Happened on a You Tube channel carrying biographies of Christian leaders and stories of revivals.   D L Moody was the first I saw, then the Weslewy borthers first John and then Charles, then the Welcsh revival of 1904, though I may have skipped something in between, not sure.  Then they did a program on the Millerites which became the SSeventh Day Adventists.  Not your orthodox denomination, especially when you see Ellen G White's strange eyes.    All interesting nevertheless.  

But then Azusa Street and the Pentcostal movement and I knew I was in a fringe part of the Christian universe.I's the usual uncritical presentation that makes much of the phenomena such as tongues speaking as evidence of the "baptism in the Holy Spirit"  whicfh  only succeeds in confusing things .   I thought John MacArthur's Strange First Conference did a great job of showing that the 
girffts of the PSirit" claimed by the charismatic movement are nothing like the gifsts described in the New Testament, and I could echo that from my own experience of having received the "tonguies" which I know are some kind of bogus experience and not at all the tongues of the Bible.  I was glad to  finally be set free from the charismtaic influence that had continued to hold me in spirte of my own recognition of its falseness.

B ut at the same time I've always felt that the reason people get involved in that movement has a valid basis, , that most Christians really do live on a level of experience much beneath what is possib le and woulde be a powerful impetus to the Churuch if God would bring it about.  

I acce[t the basic Reformed theology that says we are born again at the point that we truly believe in the salvatgion given us by Christ .   I don't think what some call the baptism in the Holy Spirit subsequent to that is in fact that baptism, but is in most cases either conversion itself which hadn'[t happened earlier in spite of the claim that it had, or was a fuller inpouring of the Holy Spirit, and it's this latter that I continue to wish for myself as well as the Church.

The episode I saw about D. >L. Moody described his first conversion as rather dramatic, so it is easy to impute tto him the regeneration experience at that time and I have no reason to doub t it.  He was powerfully changed and moved to preach the gospel, major signs that he had in fact been tborn again.

Nevertheless later on some women in his congregation prayed for him and he recieving a deeper experience of the Holy Spirit, which  brought a definite increase in power to his preaching.  While he didn't preach anything new, what he praeched converted many more people than it had done before, although he'd had a a csuccessful ministry of conversions to that p[oint.   So  whatever this "second blessing" is it's not the born again experience, it's not the oirigianl baptism in the Holy Spirit like what was experienced in Acts 2 at the beginning of the Church, it must be simply a greater empowering in the Spirit, and it must be something we could and should seek.  When it comes to a whole congregation or community it's simply revival.

Seems to me we all need this and the Church needs it.  I know that if we are in the very last days, and there seems to be every rason to think we are, that many teach that we can't expect any more rfevivals, it's all down hill from here.  That may be true, b ut why should we just accept this idea?  Surely we always need more power of the Holy Spirit as individuals and as congregations and communitiies.  Why should that need some to an end just because the eworld is sliding into the last days, and even most of the churches?   Even if we have to accept that there is a great apostasy underway that doesn't inclucdde ALL the churches, there are still strue churches, there is still "the remnant" that looks forward to the Rapture.

TGhe charismatic "revivals of the nineties are some kind of sick joke.  While I'm wiloling to consider that some of those who experienced them did have genuine experiences of the Holy Spirit, as a whiole the revivals are obviously profane and unChristian.  There is a frivolousness at least that is not fitting a work of the Holy Spirit, a giddiness or jokiness about the tone of them.  Where is the powerful praching that draws people to Chrfist?  I don';t see it any of those so called revivals.  The Laughing Revival is maybe the most obvious bogus event.  Watchman Nee identifies that laughter as "soul power" and not of the Holy Spirit.

A genuine revival produces fear of God, a hatred of sin and a condenmnation of oneself as a sinner while Jesus death on the cross is magnified and preached with greater depth than usual.This may not describ e all genuine revivals but something of that tone must be present it seems to me or it's not genuine.

Just because we have to give up on the charismatic version of revival soesn't mean we should tive up on revival as such, but unfortunatley that does seem to happen. John MacArthur has always seemed to me to be positively allergied to any idea of  that we could have and certainly should seek more power from god.  If the bible is being preached conscientiously and conversions are happening that's enough for him.   

It's not for me.Revival True and False

 \\\Bret and Heather 156th DarkHorse Podcast Livestream: Who Lost the Plot? - YouTube