# Charles Finney



## LadyFlynt (Mar 21, 2006)

Could someone directly list the heresies that Finney taught?


----------



## Arch2k (Mar 21, 2006)

Pelagianism for one.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Mar 21, 2006)

Okay, in english please...I'm getting questions from other ladies that are trying to understand what changed the baptists in the 1800's


----------



## Arch2k (Mar 21, 2006)

Pelagianism is the heresy that Arminianism sprang from.

It denies original sin, the autonomous freedom of man among other things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagianism


----------



## turmeric (Mar 21, 2006)

*Pelagianism* = all did not sin in Adam.

*Governmental atonement theory* = Christ did not die to pay for any sins, He died to demonstrate God's hatred of sin and love of mankind.

*Arminianism* = Man can decide for himself if he will change; the Holy Spirit doesn't actually change us. (This is Finney's version)

*Perfectionism* = Man can also decide to be sinless in the same crisis-of-decision way he decided to be saved.

Charles Finney taught all these things. You can find them in his own words, as his admirers have a website. Just Google Charles Finney.

Regards,
turmeric


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 21, 2006)

Here is an article by Philiip Johnson from his Spurgeon Archives website regarding the heritical teachings of Charles G. Finney

"A Wolf in Sheeps Clothing"

Here is the link: http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm

I hope that this will help in your presentation of Finney's heretical teachings.

In Christ,

MeanieCalvinst


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 21, 2006)

I think Finney's methodology has been more influential than his theology. I'd think almost no Baptist will hold to Finney's theology in all of its particulars, (especially his views on the atonement, perfectionism and conditional security) although some in the Methodist tradition and more charismatic groups originating with it, like Assemblies of God would be more likely to do so. 

By methodology I mean altar calls, calling for immediate public decisions and the like, and generally pragmatism, doing whatever it takes to get decisions. My understanding is that basically Finney's view was that revival will come through the application of the correct methods. 

John MacArthur discusses Finney at length and contrasts his views with Spurgeon's in _Ashamed of the Gospel_.


----------



## Reformingstudent (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Pelagianism is the heresy that Arminianism sprang from.
> 
> It denies original sin, the autonomous freedom of man among other things.
> ...



Can you explain what semi-Pelagianism is and how it differs from Pelagianism itself? Thanks.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Mar 21, 2006)

Okay, thanks...right now we're on trying to explain election and man's free will. This is interesting. Challenging for me.


----------



## Reformingstudent (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Pilgrim_
> I think Finney's methodology has been more influential than his theology. I'd think almost no Baptist will hold to Finney's theology in all of its particulars, (especially his views on the atonement, perfectionism and conditional security) although some in the Methodist tradition and more charismatic groups originating with it, like Assemblies of God would be more likely to do so.
> 
> By methodology I mean altar calls, calling for immediate public decisions and the like, and generally pragmatism, doing whatever it takes to get decisions. My understanding is that basically Finney's view was that revival will come through the application of the correct methods.
> ...



My father in-law who is a Southern Baptist preacher is a great fan of Finney. Next to Paul, he thinks Finney was the greatest teacher/preacher who ever lived. I wanted to share with him some of the errors in Finney's theology but like most people who have been influenced by this charlatan, he will not listen to any objective criticism.


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Okay, thanks...right now we're on trying to explain election and man's free will. This is interesting. Challenging for me.



Could you elaborate on what you mean by mans free will? 

Do you mean free to act in accordance with ones nature? 

In Christ,

MeanieCalvinist


----------



## LadyFlynt (Mar 21, 2006)

That's the direction I took...we act within our nature and within God's Will. The conversation went well. But we finally came to a head where I think she's going to have to think for awhile. The other gal was quiet, is going to go over the conversation, and then we'll discuss more later when she forms her rebuttal. One lady is IFB, the other I don't know specifically...but we got on the conversation because her grandfather was a Calvinist Baptist and didn't know what that meant.


----------



## Arch2k (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Reformingstudent_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> ...



Pelagianism taught that man was born with a blank slate (i.e. no sin) similar to Adam, and could theoretically live his entire life without sinning.

Semi-Pelagianism admited original sin, but not to the point where man was not unable to choose God apart from the Holy Spirit. 

Arminianism admited that grace is needed to choose God, but said that grace does not effectually call, but "woo's" people, and in the end, salvation is left up to man.

More here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-Pelagianism


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 21, 2006)

understanding free will (in my opinion) is the crux to understanding the doctrines of grace. a great book on this topic is:

No Place for Sovereignty: What's Wrong With Freewill Theism


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Reformingstudent_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Pilgrim_
> ...



Do you mean that he doesn't want to hear that Finney said the substitutionary atonement was another gospel, taught perfectionism, etc, or that he actually believes those things himself? I'm thinking that your father in-law, like most in the SBC, believes in the substitutionary atonement and OSAS, although knowing something about the SBC, I realize there are folks there with all kinds of beliefs. I would think that anyone who has read much by Finney himself would be aware of his views on these issues since they are really what distinguishes him.


----------



## Reformingstudent (Mar 21, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Pilgrim_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Reformingstudent_
> ...



Yep, that's correct. he is very, very much into Finney theology. Tried to show him one time what the man believed and he got upset so I dropped it. He himself is into perfectionism and is trying to stay on the straight and narrow and does not want to be side tract or told his favorite preacher whom he is trying so hard to imitate is not perfect.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 21, 2006)

(Apologies for hijacking Lady Flynt's thread) 

Does he not hold to that SBC shibboleth, OSAS? What about the substitutionary atonement? Or, like many pastors (unfortunately), does he really not get to thinking about theology to that level?


----------

