Leonard Ravenhill

I have not listened to alot of Leonard Ravenhill Sermons.
But something I have noticed is that many of the preachers that have had an impact on my life, have mentioned How much Leonard Ravenhill had impacted their Life, everyone from Calvinist Like Paul Washer to Pentecostals like David Wilkerson.
Denny kenaston in his personal testimoney said that he was listening to Leonard Ravenhill, and that Leonard Ravenhill recommended a book: The Pilgrim Church by E. Hamer Broadbent, Denny said that Book made a large impact on his life.(of course after hearing that I also had to buy the book)

I just looked at Leonard Ravenhill on wikipedia to see what they said and they pointed out some others he had impacted that I did not no of.

wikipedia
/Among others influenced by Ravenhill were Ravi Zacharias, Tommy Tenney, Steve Hill, Charles Stanley, Bill Gothard, Paul Washer, Randy Goudeau, and David Wilkerson.[3]
He was a close friend of pastor and writer A. W. Tozer.[4]
Through his teaching and books, Ravenhill addressed the disparities he perceived between the New Testament Church and the Church in his time and called for adherence to the principles of biblical revival.
Tozer said of Ravenhill:
"To such men as this, the church owes a debt too heavy to pay. The curious thing is that she seldom tries to pay him while he lives. Rather, the next generation builds his sepulchre and writes his biography – as if instinctively and awkwardly to discharge an obligation the previous generation to a large extent ignored."[5]/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Ravenhill

I have to say that, I am impressed not only by the Lives Leonard Ravenhill has impacted but also by the impact that those whom he had impacted have impacted others.

I think your observation of the sinfulness of man is what could be called functional cessationism. People rally behind the prophets, even recently dead ones but never living because bearing the Cross is very expensive. When listening to Ravenhill it is equally interesting to see how many affected him.

by Jeremy221 Wrote
/I think your observation of the sinfulness of man is what could be called functional cessationism/

Could you please explain this in simpler terms??

RE:Jeremy wrote
/I think your observation of the sinfulness of man is what could be called functional cessationism./

Listen my theolgy may not be perfect and most likely is not, But listen friend I know what it is to enter into Canaan, I will say I have difficulty staying there and continuing walking while staying there. Of all the people I have met no more than a handful would have any clue what I am speaking of.
If you do friend I am open to listening.
I would not consider myself a believer of cessationism.

Cessationism, in Christian theology, is the view that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, such as healing, tongues, and prophetic revelation, pertained to the apostolic era only, http://www.theopedia.com/Cessationism

yep a agree ravenhill has been an inspartions to many other men of god

im not sure how the subject of cesasenisim came up

theres also with out doubt been many a great censasenist in the body of christ

john weasly
george whitfield
johnathen edwards
duncan camble

to name a few

hi, how do we go from len to cessationalism?he believed like luther(4th verse)the spirit and the gifts are ours. he was a friend of mine while he lived in zachary la.and ministered in my home every week that he was home. he was a strong believer in being filled with Gods Spirit and in eternal values. i never heard him say a critical word that was directed toward one person that was not totally earned. he was a very loving man and i thank God for the miracle that coupled us.jimp

Hi proudpapa,

Sorry to be unclear. What I meant by functional cessationalism is that someone doctrinally holds to the Gifts of the Spirit, including prophecy, but when that person encounters them, they regard them as false. The reason I talked about the sinfulness of man in this regard is because the person who does not recognize the active working of the Spirit through the prophet before them today versus acknowledging the accuracy and announcing of past prophets who spoke to the conditions of yesteryear, has to do with the blindness caused by sin. Was that more clear?

(Sometimes I write very densely, leaving out words and connecting thoughts.)