Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God!

The key word in this sentence is "probably." While I disagree with your position, now I can stomach it because it admits to not having full knowledge. You raise points that most commentators do raise of which I was previously aware. I do not find the position to be conclusive. There are good points that can be made on both sides.

A more judicious use of conditional words is helpful in matters of debated theology.

Now as for Finney, your disagreement with Hodge notwithstanding, you should consider his remarks. Finney is no friend of hte Christian gospel and a study of his life will bear that out. These doctrines he held were unbiblical and he taught and promoted them even after being confronted by others. That is dangerously close to apostasy ... to knowingly teach error after being confronted by it. These were not debatable issues in orthodox theology. They were categorically contradictory of it.

 

Sites sympathetic to Finney:

http://www.wheaton.edu/bgc/ioe/EQUIP/noll7.html

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/religion/finney.html (This one states that, "Opponents such as Asahel Nettleton were able to list as many as twenty-nine objectionable practices, but the most controversial were: public praying of women in mixed-sex audiences, daily services over a series of days, use of colloquial language by the preacher, the "anxious bench", praying for people by name, and immediate church membership for converts.) Oh, the horror!

http://www.gospelcom.net/lpea/firstpriority/spring2002/feature_hardman.shtml - (Talks about his conversion)

This one goes against Finney -
http://www.grebeweb.com/linden/finney.html - states that his five conditions for justification were "1) the atonement of Christ, 2) repentance, 3) faith in Christ, 4) present sanctification, 5) perseverance in faith and obedience." The article continues in its abhorrance merely because Finney did not preach sola Christus, but that man has a part to play - that is repentence and faith. (and perseverance as well) The article says that Finney was "a wolf in sheep's clothing," which I found humourous and a telling mark of the author's bias.

From what I've been able to find, the only problem with Finney is that he was Arminian. Such does not mean he's a heretic.

 

A number of things have been documented here to show that Finney's teaching goes well beyond Arminianism. If that was all it was, we would disagree with him but would find it difficult to label him a heretic. As it is, among most orthodox theologians (even of the arminian stripe), the orthodoxy of Finney is not argued about.

 

To my way of thinking, and many would agree, that to say that Christ only died for His elect is a most defective statement to keep repeating and to place before the feet of Jesus at the hour of one's death. Finney looks like a mischievous Sunday School boy next to this. Who will be responsible for those who hear that they may not be in His autocratic plan for Heaven and eternal life and walk away from so great salvation?

 

I again did a SEARCH by using the words, Charles Finney. I came up with his autobiography. In chapter IV I found out why Calvinists despise this evangelist. Finney's pastor was a Princeton Seminary graduate and was a Five Point Calvinist. How could we have guessed. Chapter IV is this. "His Doctrinal Education And Other Experiences at Adams" {I take Adams to mean the town where Finney lived} Finney's only wrong was that he did not bow to Calvinism. As I continue to study the man, Finney, I will let you know when I find some cardinal error.

With Rev. Dr. Billy Graham's spiritual reputation on the line, is most seriously doubt that he would throw his reputation to the 'wind' if Charles Finney was off on some serious doctrinal issues. Get real.

God will judge Finney, Graham, Berrian, and possibly you too.

 

You found out wrong. I didn't even know this. My problems with Finney have nothing to do with who is pastor was. It is about his doctrine. It has been told to you where and how he contradicted Scripture. If you choose to not believe it, what else can be said?? It is funny how you, little Ray (as all of us are), somehow know more than the historians, the evangelists and pastors who were his contemporaries, and the theologians who have forgotten more theology than you or I will ever know.

As for Billy Graham and his spiritual reputation, it is not something that he has been concerned about for over 50 years, I am quite sure that he won't start now. However, that has nothing to do with Finney. Not even sure why you mention him unless it is to try to gain some yardage by association.

 

To my way of thinking, and many would agree, that to say that Christ died for everyone, even those already in hell, is a most defective statement to keep repeating and to place before the feet of Jesus at the hour of one's death.

Who will be judged responsible for telling sinners a blatant falsehood, "Jesus died for you" when that very well may not be the case? Christians are to tell sinners that Christ died for sinners and that they must repent and believe, or be forever lost, not try to woo them with a falsely based sentimentality.

Ken
A Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org

[ August 17, 2002, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]

 

Ken Hamilton,

You have little to no faith in other Christians who don't believe strictly in your Augustinianism.
We are preaching and witnessing to the same Gospel and to the same Jesus who you believe and trust in for your hope of Heaven. Our persuasion of Biblical understanding should never be thought of as 'sentimentality.' We point sinners to the value of the Cross and more especially toward the One who died their for them.

_______

Keep your personal comments out of it.
Moderator

[ August 18, 2002, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]