Sproul has said that he questions whether or not Finney was truly converted. Phil Johnson calls him a heretic. In all honesty, it's hard not to come to this conclusion.
What's sad is that, unless you study his systematic theology, you don't immediately see this. I've read several of Finney's sermons, mostly in my young Assembly of God days, and at first was set aflame by what was written. On the surface, Finney in general sounds like the average preacher-bringing the listener to an awareness of his own sinful state, calling upon the listener to repent and turn to God, etc. I thought at first I was just reading a really good and passionate preacher.
Then I picked up a copy of John MacArthur's excellent book Ashamed of the Gospel, and to my initial shock and dismay, MacArthur had an entire Appendix devoted to criticizing Finney. At first, I thought MacArthur had flipped his lid (keep in mind that this is me pre-Calvinism). But after reading more and more reading of the evaluations of Finney, and finally after reading Finney's own denouncement of Original sin and the substitutionary atonement, I had to come to the conclusion that MacArthur and others were right.
It's one of the reasons why I'm pretty hostile to the altar call approach, and looking back on my own life, I see how bad and misleading it could be. But try to reason with somebody who has grown up on the invitation system, and if you challenge it, they treat you as if you'd just espoused atheism!
We'll be coming to Finney soon in my church history class, and it'll be interesting to see how the class takes it when I lay out the genesis of and motivation for the altar call.
.
