Home › Forums › Early America › First Great Awakening vs. Second Great Awakening
- This topic has 2 voices and 0 replies.
-
AuthorPosts
-
PhidippidesKeymaster
It seems that one might be able to compare the FGA and SGA based on categories such as geographic location, method, and effect. I believe the SGA was more of a southern phenomena, unlike the FGA which was mostly confined to New England. The website at http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/2nd_awakening.htm says that the FGA was based more on spontaneous groupings, rather than the planned, organized groupings that took place at the SGA. And whereas the FGA's effect (I argue) was significant in the creation of a culture which readied the Colonies for war with England, the SGA's effect seems to be on things like the temperance movement and women's rights.
DonaldBakerParticipantI have been thinking about your post and I cannot relegate the SGA to being more of a Southern phenomenon. Yes Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone represent a Southern movement. Charles Grandison Finney and Francis Asbury are all over the place. Lyman Beecher and his daughter Harriet represent a Northern flank with William Lloyd Garrison, Jedidiah Morse et al mixed in a little later. I think the SGA should be partitioned into Sectional components that aggravated the sectionalism already present leading to the Civil War. Here is how I view it. The First Great Awakening sowed the seeds for the Revolution Phase I (Independence). The Second Great Awakening sowed the seeds for the Revolution Phase II (The Civil War). The Third Great Awakening led by Billy Graham, Oral Roberts, and Brother Shambock sowed the seeds for the Revolution Phase III (The Civil Rights Movement). The Fourth Great Awakening is being led now by T.D. Jakes, Joyce Myers, Charles Stanley, and Pat Robertson (I can explain his role). The Fourth Great Awakening has prepared the way for the Revolution Phase IV (the Spreading of Democracy via the War on Terror). Robertson and his associates such as Ralph Reed and William Bennet have successfully influenced American foreign policy to be pro-Israel and therefore anti-Arab. This Neo-Conservative movement (a liberal tag but useful here) upholds the doctrine of regime change to reform the world political order in favor of the West and Israel via Americanized Democracy. Thus our Revolution continues on in an international exportation mode.
-
AuthorPosts