bit confusing to the outsider looking in.

Personally, I haven't seen anything good that came out of the great awakening, and the holiness movement.

 

[bbbbbbb]

You forgot the Gnostic Christians. There were many different Christian sects before the Catholic church, then of course the Catholics killed anyone that disagreed with them and we now have what the Catholics wanted us to have for orthodox Christianity, but of course us Protestants didn't like some of it so we through out what we didn't like. We know have parts of the apocrypha's that can shed a different light on certain beliefs. You are right, Christian history isn't simple, and can be a bit confusing to the outsider looking in.

Personally, I haven't seen anything good that came out of the great awakening, and the holiness movement.

Most people consider the improvements in society, such as the abolition of slavery, to be a positive fruit of the Great Awakening.

 

[RBPerry]

Most people consider the improvements in society, such as the abolition of slavery, to be a positive fruit of the Great Awakening.

Even thought the civil war was fought during period, I don't see the connection spiritually. I can only be thankful that the south lost and slavery was abolished.
My position is that it divided the protestant church with numerous theology's that have little of nothing to do with salvation and what Christ expects from His people.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Even thought the civil war was fought during period, I don't see the connection spiritually. I can only be thankful that the south lost and slavery was abolished.
My position is that it divided the protestant church with numerous theology's that have little of nothing to do with salvation and what Christ expects from His people.

The abolition of slavery started long before the American Civil War. As a result of the Great Awakening in England (which initiated the Great Awakening in the United States via John Wesley and George Whitefield) men like William Wilberforce moved political mountains and abolished slavery in Great Britain and its colonies. Do you think the Christ expects His people to be slaveholders?

 

[RBPerry]

Do you think the Christ expects His people to be slaveholders?

Of course not.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Of course not.

I don't think so either, although there have been many that, actually, have thought so.

Thus, I think that we can agree that the abolition of slavery was one of the many moral results of the Great Awakening.

 

[RBPerry]

I don't think so either, although there have been many that, actually, have thought so.

Thus, I think that we can agree that the abolition of slavery was one of the many moral results of the Great Awakening.

Sorry, must disagree, the civil war would have happened without the great awakening. The great awakening was a religious movement, the civil war was political and slavery wasn't what started the civil war, it was taxes levied on the south to strengthen the union army. We have many history revisionist today that want to make the civil war strictly about slavery, but it was only part of it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Sorry, must disagree, the civil war would have happened without the great awakening. The great awakening was a religious movement, the civil war was political and slavery wasn't what started the civil war, it was taxes levied on the south to strengthen the union army. We have many history revisionist today that want to make the civil war strictly about slavery, but it was only part of it.

The abolition of slavery was not an issue until the Great Awakening made it an issue, first in England and then throughout its empire. One might advance an argument that the Enlightenment (which is closely allied with the Great Awakening) was the impetus for the abolition of slavery. To believe that the American Civil War happened spontaneously because folks enjoyed slaughtering each other on the field of battle, is shear nonsense. Perhaps you might want to reread Uncle Tom's Cabin and sing, yet again, the Battle Hymn of the Republic.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

If you have decided to read this thread and question you are aware that I want to focus on the third and fourth great awakening and primarily what came out of the third great awakening.

What happened during these “Great Awakenings”? Christianity got split up into many pieces known as denominations or various Christian movements.

We also had the holiness movement that went right along with the great awakening. What denominations or groups came out of this era? Here is a few, Jehovah’s Witness, Mormons, Christian Science, Quakers, Shakers, Seventh Day Adventist, Nazarene, Theosophy, Thelema, and of course the Pentecostals in 1906. There was also the Millerite movement from 1831 to 1844, but that was short lived.

The fourth was the Jesus movement in the 1960-70s that I was somewhat a part of. Many disputes if this was any kind of great awakening, however it did bring many to Christ that filtered into various churches, long term effects I think are undecided.

Today we have another group that has gained great popularity, and that is the non-denominational churches where the pastors may preach whatever they feel the Lord is leading them to without worrying about conflicting with denominational theology. That is my choice for church attendance.

I wrote a paper in the early 70s. Just a bit of advice, do not write a challenge like this if you are attending a Christian college, it may not be received too well.

I’m not going to post the entire paper. Why, it was handwritten, and I don’t feel like copying it. My question is, was the third and fourth great awakenings a curse or blessing? There is no question it divided the Protestant Christian churches. I am not a theologian, nor a pastor, and in all honesty, I don’t know if it was a blessing or curse or somewhere in between. My opinion when I was in college and close to graduation (early 70) is that it became a curse brought about by Satan break up the Protestant movement. However, in my early twenties I knew everything, that lasted until I was about thirty, by fifty I realized there was more I didn’t know than I do know.

One thing the great awakening did produce was plenty of false prophets, so that confirmed to me that women aren’t supposed to speak in church, be in leadership over men, or spout off about their dreams. I know, good luck making that work.

Please remember, we did not have the internet or computers back then. All research was done by going to the library and digging through books.

I would love to hear some commonsense opinions. Oh, I do believe in progressive revelations, to a point.

without having read any answers to this question yet...i have some serious concerns with the assumptions made here.

1. the millerite movement still exists...so it did not dissolve in 1844. The SDA church that came out of the millerite movement was not actually formed until i believe around 1863 (thats 20 years later)

2. Where exactly did you come up with the idea that women are false prophets or even have anything to do with such a doctrine? (my assumption is that this is a swipe at SDA church specifically and I challenge you to show evidence on that unfair character assassination of one of the most prolific female authors in all of Christianity). E.G.White is not a saint or a God, she did not even claim to be a prophet...which is in stark contrast to the numerous modern false prophets we know of!

3. you live in a country, are more than likely protective of that counties ideals and social structures, more than likely lock your front and back doors at night time to keep "untowards" out, have a fence around your house...exactly how do you propose that non denominational groups are going to move forward in spreading the gospel? What gospel are they spreading? how can they be unified in spreading any message when they do not all believe the same things? This is utter madness...society doesnt even work that way so why would you think religion should?
My charge to you is that you attend a non denominational church because it suits your lifestyle and doesnt force you to confront less than Christian worldly habits. Whenever you come across a difficult one, you can simply "go somewhere else more accepting of said bad habit"

Its a shame you cannot post your academic paper, i would be very interested in reading that.

 

[RBPerry]

without having read any answers to this question yet...i have some serious concerns with the assumptions made here.

1. the millerite movement still exists...so it did not dissolve in 1844. The SDA church that came out of the millerite movement was not actually formed until i believe around 1863 (thats 20 years later)

2. Where exactly did you come up with the idea that women are false prophets or even have anything to do with such a doctrine? (my assumption is that this is a swipe at SDA church specifically and I challenge you to show evidence on that unfair character assassination of one of the most prolific female authors in all of Christianity). E.G.White is not a saint or a God, she did not even claim to be a prophet...which is in stark contrast to the numerous modern false prophets we know of!

3. you live in a country, are more than likely protective of that counties ideals and social structures, more than likely lock your front and back doors at night time to keep "untowards" out, have a fence around your house...exactly how do you propose that non denominational groups are going to move forward in spreading the gospel? What gospel are they spreading? how can they be unified in spreading any message when they do not all believe the same things? This is utter madness...society doesnt even work that way so why would you think religion should?
My charge to you is that you attend a non denominational church because it suits your lifestyle and doesnt force you to confront less than Christian worldly habits. Whenever you come across a difficult one, you can simply "go somewhere else more accepting of said bad habit"

Its a shame you cannot post your academic paper, i would be very interested in reading that.

Would you like to read mine, sixteen years of SDA schools, graduated from Loma Linda, major was Masters in phycology and bachelors in nutrition. You make an assumption that this is mud slinging at the SDA church, I didn't mention the SDA in this post.
The problem I had is I started asking questions that the professors at Loma Linda didn't like, I have a tendency to think for myself and not just regurgitate something someone else has attempted to teach.
As for Ms. White, first of all her books on child rearing, what a joke, she dumped her kids to run around the country preaching. Would you like a list of some of things she came up with that are total non sense.
Christian, try John 3:16 and dump all the stupid rules that your club has made up. Christianity isn't difficult because we have freedom in Christ. Like Paul said, "all things are permissible, but not all things are profitable". Jesus said, "it isn't what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, it's what comes out."
What the great awakening did was to split the protestant movement up into fragments, why would Christ divide His people up like that? He didn't, we have done it to ourselves.
Don't bother throwing you pat scriptures at me, I know them all to well.
Want to know why non denominational churches are doing so well, they minister to the needs of the people, and most are well governed with strong accountability to scriptural accuracy, they just don't burden their congregations with rules that make no sense, and really can't be supported accurately with scripture. Mrs. white's dreams weren't prophetic visions, just like the other prophets that came out of the era. If God had an issue with the sabbath, dietary rules, alcohol (wine isn't grape juice), he wouldn't have waited until the ninetieth century to deal with it.
You are correct that Mrs. White didn't claim to be a prophet, however she never corrected anyone when the implies or said she was, and that was wrong.

 

[RBPerry]

The abolition of slavery was not an issue until the Great Awakening made it an issue, first in England and then throughout its empire. One might advance an argument that the Enlightenment (which is closely allied with the Great Awakening) was the impetus for the abolition of slavery. To believe that the American Civil War happened spontaneously because folks enjoyed slaughtering each other on the field of battle, is shear nonsense. Perhaps you might want to reread Uncle Tom's Cabin and sing, yet again, the Battle Hymn of the Republic.

Sorry, I just don't think what was going on in Europe was a driving force to stop slavery. The South had way too much to gain by keeping slavery, and frankly I doubt if they even cared what England and the rest of Europe were doing. However I had mentioned if you had asked the average southerner, or northerner to go to war to free the black, most wouldn't have joined for that reason alone.

 

[PloverWing]

One thing the great awakening did produce was plenty of false prophets, so that confirmed to me that women aren’t supposed to speak in church, be in leadership over men, or spout off about their dreams.

Where exactly did you come up with the idea that women are false prophets or even have anything to do with such a doctrine? (my assumption is that this is a swipe at SDA church specifically and I challenge you to show evidence on that unfair character assassination of one of the most prolific female authors in all of Christianity).

@RBPerry : I assumed that your statement about women was meant as a general condemnation of women serving in clergy and lay leadership positions. Were you taking aim at Ellen G. White in particular?

Are you rejecting women in leadership and the Great Awakenings because of your experience with the Seventh-Day Adventists? If so, that might be worth discussing.

 

[RBPerry]

@RBPerry : I assumed that your statement about women was meant as a general condemnation of women serving in clergy and lay leadership positions. Were you taking aim at Ellen G. White in particular?

Are you rejecting women in leadership and the Great Awakenings because of your experience with the Seventh-Day Adventists? If so, that might be worth discussing.

Very good and fair questions. Well 1 Timothy second chapter don't remember the verse dealt with women in leadership and teaching. I think my point was more pointed towards my opinion of Mrs. White and all her books I was required to read.
I do realize our society has changed in that regard and I do realize many women can be a wonderful asset to the church. As for leadership, I think that is a tough one for me because I do understand how a woman's emotions can sometimes effect her decision making process.
As I have said, I'm not a theologian nor a pastor, so that's just my opinion.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Sorry, I just don't think what was going on in Europe was a driving force to stop slavery. The South had way too much to gain by keeping slavery, and frankly I doubt if they even cared what England and the rest of Europe were doing. However I had mentioned if you had asked the average southerner, or northerner to go to war to free the black, most wouldn't have joined for that reason alone.

England had a vital interest in the cotton industry which was centered in the American South and her Majesty's government covertly did everything they could to maintain the importation of cotton. The years 1861-1865 are known as the Cotton Famine in England when the spinning mills in Lancashire, Manchester, Leeds, Bradford, etc. came to a stop for lack of cotton from the Confederate states and thousands of factory hands were unemployed and the economy was in ruins. That, coupled with massive food exports (primarily wheat) from the United States, resulted in a severe agricultural depression which did not come to an end until WWI.

Southerners in the United States were financially ruined by the very effective Union blockade of Southern ports which stopped the trade in cotton.

The reality is that the situation would not have developed had it not been for a combination of cultural and economic factors including the Great Awakening, the Enlightenment, and the Industrial Revolution.