1
Murray, Iain H. Pentecost – Today? The Biblical Basis for Understanding Revival. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust 1998. 226 pp. $16.50.
Introduction
Biographical and Authorship of Iain Murray
Iain Murray has championed out-of-print books from Reformed and Puritan authors since the founding of the Banner of Truth Trust in 1957. Before the Trust there was the Banner of Truth magazine (1955) which Murray edited until 1987.[1]
Murray was born in Lancashire, England in 1931. He was educated at King William’s College, Isle of Man and the University of Durham. Murray converted to Christ at age seventeen after an upbringing in the English Presbyterian Church.
Murray served as an assistant to Lloyd-Jones’ at Westminster Chapel, London for three years from 1956 to 1959. From 1961 to 1969, Murray served at Grove Chapel, London and at St. Giles Presbyterian Church, Sydney from 1981-1984. Murray has travelled extensively to teach and preach, continues his writing ministry and currently remains the Editorial Director for the Banner of Truth Trust.
Murray has authored several books. His works include biographies: D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The First Forty Years (1982) and D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The Fight of Faith (1990); The Forgotten Spurgeon (1978); Jonathan Edwards: A New Biography (1988); The Life of Arthur W. Pink (2004); and The Life of John Murray (1984). He has also written extensively about revivals and church history: The Puritan Hope: Revival and the Interpretation of Prophecy (1971); Revival and Revivalism: The Making and Marring of American Evangelicalism 1750-1858 (1994); Evangelicalism Divided: A Record of Crucial Changes in the Years 1950 to 2000 (2000) and The Old Evangelicalism: Old Truths for a New Awakening (2005).
Murray and his wife Jean Ann have been married for fifty-four years and live in Edinburgh, Scotland. They have five children and ten grandchildren.
Summary of the Book
Murray wrote Pentecost to answer the question, “How are we to understand ‘revival’?” Perhaps it is best to back up one more step. This question assumes there is such a thing as revivals in church history. We might first ask the question, “Since the event of Pentecost, is there reason to believe that further outpourings of the Spirit are necessary?” There is debate here. Some think Pentecost was the once-for-all sufficient gift of the Spirit’s presence. Believers, they say, must “realize what is already theirs” (7). Others promise further outpourings or revivals dependent upon human obedience. As one reviewer said, “it’s feast or famine, depending on us.”[2]Murray examines these two positions in light of Scripture and history.
Murray does believe that God gives “revivals” to the church and defines a revival this way:
[A]n outpouring of the Holy Spirit, brought about by the intercession of Christ, resulting in a new degree of life in the churches and a widespread movement of grace among the unconverted. It is an extraordinary communication of the Spirit of God, a superabundance of the Spirit’s operations, an enlargement of his manifest power (23-24).
Murray notes that there are many books describing revivals, but few that undergo the “struggle to establish a biblical theology which explains and justifies the phenomenon” of revivals (6). Murray’s concern is for more than the increase of revivals. He wants to make the case for a theological understanding of revivals because he believes there to be a “direct practical consequence in the life of the church” (6). With an ecclesiological concern in mind, he then examines current views and judges them against the teaching of Scripture.
Other Books in the Field
Two “titans” of thought about revival are presented together by Murray. He compares Finney’s thoughts on revival from his Revivals of Religion with the thoughts of Edwards’ in Thoughts of the Revival of Religion in New England and other works by both authors. But these are not all the authors. Murray’s “Title Index” reads like a Who’s Who of Reformed and Puritan writers on the subject. The Index would make a good start for a bibliography on the subject!
I am somewhat surprised that Murray did not include Lloyd-Jones’ Joy Unspeakable: Power and Renewal in the Holy Spirit (1984). Murray quotes from other of Lloyd-Jones’ works to support his case that a revival is an extraordinary “enlargement” of the Spirit upon the church. In this assessment it does seem that Lloyd-Jones and Murray agree. Likewise they agree about the sovereignty of God in giving the gift of an extra measure of power to the church. Neither man would allow for human initiation to be the determining factor of a revival as would Finney.
Murray and Lloyd-Jones would probably not disagree with what happens to people when the Spirit is poured out upon them. Lloyd-Jones writes about this more graphically than does Murray,
. . . what happens invariably is that they are aware of a Presence and of a power, something has come upon them and has happened to them and they are lifted up out of themselves and out of time, they scarcely know where they are, and phenomena take place. I am not talking about speaking with tongues, but about joy and abandon, something so great that people even faint and become unconscious, and great power and liberty, great authority follows in preaching – and that is what is called a revival. . . My dear friends, if you read the history of the church you can come to only one conclusion: this has been God’s way of keeping the church alive . . . When the life has gone he has sent it again; when the power has vanished he sends it again. That has been the history of the Christian church from the first century until today.[3]
Murray and Lloyd-Jones may have seen eye-to-eye with regard to God’s sovereignty in giving the gift of revival at various times and places, and even some degree of agreement with human response to the work of the Spirit, but they differed greatly over the controversial positions on the teaching of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In Joy Unspeakable Lloyd-Jones makes the case for a two-stage experience of the Holy Spirit: one at regeneration and a second at a future time of “the baptism of the Holy Spirit.” Lloyd-Jones seems to have taken the classical Pentecostal and the more contemporary charismatic position.[4] He wrote,
I take it that that is therefore abundantly clear – you cannot be a Christian without having the Holy Spirit in you. But – and here is the point – I am asserting at the same time that you can be a believer, that you can have the Holy Spirit dwelling in you, and still not be baptized with the Holy Spirit. Now this is the crucial issue.[5]
In the balance of the chapter, Lloyd-Jones seems to follow the arguments of a classic Pentecostal position on the baptism as reflected in the official doctrine and teaching of the Assemblies of God.[6] He argues that the baptism with the Holy Spirit belongs to Jesus but to the Spirit it is given to baptize us into the body of Christ as his work of regeneration in us. Therefore, Lloyd-Jones concludes that “you can be a child of God and yet not be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”[7] He then supports his position using texts from Acts 1: 4-8; 2; 8:14; and 19.
Murray spends an entire chapter on the matter of the interpretation of subjective religious experiences. Within this chapter he addresses various teachings on the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Murray shows from the Scriptures rather than experience why the two-stage approach approved by Lloyd-Jones should not be accepted (112-125). Perhaps his respect for Lloyd-Jones caused him to discretely leave his name out of the discussion.
Murray’s book Revival and Revivalism (1994) anticipates Pentecost in much more detail as he traces the evolution toward revivalism in America. Revivals were once “surprising” but with the emergence of revivalism became “announced [events] in advance” with revivalists “guaranteeing results” (xviii). Murray links this emergence with “the low level of biblical instruction . . . Ideas popularized by the spirit of the age [that were] too strong to be counteracted by preachers who were too few in number, or inadequately prepared [and a wholesale rejection of the] Calvinistic understanding of the gospel that had hitherto prevailed among all evangelical Christians.”[8]Murray’s Pentecost seems to fill the void among other books on revival by showing the “all-important distinction between religious excitements, deliberately organized to secure converts, and the phenomenon of authentic spiritual awakening which is the work of the living God” (xix).
Summary of Main Points
Murray’s book is laid out in seven chapters and three appendices. He seeks to build a theological explanation that filters the historic experiences through the lens of the Scriptures.
Chapter one presents Murray’s understanding of revival as a “larger measure of the Spirit of God given to the church” (17). He comes to this position as a “third way” of understanding revivals by examining the two prominent schools of understanding. The first view “affirms that the whole concept of occasional revivals is not biblical at all” (7). Because the Spirit is already present, this position asks, “how can he be more present?” Instead of revivals what believers need is to “realise what is already given” (7). The second view is that God does give the gift of revivals, but they are dependent upon human obedience (8). In this view, the people of God must exercise repentance, surrender, submission, consecration, etc. Second Chronicles 7:14 is often cited as the foundational text for securing God’s blessing of revival. Murray quotes Finney in this regard: “A revival is as naturally a result of the use of the appropriate means as a crop is of the use of its appropriate means.” If used rightly, “revival would never cease.” (8).
Murray’s view is a third way: revivals are a larger measure of the Spirit of God given to the church (17). In an important segment prior to his view, Murray makes an important distinction between Old and New Testaments. He claims that the church often confuses the promises and transposes the old over into the new. The first confusion is the understanding of the “land” as promise. The NT church “ceases to be connected in any theocratic manner with any land. Our is ‘the Jerusalem above,’ ‘the heavenly Jerusalem’ (Gal 4:26; Heb 12:22)” (15). The second confusion is due to using the OT words for revive and reviving to describe NT events.
Murray then provides a helpful section on the consequences for the church of each of the views. The first view stifles prayer for more of the Spirit. The second view seeks to make the “surprising” normal and can blame the poor state of the church for God not moving. The third view avoids both these pitfalls and provides a vital lesson: “The authenticity of any alleged revival is to be judged by the same tests by which the genuineness of all Christianity is to be tested” (31). This lesson is valuable for testing spirituality growing from normal times or extraordinary times because in either instance it is about what it means to be a Christian. Is there love for God and willing obedience to the Scriptures? Is there concern to serve Christ and his kingdom? Is there the desire and effort for personal holiness and compassion for brothers and sisters in Christ as well as for those outside? A revival may draw attention to itself because of unusual experiences or manifestations, but the mark of a true revival would be the marks of the Holy Spirit which are present in anyone who has been regenerated by his working.
Chapter two takes up the controversial theology and practice of Charles Finney as it influence the church. Murray examines Finney’s theology (and boasting!) and explains why “the old school” opposed Finney’s “new measures” (49). The adoption of Finney’s positions over time influenced the church negatively and is with us still today. With Finney’s theology we are left with a superficial view of conversion based on a superficial view of sin (50); trust in human instruction necessary to become a Christian (e.g., trusting in walking forward to the altar to receive Christ) (50); lower standards for church membership by accepting some worldliness among professing Christians (51); and a change in the content of revival (52).
Chapter three addresses the biblical tension between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility in relationship to revivals and accompanying phenomenon. Murray concludes that God is sovereign in revival. There is comfort for the church in this chapter. Murray asserts that God is sovereign in his choice of “instruments” (70). These men may not have been the most profound theological thinkers, or even the most “correct,” yet God used some “whose teaching was in some respects faulty and erroneous” (71). Though they may have been “poor theologians [they were] excellent for burning!” (71).
Chapter four examines the role of the Holy Spirit in preaching. Murray encourages preachers to plead with God for the anointing of the Spirit (90-99). Chapter five calls the reader to interpret any religious experience, during revival or in normal times, according to the Scriptures (105-133). Chapter six warns church leaders to be alert to things that hinder revival and grieve the Spirit. In this chapter, Murray takes a sobering look at the dangers of fanaticism in revival (134-169). Finally, chapter seven explains six good things brought by revival. Murray points out that genuine revivals restore: 1) faith in God’s Word as inerrant, authoritative (and sufficient); 2) a definitiveness to the meaning of “Christian;” 3) an urgency to advance the gospel with amazing speed; 4) a moral influence in society; 5) alter (for the good) an understanding of Christian ministry; and 6) change (also for the good) public worship in church (171-193).
Critical Evaluation
What the Reviewers Said
Not many reviews seem to have been written for Pentecost. My search through ATLA discovered only three available to me.[9] The three authors recognized Murray’s work as “a work written for the readership of the church at large, rather than for the academy”[10] and appreciated Murray’s “sane, biblical, and immensely practical book on revival.”[11] The same author admitted that he was “pleasantly surprised” and “having [his] prejudices challenged” by Murray.[12] Porter called Pentecost a “rare book” because Murray “argue[d] the validity of the subject from a historical narrative point of view.”[13] The third review by Ellis was more like a summary of a few ideas from the book and not very helpful.
William Porter’s review included three weaknesses of the book that sound like his own agenda rather than a careful reading of Murray. Porter writes that he believes it is a “pity that Murray doesn’t engage with sociological analysis of revival.”[14] Porter admits that the omission may be outside Murray’s intention. Indeed it is not Murray’s intention to deal with a sociological analysis because he makes it plain in the opening pages that his concern is “to establish a biblical theology which explains and justifies the phenomenon” (6, my italics). Furthermore, Murray dedicates an entire chapter (five) to “The Interpretation of Experience” in which he makes two basic points: 1) “We have to start with Scripture, not with experience”(106); and 2) “For even true experience, when misinterpreted, becomes the source of wrong teaching. This has sometimes happened in revivals” (107).
I am not certain what position Porter takes on God’s sovereignty when he writes, “when looking at why God chooses to give enlarged measures of the Spirit at certain times in history, rather than face possible sociological explanations [Murray] seems to hide behind a theology of God’s sovereignty” (374). It seems that Murray might answer, “God chooses because God is sovereign!” This is the point that Murray wants to drive home throughout the book. Revival cannot be worked up, as Finney believed, but can be a matter of intense and purposeful prayer and gratefully received when given.
Finally, Porter wants Murray to answer the “complexity” of modern mission rather than “suggest that the church’s problems . . . with today’s culture will be solved at a stroke of revival” (374). Once again, this does not seem to be a concern for Murray who is more intent on knowing the marks of difference between God-given and man-made revivals. It seems Porter is asking Murray to answer his questions rather than reading Murray’s concerns.
Personal Analysis
Murray’s book should be read by every pastor who is serious about praying for revival in his church. Murray will give pastors “tracks to run on” should the Lord bless your church with an “enlarged measure of the Spirit.” Church leaders will need those tracks to examine the reality of the experiences, teach the truth of the Christian life and shepherd the confused through the messy humanness that may appear in the mingling of “the dirt and the Divine.”[15]
Where Lovelace addresses the need for ongoing renewal in the life of the believer and the life of the church, Murray addresses the surprising and sovereign choice of God to revive his people. Renewal belongs to the disciplines of the normal Christian life; revivals belong to God.