Protestant Revivals in China with Particular Reference to Shandong Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revivals have been a regular feature of the missionary enterprise. The modern Catholic and Protestant missionary movements themselves emerged from major religious revivals in the Western world. On the nineteenth-century China mission fields, Protestant missionaries from the mainline denominations frequently lamented the fact that their often nominal convert communities were lacking in Christian spirit and called for reinvigoration campaigns. It was, however, in the twentieth century that several large-scale revival movements occurred, starting with the ‘Manchurian revival’ of 1907–8 and culminating in the great ‘Shandong revival’ of the 1930s. The years after 1908 saw the rise of Chinese ― as well as some foreign ― full-time revivalists engaging in evangelistic efforts to reach the native Christian as well as non-Christian populations. The Canadian Presbyterian Jonathan Goforth (1859–1936) and the Shandong evangelist Ding Limei (1871–1936) are the most prominent representatives of the early campaigns of Christian renewal. In the 1920s, in spite of the fundamentalist/modernist controversy and anti-Christian agitation by nationalist and revolutionary forces in China, revivalism actually intensified. The principal focus of this paper will be on the new currents of spiritual regeneration that came with the proliferation of mostly small and sectarian missions of Holiness or Pentecostal provenance. Pentecostal ideas, in particular, contributed to the growth of Chinese independent churches and the wave of revivalism that swept across parts of China in the early 1930s. Such ‘gifts of the spirit’ as prophecy, divine healing and speaking in tongues, as well as a strong pre-millenarian belief, energised many of the more radical indigenous revivalists at this time. Other well-known Chinese evangelists had been influenced by the Holiness movement or Plymouth Brethren ideas. The Chinese dimension, especially in the context of Shandong province, is receiving particular attention in this paper.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".