As the Toronto Blessing gathered momentum throughout 1994 and 1995, Christians from outside the revival began to weigh in. Some, like ‘Bible Answer Man’ Hank Hanagraaf, were wholly negative, labeling the revival as ‘counterfeit’. Others, like James A. Beverley, took a more balanced approach. In Holy Laughter and the Toronto Blessing, Beverley provides an historical and theological evaluation of the revival.

The Toronto Blessing didn’t arrive ex nihilo, and cannot be evaluated in isolation. Beverley explores the roots of the revival in John Wimber’s Vineyard movement, Rodney Howard-Browne’s laughing revival, and the Kansas City Prophets. I found him to be skeptical but balanced (a trait I personally experienced when Dr. Beverley taught me apologetics in the early 2000s at Tyndale Seminary).

Some of the miracles from the Toronto Blessing, as recorded by people like Guy Chevreau in his 1994 work, Catch the Fire, fail to stand up under scrutiny. Reports of healing from the revival were quickly exaggerated and prophetic words that did not come to pass were reinterpreted. This, along the mixed quality of the nightly sermons, are Beverley’s chief criticisms of the revival.

Beverley’s approach to the Toronto Blessing is sound, but incomplete. The strict journalistic lens through which Beverley analyzed the Toronto Blessing can only provide a partial picture of the revival. In any encounter with the Spirit of God, much more happens than can be listed and verified using scientific method. This doesn’t undermine Beverley’s work—rather, it calls engagement with the Toronto Blessing on other levels. The multidisciplinary work of Margaret M. Poloma in Main Street Mystics, for example, reveals layers of meaning unexplored in Beverley’s work.

If you’re interested in exploring the roots of the 1990s revival, Holy Laughter and the Toronto Blessing is a clear and concise resource.

Beverley, James A. Holy Laughter and The Toronto Blessing: An Investigative Report. Zondervan, 1995.