Talk:John Wimber
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity. (with unknown importance) | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information. |
"...broke through many 'sound barriers' in the church". Could someone explain what this means, please? DJ Clayworth 18:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Why isn't there a mention of Lonnie Frisbee here?
Contents |
[edit] Wimber & the Righteous Bros
“He was raised in a non-religious family but converted to Christianity in May 1963 after some years as keyboard player in the band The Righteous Brothers.”
The Righteous Brothers duo began recording in 1963, and formed no earlier than 1962, according to the Wikipedia entry, and their homepage. Clearly, Wimber could not have played with the “band” for “some years” before 1963. There is some confusion or inaccuracy here. He could have played with some precursor to the group, I suppose, or continued to play after his conversion, but it should be cleared up.
- Fixed - August 3, 2006 - Dialsforme
[edit] Third Wave
The Third Wave is inaccurately described here. The distinction made here between the first, second and third waves are as follows. The first was the Azusa street revival which involved denominations, but also started independent church(es) movement(s) such as the Assemblies of God, Four Square, the Church of God, etc. This first wave sprouted in the 10's and 20's (of the 20th century).
The second wave is associated - attributed by most scholars - as the 'charismatic' movement of post-world war II american Christianity - and it is largely known for its non-denominational character (even though Calvary Chapels and others like it are associated with this second wave). Figures like Oral Roberts, Lester Sumrall, Rex Humbard emerge. Even more modern figures like Rod Parsley, Jesse DuPlantis, and others can be associated with the second wave - known by many as charismatic, church growth, neo-pentecostal movement(s). The problem is that these terms get used interchangeably to describe all three periods. This second wave produced the Jimmy Baker's and Swaggerts which drew attention when they fell - and was satirized by Steve Martin in Leap of Faith (which has him portrayed as the likes of Benny Hinn). This second wave could be charazterized as the 'glam' period. In this genre of neo-pentecostalism, the tongues are displated in worship time, even preaching sessions are interrupted by some who speaks in the glossia - but unlike the uninhibited time during 'praise and worship' - the one-on-one spectacle is usually followed by a translator, if the 'speaking' has been exhibited where the congregation is focused upon it (i.e. one particular message).
This type of exhibitionalism - demanded (as with the first) or encouraged (as with the second) - is not seen in such a degree with the 'third wave'. In other words, it is much more laid back and open. This is what makes the third wave distinct, as one traces the history of the 'pentecostal' movement - one sees digression in emphasizing the necessity to 'produce' (i.e. exhibit, display, the gifts, particularly in the worship setting). For many in the Third wave, forcing it - is more-or-less 'containing' God.
While the Vineyard believes in the 'gifts' (tongues, healing, etc), this article sites that it is exhibition of tongues (gifts) - that marks the 'third wave'. That is incorrect and more attributable to the second wave - one need only to look at televangelism's legacy or TBN. In fact, anyone familiar with the Vineyard's break from the Calvary Chapel movement can see that exhibitional character is what led Wimber to leave. One finds in the 'third wave' an acceptance or appreciation of the gifts, but it is not considered inherent to salvation (as with many of the 'first wave') nor is it presumed to be there at every service. I've been in the Vineyard for several years, and I've never heard one service interrupted by someone speaking tongues, nor have I seen it exhibited. My numerous experience at charasmatic churches 'shoved' the gifts at me - by not exhibiting it - I was 'out of place'. One does not see that at the Vineyard. In fact, one might go to the Vineyard and never know its beliefs (in the gifts) by attending just a worship service. The same can be said by those who derive from the first and second waves. That is the missing point and it is incorrectly stated here.
Vinson Synan now the dean of Regent Divinity School has articulated this very well in several articles (i.e. between the waves). and he has a book called The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition: charismatic movements in the twentieth century, which discusses this. I would be happy to contribute more if need be. But I hope that it gets corrected. Thanks. Sam Soliman samuel.soliman@yale.edu
In the book "Quest for the Radical Middle" doesn't it say that Wimber himself did not like the term "Third Wave"? I seem to remember that and will have to read up on it. Can anyone confirm that? Him not agreeing in it could line up with his theological bent...
--dialsforme
[edit] Critique section added
I have added this to counteract the lack of balance I perceive in the article. John Wimber, (who I saw "live" at a week long residential event in the 1980s), was alleged to be using an incorrect (non-Biblical) theology by some of the evangelical conservatives who reviewed the Vineyard and its approach to church growth, the running of church services and "soul saving". Where some of these references are available online, I have cited them. Trevor H. (UK) 00:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism?
When I arrived at the page at about 12:00 EST today, the article had "John Wimber is a big, fat cunt (who is now dead)." By the time I signed in to report it, it had been removed by someone else, but that along with the notation above about "breaking the sound barrier" would seem to mean this article has been hit by vandals more than a couple of times. Should this article be flagged? --Santiago (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality
The page is labelled with the POV template and, on a quick search, has been since this edit by Cherchez le femme in Sept 2007. There has been no discussion on the Talk page that i can see about neutrality; the article seems to be changed from the time the template was posted; there seems to be a pretty good NPOV, both 'sides' represented in the article. I am therefore removing the template. Please discuss it here, indicate your issue, if you replace it. Cheers, Lindsay 08:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
