John Wesley and Charles Finney

I once heard a preacher who waxed eloquent on the damage these two did that have resulted in the abundant deceptions of the modern church.

He pointed to the schemes of heightening sensationalist oriented music and sermons, that presented little if not highly watered down presentations of the Scriptures. The doctrinal error prone to those who follow their example and the moral excesses that plague those are who hold similar views in which they are more apt to fail.

He also pointed to the typical Baptist call for a response (invitation time) as having come directly from Finney.

He stated that the sober solemn worship was lost in the froth and fluff of the revival type services typical of what would pass for a Sunday sermon.

He stated that these were all tools used to delude the church into a form of worship but was in actuality an affront to the Holy God of Heaven.


BTW, this preacher is no intellectual midget mind, but has standing as a scholar and more than one published writing.

I was wondering what the folks on the forum might consider of support or objection to the thinking of this preacher.

OOOPPPSSS wrong Wesley!!!!!!!!!! - it was John not Charles. John is credited with much of the modernistic trends of the church of this day. Charles actually had strong disagreement with some of John's thinking.

 

I see Phil Johnson posted this on his sight with documentation.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm

 

I am most thankful for your salvation, and the experience you had 35 years ago. I would not for a moment consider the work of the Holy Spirit is not effectual anytime the Word is declared.

The link declares that Finney was a heretic and further that the influence he had has brought damage to the church?

I know that Wesley embraced the Moravian thinking and they are part of the world counsel of churches as is the Methodists.

What I wanted was for the forum folks to show that: Yes, these men were a hindrance to the cause of Christ, or No, they were not, and to give some explanation as to how they support their opinions.

Personally, I am not calling either anything at this time, just gathering some forum thinking and the assessment of the impact on the modern church.

 

I agree with the changing methods.

 

No doubt the man accomplished a great deal. His zeal is a rare quality, especially in this modern age.

I am not in a position of being critical, but I would caution that just because a person accomplishes a great deal doesn't mean they are right.

An example would be Joseph Smith. Not that I am aligning Wesley with that sort, but just to show that numbers, and results do not equate to Godliness.

 

Winning people to Christ. Hmmm

Now that is a term that just might need a bit of clarification.

How does a person "win someone to Christ" when that person doing the winning has absolutely no control over the salvation at any point in the process?

BTW, Joseph Smith clarified the gospel and corrected all errors that man had made in the Old and New Testament. That is what is believed. And the resulting numbers must certainly show that God approves and is blessing the work.

 

Let me be the first to post, again.

I wrote, "Joseph Smith clarified the gospel and corrected all errors that man had made in the Old and New Testament. That is what is believed. And the resulting numbers must certainly show that God approves and is blessing the work."

I was not making a statement of agreement. I hope that any who read what this agedman has written would not attempt to align me with the false prophet and his (as well as other supporter's) teaching. The believer has no association with such and should not - I certainly don't.

The the attempt was to use sarcasm to show the fallacy of thinking that, because a person has persuasive powers and exuberance in a work which impacts a great number of lives which in turn results in a large following, that man or work is approved and blessed by the God in heaven.

Excess in the IFB world has been allowed and excused by the pew sitters. In my opinion, most of the readers in this forum have first hand knowledge or at the least read the record of some "great man of God" who aggressively garnered political support and stayed at a leadership position though no longer qualified because people placed results in numbers above the authority of God's word.

The cry of numbers as validation of God's blessing is causing thousands to swarm to the modern church that offers little if any sound doctrinal teaching.

The question of this thread was the historical evidence that Finney and Wesley could have been horribly misguided. Could it be that in their exuberance and the thinking that the numbers indicated God's blessings were actually part of the deceitfulness of the enemy?

 

Jonathan Edwards is credited with starting the first Baptist church in America. He broke from the established church because of doctrinal issues. Was he influential? No doubt, but he would no doubt have had great issues with the presentation and doctrine of both Finney and Wesley.

I am uncertain just how great an impact the Baptists have ever had.

For instance, in colonial Williamsburg, the established church (where Thomas Jefferson, and other notables that lived in the area had membership) highly persecuted the very small Baptist congregation.