At a time when many in the church either have a complete misunderstanding of revival, or it is a concept that is completely ignored, Richard Owen Roberts has sought to bring forward a biblical perspective on the topic through his writings and teachings.
Throughout his lifetime of ministry, he has mostly observed the American church in a state of numerical decline. Instead of feeling defeated, he has remained faithful to his task, recognizing the impact of his ministry is solely in the Lord’s hands. In addition, his prayer for the church has not only been for revival but for reform as well, he said:
I have a doctrine of revival that doesn't quite fit the pattern of the church. But here's a very critical issue – in urging people to pray for revival, what we have been doing is urging them to pray for an increase of what's going on. And I’ve come to the realization that's not what I want at all. I don't want to see the church revived. I want to see the church reformed. I want to get back to the Scripture. I want to ask
fundamental questions like, what does God want? Is he concerned about these vast numbers of converts that we’re making? Or rather than a thousand, would he rather have one single person that radiated the life and the holiness of Jesus Christ. And I know I've always been aimed in that general direction, I am only saying that it is becoming clearer to me than it ever was before that we just don't want any more of what we’ve got. We want to get back to the Scripture.1
In his decades of studying revival, he has not wavered in his hope that the Lord could move in the American church, and his prayer, and hope, for the church has even grown to seek from the Lord dramatic changes that would make the church more faithful to its mission. Despite the many faults that could be put against the church, Roberts has remained confident that the Lord can use believers who are willing to be broken and
1See interview transcripts for these remarks. These comments were made in a larger discussion of the Heart-Cry for Revival Conference. Roberts lamented the change that this conference has experienced over the last decade as it has become less focused on biblical revival and God’s character and more focused on pragmatic matters of how to do revival.
remade through his reviving work. The American church certainly needs God’s reviving work to renew and reach a new generation of people, and those seeking this movement would benefit greatly from examining Roberts’s contributions to this important topic.
Issues Discussed
In the introduction to this study of Roberts’s life and ministry several issues were presented to be examined and discussed. These issues were divided into three main subject areas: a biography of Roberts’s life, an examination of his theology of revival, and a evaluation of his connection between revival, repentance, and history. Through these areas the following issues were addressed and several questions were answered.
First, how did Roberts’s early life impact his understanding of revival? And was his understanding of repentance a result of his conversion or later life events? These questions were addressed through the biography of Roberts’s life. His childhood was presented with a particular focus on the impact of the Great Depression, Second World War, and his conversion. Through these events it was displayed that Roberts’s upbringing in a conservative Presbyterian church brought him to a reformed theology which
impacted his understanding of revival and carried forward into his teachings as an adult.
Second, has Roberts’s shifted in his teachings on revival from the early nineteen-eighties to the present day? The answer to this question was handled in the third chapter as part of the examination of Roberts’s theology of revival. While Roberts has modified his definition of revival from his book on the topic to his more recent teachings, he has not demonstrated any significant shift in this area. This is also evident by the shift in preaching invitations that Roberts has received. Early in his ministry Roberts regularly received invitations from Presbyterian and Congregational churches, but as these
denominations experienced shifts in theology and practice, Roberts started to receive invitations from more conservative groups. Later in his ministry he has primarily taught
in Baptist and Church of Christ settings. This reflects more on the changes in the denominations then it does on any shifts in Roberts’s understanding and teachings.
Third, what led Roberts to pursue a bookstore and publishing ministry instead of other ministry avenues? Has this decision been beneficial or detrimental to the overall impact of his ministry? In the interview, Roberts discussed these issues in detail. He started his bookstore ministry to provide steady income to allow him to preach without financial concerns. The publishing aspect became a natural extension of the bookstore as Roberts sought to be responsible in managing his business. While Roberts started the bookstore and publishing under a secondary purpose, both aspects grew to be significant components of his overall ministry, and both have proved to be beneficial to the church.
Fourth, what are Roberts’s views on the global church and God’s movements in other areas of the world? How does he respond to movements that are outside of the American Evangelical norm? These questions were addressed under the critique of Roberts’s ministry in chapter five. It was discussed that Roberts’s ministry focused on the American church, and Western Christian history, and that he did not interact with the global church to any significant degree. One could speculate that if Roberts interacted with the global church on the topic of revival he would find many areas in which to critique it. One reason that he would likely critique these movements is that much of the activity that has been labeled as revival in the global church does not conform to the biblical examples of revival as Roberts has taught them.2 Additionally, these movements also appear very different than the First Great Awakening, which is a movement that Roberts views as a solidly biblical revival. Overall, Roberts has provided very little interaction with the global church to answer these questions about the global movements.
Fifth, did Roberts intentionally pursue a strong connection between revival,
2For examples of these global revivals, seeMark Shaw, Global Awakening: How the 20th Century Revivals Triggered a Christian Revolution (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010).
repentance, and history or were these natural out workings of his convictions and interests? Of all the questions examined in this research, this question was answered the most directly through the research. Chapter four developed the connections between these three issues in detail. Roberts was intentional in his pursuit of connecting revival,
repentance, and history. His desire has been to connect today’s church with the historical church and to bring attention back to the time when God brought true biblical revival.
Sixth, in what ways have Roberts’s views on revival, repentance and church history impacted his pastoral ministry? This question was addressed in the second chapter and interview transcript of this research. Roberts spent some time during his ministry in the pastorate and as an interim pastor, but for the bulk of his ministry he has been an itinerate preacher. Throughout his ministry Roberts has remained consistent in his teachings on these topics, and churches have either embraced him or not – his ability to fit the pastoral role has been determined by the church’s response to his views. Two examples from his life illustrate this well. The first was his experience in the established church in Fresno, in which he struggled through a year as the pastor. The second was the church plant in Fresno in which he experienced almost eight years of fruitful ministry.
Overall, Roberts pastoral ministry was impacted both positively and negatively by his views on these three topics, whatever the impact, Roberts sought to be consistent.
Seventh, does Roberts’s believe that he has ever been involved with a true revival? If not, why does he think that this is so and is he disappointed about this? These questions were answered in some ways in the biography section, the interview transcript, and in the examination of his theology of revival. If revival is personal or among a small group of people, then Roberts would state that he has experienced moments of revival in his life. If revival is a larger movement of God in which the church is transformed and the wider community is impacted, then Roberts would state that he has not, and neither has the recent church, experienced true revival. Despite the lack of corporate revival, Roberts has remained hopeful that God may still move in the church in a powerful revival.
Eighth, how will Roberts’s ministry be evaluated in the coming generation?
Will he be remembered in his own right, or simply seen as one who preserved other’s work such as J. Edwin Orr? These questions on Roberts’s legacy were asked during the interview and his response is included in the transcript. His connection with Orr was examined, and it has been demonstrated that although the two men had overlap, and a friendship, their focus and intents were different. Roberts did publish four books written by Orr after he passed away, but the content of the books fit into his general guidelines for publishing. Roberts sought to put Orr’s work before more readers because he saw its value for the church, but Roberts’s ministry will be evaluated on its own standing.
Ninth, how does Roberts view his own life and ministry? What is his outlook for the future of the church in America? Is he hopeful or concerned? These final questions were addressed primarily in the interview with Roberts. He does not measure his ministry success through standards such as numbers or through audience response, instead he considers his ministry through faithfulness to his call. In evaluating his ministry Roberts focused on how well he has followed the Lord’s leading. He believes that he has been faithful, but allows for God to be the judge of his service. In several places throughout this research it has been discussed that Roberts has remained hopeful that God can bring revival to the modern church. He believes that God has not pronounced final judgment on the American church; therefore, there is still time to repent to God and to be revived.
Areas for Further Study
In every research project, one is limited to the extent and scope of what can be studied and to what degree. This project, which examined Roberts’s life and ministry to understand his theology of revival, has been limited in many ways. For this reason, there are several areas which could be studied further regarding Roberts’s life and ministry.
The first area in which this study could be built upon would be to continue to develop the biographical information on Roberts’s life and ministry. In this area, this
research was limited to resources available online and through a single interview with Roberts. One could certainly improve upon the research by on-site studies in
Schenectady, Fresno, and Wheaton. In these locations, one would be able to examine material in archives to verify and support the events that Roberts has recalled.
Additionally, much could be gained by careful study of Roberts’s collection of revival literature in library at the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. Finally, if access would be granted, the biography could be strengthened through access to Roberts’s notes and personal correspondence. Roberts’s life provides a steady example of faithfulness which is deserving of study and what is provided here may simply be a starting point.
Some additional areas which could be pursued further in research would be Roberts’s connections with the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Wheaton College. For the second half of his life and ministry, Roberts has lived within a short walk of the Billy Graham Center on Wheaton’s campus. He has had numerous
interactions, both positive and negative, and it would be interesting to further consider these relationships in a formal study. One could consider how the relationship started, to what extent the two worked together, and what difficulties resulted through these
interactions.3 In a similar manner, another area of study would be to consider Roberts along with his contemporaries in the area of revival. A comparison analysis of how he fits into broader revival community would be an interesting and beneficial study. This study would provide an important glimpse into the broader understanding of revival during the last century and better equip the church to see areas to grow in the coming years.
Final Reflections
At the conclusion of this study, as one considers all the avenues in which
3Roberts mentioned that he was hurt by Wheaton College, and the college asked him to never step foot on its campus again. He did not provide details on what led to this interaction, and the in the scope of this study it was not possible verify this course of action from Wheaton College.
Roberts has impacted the church in the area of revival, it is difficult to not lament that the wider church as largely ignored his teaching. This is unfortunate because the church is in great need of true revival, but it is largely remained confused, or in error, about the topic.
With this confusion, the church is not able to properly prepare itself to seek revival. At the same time, this confusion leads many to label movements revival, when in fact the movement is much less. Of course, God can overcome even these difficulties, and move among the church, reviving his people and returning them to proper understanding of his character and his work. While the church’s misunderstanding of revival is troubling, according to Roberts, the greater tragedy is its misunderstanding of God. He writes, Many tolerate a view of God which is vastly beneath the revelation which God makes of Himself in Holy Scriptures. God describes Himself in the Bible in such language as, “I am that I am” (Exodus 3:14); “I change not” (Malachi 3:6); “I am holy” (1 Peter 1:16); “I fill heaven and earth” (Jeremiah 23:24); “I will do all My pleasure” (Isaiah 46:10); “I know thy works” (Revelation 2:2); and “I will ease Me of Mine adversaries” (Isaiah 1:24). He never portrays Himself as soft on sin or as loving perpetually unrepentant sinners. He does not favorably compare Himself with man but in a great variety of ways insists that our thoughts are not His thoughts and our ways are not His ways.
God does not indicate that He needs us but insists on our need of Him. He does not accommodate Himself to our life-style but demands that we conform our ways to His. Contrary to the thinking of many, God is not evolving into a softer, more cuddly Being, but is as full of righteous indignation now as when He flooded the earth, destroying the civilization of Noah’s day and when He poured fire and brimstone from heaven upon Sodom and Gomorrah. The meek and gentle Jesus is the very God who pronounced, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” and asked, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?” (Matthew 11:21,22); at the same time warning, “Thou, Capernaum, which art exalted into heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee” (verses 23,24).4
Roberts’s point is that the church needs to return to a full understanding of God. The church cannot simply view God in the ways in which it desires, but must continually return to Scripture to grow in its understanding. Through the Bible, God has revealed his
4Richard Owen Roberts,ed., Salvation in Full Color: Twenty Sermons by Great Awakening Preachers (Wheaton, IL: International Awakening Press, 1994) xi.
character to the church, and a proper understanding of God best prepares the church for revival. Roberts states, “A powerful relationship exists between what a person thinks of God, what they think of themselves, what they think of sin, and what they think of salvation.”5 Proper understanding of God is necessary to gain proper understanding in other areas of salvation. When the church has a proper understanding of these important topics it is best equipped to seek and pray for revival among its people and community.
Overall, Roberts has provided the church with a needed correction and refocus in the area of revival. His understanding of the character of God has led him to base his understanding of revival as purely a movement in which God is in sovereign control. For this reason, he defines revival as, “an extraordinary movement of the Holy Spirit
producing extraordinary results.”6 If revival is simply the natural progression of a church working through certain steps, then Roberts could not make this claim. Instead, revivals are those special moments in church history when the Lord has decided to visit his people in an extraordinary manner, for his glory and purpose, to make his name great.
5Roberts, Salvation in Full Color, xi.
6Richard Owen Roberts, Revival (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1983), 16-17.
APPENDIX
INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
ROR: I think maybe for a moment before you to start your questions for me to make a statement that's essential.1 We recently had a conference at the Cove, in Asheville. It will be twenty-two years, this is the end of twenty-two years in which I have participated in this conference. It’s called the Heart Cry for Revival conference, which was started by the Sutera twins and Stephen Olford, and a group of men of substance like that. And I am the only one that's participated each time over the twenty-two year span, but it's become increasingly difficult to do so, and in a very inconsequential way because the Cove is a terribly expensive place and the speakers all pay their own expenses. That's pretty dubious whether that makes sense or not. But then that's a very inconsequential thing, the issue really is a concept of revival that others hold to. And I had a call this morning from Al Whitinghill, I don't know if you know Al, but he's the head of the, oh I've forgotten the name at the moment, anyway a group of itinerants who started in Australia years ago.
Street preachers, and it’s small, but it's quite substantial. And he said just a few minutes ago, ‘well you know the reason people go is to hear you because you’re the last of your kind and the rest of it is sheer nonsense.’ Well that’s what I'm trying to say. The bulk of the time is spent on strategizing. Now what has strategy to do with the work of Christ?
He’s already laid out the strategy. We just have to follow. So, my impression is that the interest in revival, at a time when it is more needed than ever before, is just zero. Those
1This appendix is a verbatim copy of the interview that I had with Richard Owen Roberts for this dissertation. As such it is conversational in nature and not intended to be a polished written document.
Its purpose is to accurately display what was discussed in the interview. Roberts has signed a statement of verification which can be found at the end of the transcript. Finally, since this is verbal transcript one may find errors in facts or recollection. I have not made any corrections or changes in these instances, but have simply provided what Roberts recalled at the time that we spoke.