Hello all. I'm new here so maybe this has been already talked about, so pardon me if it has. I read Ronald Cooke's well written article "Tongues nonsense and Martyn Lloyd-Jones". Mr. Cooke stated that MLJ believed that the sign gifts were needed for revival to take place. I've been reading MLJ for years including his treatments of the baptism with the Holy Ghost and revival in his various preaching series. I don't recall him ever stating or even implying that the sign gifts were "needed" for a revival but rather that they were just always possible in the Christian life. I'm not sure I agree with him or not (he does marshall some credible instances from the old classic The Scott's Worthies as examples), but we should be fair and not exaggerate his view, which I think the article does. And there have been a few men of note who have taught a similar baptism, sealing or filling post conversion too(though most rejected the sign gifts) and should be considered when weighing church history. Such were Tozer, Moody, Spurgeon, Charles Simeon and the puritans John Preston and John Owen, among others. I'm not defending the Charismatic/Pentecostalism of our day (I think it is a disgrace to Christ) but just want to be fair to my friend Lloyd-Jones and Chistian history.