Was Charles Finney a true or false convert?

[Jon 316]

Some say he was a man of God and others say he was a heretic.

1) Was he a true believer who had some bad theology?
2) Did he preach enough of the gospel to see people truly saved?
3) Why do some of the accounts of his revivals sound like a genuine work of God ? i.e conviction of sin, repentance and calling on Christ.

 

[Zenas]

There is only one Man who is just and able to judge a man's soul.

 

[LadyFlynt]

But I will suggest that 1) we can't judge the heart of another 2) some convert, but are in err and 3) sometimes zeal can cause one to get ahead of oneself.

 

[mvdm]

There may have been some conversions while Finney used his "new measures", but this occurred DESPITE what he was doing.

Contrary to some recent sloppy revisionist history, Edwards was NOT a "revivalist", nor was he responsible for Finney's man-centered approach to evangelism. Finney hated Edwards' consistent teaching that regeneration is a divine sovereign work of God.

 

[CharlieJ]

I don't know. “These doctrines I could not receive. I could not receive [the Calvinist] views on the subject of atonement, regeneration, faith, repentance, the slavery of the will, or any of the kindred doctrines.” Iain Murray, Revival and Revivalism, 256. Citing from Finney's Memoirs.

I find it disturbing that he held to the governmental view of the atonement and believed that forgiveness was merited by human contrition. He also believed, or at least seemed to indicate at times, that conversion was the sinner choosing to obey God. That doesn't sound like a great definition of faith. It's been a while since I read his Systematic Theology, but I believe he also denied original sin, articulating the human condition in terms of Pelagianism. Real Pelagianism, not the watered-down Wesleyan version. If that is true, then I would be inclined to place in the camp of true heretics.

------------

As to why some good was done by him, Iain Murray points out that he started out a fairly normal Presbyterian minister and gradually grew to the extremes he is known for. Even his detractors believed he was doing some good work at the beginning of his ministry. However, it is worth noting that Finney's popularity coincided with the end of the Second Great Awakening, exposing the falseness of his claim that the new measures would produce endless revival.

 

[nicnap]

There is only one Man who is just and able to judge a man's soul.

 

[Rich Koster]

I believe we will have to wait until eternity to see if Finney is in Christ. However, his doctrine and altar calls stinketh on this side.

 

[Anton Bruckner]

God can save a drowning man with a straw. The straw is not regenerate though.

 

[Michael Doyle]

There is only one Man who is just and able to judge a man's soul.

-----Added 2/28/2009 at 09:53:39 EST-----

Was Charles a Finney true or false convert?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some say he was a man of God and others say he was a heretic.

1) Was he a true believer who had some bad theology?
2) Did he preach enough of the gospel to see people truly saved?
3) Why do some of the accounts of his revivals sound like a genuine work of God ? i.e conviction of sin, repentance and calling on Christ.
__________________

Jon, I sometimes get the impression that you are making a case for the exception of bad theology in your polls. Not trying to attack, perhaps just understand better.

 

[Theogenes]

The way R.C. Sproul put it was:
"Finney's not a heretic, he's an Arch-heretic! He out Pelagianized Pelagius"!
Or something to that effect.

 

[SolaScriptura]

The man was a heretic. He was a full-blown Pelagian - something that even Rome condemned. And this is not a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Finney may have been used in spite of himself to lead some people to Christ. Granted. But that in no way legitimizes his teaching. The destructive nature of his doctrines can be easily seen by looking at the longterm impact of them on the church. Indeed, I would say that almost 200 years later we have still not recovered.

 

[Theognome]

"Some indeed preach Christ even fron envy and strife, and some also from goodwill. The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains, but the latter of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice." Phil. 1:15-18

Well, at least the former Paul spoke of preached the gospel. I can't say that of Finney.

Theognome

 

[Jon 316]

There is only one Man who is just and able to judge a man's soul.

-----Added 2/28/2009 at 09:53:39 EST-----

Was Charles a Finney true or false convert?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some say he was a man of God and others say he was a heretic.

1) Was he a true believer who had some bad theology?
2) Did he preach enough of the gospel to see people truly saved?
3) Why do some of the accounts of his revivals sound like a genuine work of God ? i.e conviction of sin, repentance and calling on Christ.
__________________

Jon, I sometimes get the impression that you are making a case for the exception of bad theology in your polls. Not trying to attack, perhaps just understand better.

I'm nost sure exactly what you are asking me or why you are asking it i.e to which polls are you refering?). Could you please clarify?