ive never heard ravenhill preach on tongues, im just curious did he believe in the baptism of the holy spirit with evidence of tongues ? i know he was fond of the pentecostal movement (if not pentecostal himself) and preached at alot of AG churches but dont know if even he himself spoke in tongues or even supported the theology of the sign of speaking in it to be filled with power
I wrote the following brief essay on Ravenhill and tongues:
http://iamadisciple.blogspot.com/2008/08/was-leonard-ravenhill-pentecostal.html
Hope it satisfies your questions.
someone could ask his son David Ravenhill.
he has a website too.
That was a fine essay, KJ. Thanks for making it available to us. I would like to add that I have an old sermon video of Ravenhill in my library where he mentions in passing the traditional Pentecostal doctrine of obligatory tongues at Spirit baptism as "junk theology".
He was an amazing man; like KJ said he fellowshiped with ministers of all denominations, which I think is very healthy and wise. It really frustrates people when they can't put a label on you. I balked when I fist heard him make that statement, because I was certified with the Assemblies of God and held to the traditonal Pentecostal view. Now, years later, I believe that he was right.
I can get the name of the sermon if you like, as I'm sure Greg has it here in the archives.
Brother Paul
I 2nd that. very good article KJ
This might help and you might want to add this to the article that was written. I recall Ravenhill stating his father took him to a all night prayer meeting at 14 years of age where is was born again, and then he said he was filled with the Holy Ghost at 18. I think this may have been around the same time he started reading David Brainerd's life story and got the book Power Through Prayer by Bounds. Hope this helps.
The essay I wrote was part of my blog. Feel free to write a comment on it and contribute to the article for whatever future readers may stumble across it, regarding Ravenhill's pentecostal views :-)
Hi KingJimmy...
That is a nice article. I didn't know that Ravenhill claimed to have never spoken with tongues. I have listened to many of his messages, so I assume that I might have missed such references. However, I know that he was quite cynical of those who claimed to speak in tongues yet have little passion to rightly live for God.
When I met with Brother Ravenhill in his home as a teen (shortly before he died), I told him that I was Pentecostal, to which he replied, "Lovely." I thought that it was a strange reaction, but he wasn't at all cynical by it. Of course, at the beginning of the meeting, he asked me many questions about my faith. Eventually, I assumed (and was told by others) that he did this to weed out those who are simply star-struck so that he could spend time with those who are openhearted and sincere. By the time he responded to me telling him that I was Pentecostal, I had already "survived" the weeding process.
Although I am Pentecostal, I am not a traditional Pentecostal either. I cringe every time I am in a congregation and the pastor asks people to pray out loud in tongues -- as if it were something people could turn on and off like a water faucet. My own experience was that I spoke with tongues when I was baptized in the Holy Spirit. I was alone – and had finally given up the desire to simply speak with tongues. I told the Lord that the reason that I wanted to be baptized with the Holy Spirit was because I simply wanted to know Him more. I began to worship Him…and it happened suddenly and unmistakably. There was no one around (thankfully). Like the time at summer camp when I cried out to the Lord in repentance with an unquenchable desire to truly know Him, I had this experience when I was completely alone.
Since that experience, I have never been able to just “speak in tongues” like so many people seem willing and able to do. I see ministers telling people to “pray out loud in the Holy Ghost” as if the Holy Spirit was subject to our desires (or as if the ability makes them truly bilingual at all times). Even before I was baptized with the Holy Spirit, I was quite skeptical of this sort of thing (and other “signs” like it). Many of the most ungodly “Christians” seemed to speak with tongues or get “slain in the spirit” the most often. I used to really contemplate just how such a thing could happen.
However, I have spoken with tongues. There are times when I am alone in prayer…or reading the Word of God…or even reading the newspaper – when I am intently moved by such a great need of God. Sometimes, that same overwhelming thing happens. Sometimes, I simply begin to suddenly weep almost uncontrollably…and the words of another language simply flow out of my mouth as though they were flowing from deep inside of me. Once I am finished weeping, praying and/or speaking as such, I am so acutely aware at the moment that this is such a holy thing that I would never try to make a spectacle of it. In fact, I am usually struck with an overwhelming hunger to spend time alone with God in prayer and worship.
I once told my wife that I suspected that most of the people who claim to speak with tongues probably do not really speak with tongues. I have heard the same “shunddai shunddai shunddais” over and over again in many Churches. Typically, it seems to do nothing for the person but draw attention to the fact that they can apparently speak with tongues. My experience is entirely different. I have never been able (or even wanted) to make a spectacle of such a thing.
Of course, I hesitate writing this right now. There are some good believers here who might be just as skeptical of such a thing as I was. I do believe in speaking with tongues, and I am entirely convinced that this gift is available today. Is it the initial sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit? I don’t even pretend to know! I know that I was taught that it was, but I was skeptical at the time. I know that it happened frequently to those who were baptized with the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts. Yet on at least one occasion, it doesn’t say WHAT happened. I guess that the point is that our eyes and minds should not even be on such a thing. We should be entirely focused upon Christ.
Once, there was a missionary who visited our rather large Assembly of God congregation. He was adamantly in favor of the notion that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. He had a very clear way of convincing the congregation of the need for the baptism of the Holy Spirit – and the need to not be ashamed if you do not speak with tongues. At the end of his message, the preacher asked everyone to raise up their hands if they had NEVER spoken with tongues before, and probably 4/5 of the congregation raised their hand (including many people who acted like they had for years). What would possess people who don’t speak with tongues to act like they do? Maybe a “churchy” sort of peer pressure? The point is that many people who believe in tongues as the initial evidence for the Baptism of the Holy Spirit do not actually speak with tongues.
I have sought for the answer many times. Is tongues the initial evidence? I don’t know. And you know what? I don’t think that I even really care to know. The important thing is to know Jesus. I think that Brother Ravenhill made it clear that – even if we could speak in tongues, prophesy and heal the sick – our faith is not worth much if we don’t daily spend time with God in prayer and live for Him. Instead of seeking tongues (or healing, or any other gift), why can’t we just seek Christ? Besides, He is the Giver of the gifts anyway. If He really wants us to have such a gift, He would freely give it.
Anyway, thanks for the article! It was quite a “lovely” description regarding the life of a wonderful man of God! I would prefer a dozen Leonard Ravenhills over another million mere "tongue talkers" (or people who claim to speak with tongues).
:-)
Thank you for your wonderful thoughts and insights about Ravenhill, ccchhhrrriiisss. What a precious thing to have sat around talking with such a man. I too consider myself Pentecostal, but don't believe that speaking in tongues is the evidence of the baptism of the Spirit. I believe, of course, there will always be some outward demonstration of power accompanying that baptism, and that (generally speaking) more often than not, tongues will likely accompany that experience.
I sometimes raise and eyebrow when I testify of my baptism experience, for I say I do not remember if I spoke in tongues or not. I was alone in my room, simply seeking God, and all of a sudden I had an awareness of God like I never had since I first heard the gospel. I know I was in deep agonizing prayer, and I know I muttered some things while just having communion with the Lord. I don't really recall to be honest. I simply remember being so overwhelmed with the Spirit of God that it does not bother me one way or the other whether I spoke in tongues back then or not. In fact, it would be quite a little while before I ever prayed in tongues and was conscious of what it was the Spirit was prompting me to do. In fact, I don't think it was until I was in Bible college that I even understood that is what I was in fact doing from time to time (I was attending a Baptist church for a while).
Personally, I believe so long as one has the personal witness of the Holy Spirit regarding this experience, then that is all the "evidence" one needs. Of course, so long as one stays full of the Spirit thereafter, one should continue to demonstrate the power one received.
KingJimmy: My brother asked me the original question on this post yesterday after hearing A Man of God. Thanks for answering. It was a good article that catches some of his way of speaking about things.
I was not successful in posting this on your site. [i]“Indeed, he denied ever speaking or praying in tongues all his life”
I sometimes think about how Ravenhill (and others like him) had spent so much of their energies praying for revival, and preaching towards that end- and yet never got to experience a revival firsthand.
But then again, if we define revival as a revolutionary work of the Spirit that occurs first...in the heart of an ‘individual’... then maybe even now the godly dreams of men like Ravenhill are coming to fruition. For if a ‘revived life’ can be likened to a stream that carries life giving waters, then the legacy of the godly can be seen in the rivulets that dot our globe. When these rivulets meet up with one another, they happily converge together to form a mighty river.
Psalm 46:4,5
"There is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most High. God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved: God shall help her, and that right early."
In Christ,
John
hi, i have oft heard him say that you need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit with all that comes with it,jimp
“Indeed, he denied ever speaking or praying in tongues all his life”. Could you maybe give one example or reference? The sentence, as you write it, suggests many denials.
He did it in multiple sermons throughout his life. However, one in particular strikes me. I think it was either one sermon he preached immediately before he broke his back during a fire at a hotel he was at, or it was the first sermon he preached after he had recovered enough to do so. Unfortunately, I cannot recall the name of the sermon. It was preached in the 60's I think. Maybe somebody here can point it out?
I've not had time to listen to it again, but I believe this is the message where Ravenhill denies speaking in tongues:
Revival - https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?lid=2264
Description: This sermon was given by Ravenhill in 1955. This must have been just before he was injured. What a fiery message, I think this was about the time that Ravenhill speaks of the revival at Tozer church. The agony of deceived and lost people going to hell is overwhelming.
All I remember is that this sermon was absolutely amazing. He speaks with such incredible unction throughout the message, and, somewhere in the middle denies having ever spoken in tongues. His congregation was obviously very Pentecotsal, as they help him preach quite a bit :-)
I know that Leonard Ravenhill believed in the gifts of the Spirit. I know of several men that sat under brother Ravenhill's ministry, and they all spoke in tongues.
When I received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, it was several months later that I actually spoke in tongues. Since the day of Pentecost almost all of the well known saints have testified to be filled with the Holy Spirit, some of them spoke in tongues, and others didn't. I don't think that we should make tongues the issue as to whether or not they were baptized in the Spirit. They moved in the power of God and that was evidence that they were filled with the Spirit.
The Holy Spirit in our lives will sancitify us and bring forth the fruit of the Spirit in our lives, making us more like Jesus.
Mike
Pentecost - Leonard Ravenhill
This promise was exclusive - "Ye shall receive power." Who was to receive the promise? Only the followers of Christ.
The promise was exciting - "Ye shall receive power." In eager anticipation of this blessed enduement, the waiting ones could see all their weakness evaporating in the baptism of fire.
The promise was explicit - "Not many days hence."
The promise was expanding - This thing was not to be done in a corner, nor whispered among the redeemed. It would reach out through them to Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost parts of the earth.
This promise was exalting - In the whole world of created things there is no greater power than that of the Holy Spirit of God. They were to be filled with the Spirit of the living God. Earth has no greater honor than that.
Angels, behold and wonder!
Every thing in the heavens above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters above the earth - all these are the work of His fingers and this Mighty one is He who condescends to come and indwell mortals.
But though Pentecost meant power to the disciples - it also meant prison to them. Pentecost meant enduement - it almost meant banishment. Pentecost meant favor with God - it also brought hatred from men. Pentecost brought great miracles - it also brought mighty obstacles. Pentecost brought anointing for the upper room preachers - it also brought appointing a deacon and under the enduement he turned Samaria upside down.
In Europe Pentecost Sunday is always called Whitsunday (White Sunday), and the children usually dress in white. The disciples were "made white" at the first Pentecost - that is, their hearts were "purified by faith" (Acts 15:8, 9). This purification is a lost accent these days in interpreting the Baptism with Spirit. Under the title of Spirit-filled churches, there are some weird and wanton things operating at present.
If too much stress has not been made of the gifts of the Spirit, then too little has been said of the fruit of the Spirit. Note how few books are available on the fruits of the Spirit, but how many on the gifts of the Spirit. Yet the Son of God said, "By their fruits ye shall know them."
The first essential for the coming of the Holy Ghost into a heart today is that the heart should be cleansed from sin, for the Holy Spirit does not fill an unclean heart. What God has cleansed, He then fills. Finally, whom God fills, He uses. A holy life is the authentic sign of being filled with the Spirit.
Today we need a revival of holy living. Why do we have to hang a sign outside our church to announce that we are Fundamental and Biblical? Because without a sign, no one could identify us? When I passed through a town that a few days before had been torn apart by a tornado, I assure you I had not to be told a mighty wind had cleaved the place. A fire is self-announcing. A conflagration needs no publicity. When the fire of the Holy Ghost falls again and the mighty wind of the Spirit comes (I am positive He is coming), then our "bush" will burn too, and a Moses will turn again to see the great sight. Even so, come Holy Ghost! Come quickly!
Hi everyone,
Personally, I've never heard of anything in Ravenhill's writings which indicates whether or not he himself had ever spoken in tongues. However, I was just listening again to this message delivered by Duncan Campbell, who was Ravenhill's contemporary and friend. At approximately the 60% mark of this sound file, Campbell shares about the fact that during the Hebrides revival many miraculous occurences took place, including visions and other manifestations. However, no healings or speaking in tongues took place during the revival. Campbell said that he did believe in tongues and he would encounter tongues speaking later, after the revival.
I love the simplicity with which Campbell explains what revival is : 'An awareness of God'.
May we again witness such a mighty move of God, in this generation !
http://downloads2.sermonindex.us/0/SID0355.mp3
In Jesus,
John
Leonard Ravenhill said Prayer in its highest form is agonizing soul sweat.
Charles Finney said For a long time I tried to get my prayer before the Lord; but somehow words could not express it. I could only groan and weep, without being able to express what I wanted in words.
The highest form of prayer said Lenoard Ravenhill is to agonize with Soul sweat. Charles Finney describes this prayer as a groaning and weeping that he was not able to express how he felt with words.
Luk 22 v 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
Not just tounges but groans Ravenhill seems to know about this type of prayer.
Thank you dear brothers. My brother (in both ways) just asked and the thread just happen to get posted. great references.
I love how he put it, in effect, "you can't be filled with the Holy Spirit without noticing it."
Amen
Lenoard Raven Hill said;
Prayer is profoundly simple and simply profound. "Prayer is the simplest form of speech that infant lips can try," and yet so sublime that it outranges all speech and exhausts man's vocabulary.
A Niagara of burning words does not mean that God is either impressed or moved. One of the most profound of Old Testament intercessors had no language "Her lips moved, but her voice was not heard." No linguist here! There are groanings which cannot be uttered."
Are we so substandard to New Testament Christianity that we know not the historical faith of our fathers (with its implications and operations), but only the hysterical faith of our fellows?
This discussion is locked.
