Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Fake Baptisms to get the ball rolling!

[victoryword]

Interesting. I do know there are websites dedicated to hating Finney mostly the Websites are calvinistic ones. I don't know a whole lot about Finley other than Calvinist don't like him so he cant be all bad lol..

Finney was a great man of God who brought many people to Christ and held effective revivals (not like the fake stuff we see today). He also fought for the abolition of slavery (while many Calvinist "preachers" actually had slaves. Not sure why there are so many Black Calvinist churches popping up these days).He will alwaysbe attacked by Calvinists (and the devil) because of the damage he did to the devil's kingdom.

[Justaned]

Charles G. Finney started altar calls during a time when hyper-calvinism was the prevalent teaching in the churh in the USA.

Interesting. I do know there are websites dedicated to hating Finney mostly the Websites are calvinistic ones. I don't know a whole lot about Finley other than Calvinist don't like him so he cant be all bad lol..

Finney is a dye in the wool and respected Calvinist! So I can't imagine any Calvinist hating him. Admittedly we was not well educated and knew very little actual theology. His major stand was against the error of hyper Calvinism and because of the many that don't know the difference between Calvinism and Hyper think Finney preached against Calvinism but he didn't normally. However again one has to admit he did stray in the direction out of ignorance to what Calvinism actually taught.

[victoryword]

Ed, Finney was NOT a Calvinist. Where did you get that idea from? I have read many of his writings and sermons and Finney is definitely more along the lines of Wesleyan and holiness. Are we talking about the same Charles G. Finney?

[victoryword]

And Finney was a lawyer so he was very well educated, though admittedly not in seminary. But then again, he was probably the better for it since 98% of the worse preachers are seminary trained.

[branham1965]

He actually had some education at an old Historic Wesleyan College on state route 23 not far from us here.

HE IS DESPISED BY THE CALVINISTS.HE UPENDS THEIR NUTBALL THEOLOGY.

Ed, Finney was NOT a Calvinist. Where did you get that idea from? I have read many of his writings and sermons and Finney is definitely more along the lines of Wesleyan and holiness. Are we talking about the same Charles G. Finney?

[Justaned]

Ed, Finney was NOT a Calvinist. Where did you get that idea from? I have read many of his writings and sermons and Finney is definitely more along the lines of Wesleyan and holiness. Are we talking about the same Charles G. Finney?

He was an ordained Presbyterian Minister. You can't be much more Calvinist than being a Presbyterian.
Again he wasn't well educated in theology and tended to go all over the board. However I believe he held to 4 of the five aspects of the tulip the possible exception was the total depravity of man.

Also he was studying to be a Lawyer but dropped that when he went into the ministry.
He confessed adherence to the Westminster Confession however later he admit he wasn't totally sure what all it said.

He had a touch of Pelagianism when it came to Justification by faith.

If anything Finney's theology was messed up. He denied Christ died out of obedience to the father but rather out of obedience to the law. ????? nonsense in my opinion.

Finney also rejected that Adam's sin was inherited by man.

Finney claimed Calvinism but rejected most of basic Christianity.

[victoryword]

Another take on Finney's theology:

Early Life
Born in Warren, Connecticut,[2] Finney was the youngest of fifteen children. The son of farmers, Finney never attended college, but his six-foot three-inch stature, piercing eyes, musical skill and leadership abilities gained him recognition in his community.[3] He studied as an apprentice to become a lawyer, but after a dramatic conversion experience and baptism into the Holy Spirit in Adams, New York, he gave up legal practice to preach the gospel.[4][5] At age 29 under George Washington Gale, Finney studied to become a licensed minister in the Presbyterian Church, though he had many misgivings about the fundamental doctrines taught in that denomination.[6]

Theology
Finney was a primary influence on the "revival" style of theology which emerged in the 19th century. Though coming from a Calvinistic background, Finney rejected tenets of "Old Divinity" Calvinism which he felt were unbiblical and counter to evangelism and Christian mission.

Finney's theology is difficult to classify, as can be observed in his masterwork, Religious Revivals. In this work, he emphasizes the involvement of a person's will in salvation.[10] Whether he believed the will was free to repent or not repent, or whether he viewed God as inclining the will irresistibly (as in Calvinist doctrine, where the will of an elect individual is changed by God so that they now desire to repent, thus repenting with their will and not against it, but not being free in whether they choose repentance since they must choose what their will is inclined towards), is not made clear. Finney, like most Protestants, affirmed salvation by grace through faith alone, not by works or by obedience.[11][12] Finney also affirmed that works were the evidence of faith. The presence of unrepentant sin thus evidenced that a person had not received salvation.[citation needed]

In his Systematic Theology, Finney remarks that "I have felt greater hesitancy in forming and expressing my views upon this Perseverance of the saints, than upon almost any other question in theology."[13] At the same time, he took the presence of unrepented sin in the life of a professing Christian as evidence that they must immediately repent or be lost.[citation needed] Finney draws support for this position from Peter's treatment of the baptized Simon (see Acts 8) and Paul's instruction of discipline to the Corinthian church (see 1 Corinthians 5). This type of teaching underscores the strong emphasis on personal holiness found in Finney's writings.

Finney's understanding of the atonement was that it satisfied "public justice" and that it opened up the way for God to pardon people of their sin. This was the so-called New Divinity which was popular at that time period. In this view, Christ's death satisfied public justice rather than retributive justice. As Finney put it, it was not a "commercial transaction." This view of the atonement is typically known as the governmental view or government view.

Princeton Theological Seminary Professor Albert Baldwin Dod reviewed Finney's 1835 book Lectures on Revivals of Religion[14] and rejected it as theologically unsound.[15] Dod was a defender of Old School Calvinist orthodoxy (see Princeton theologians) and was especially critical of Finney's view of the doctrine of total depravity.[16]

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/charles-gr ... z2tzPlOyWM

[Justaned]

Another take on Finney's theology:

Early Life
Born in Warren, Connecticut,[2] Finney was the youngest of fifteen children. The son of farmers, Finney never attended college, but his six-foot three-inch stature, piercing eyes, musical skill and leadership abilities gained him recognition in his community.[3] He studied as an apprentice to become a lawyer, but after a dramatic conversion experience and baptism into the Holy Spirit in Adams, New York, he gave up legal practice to preach the gospel.[4][5] At age 29 under George Washington Gale, Finney studied to become a licensed minister in the Presbyterian Church, though he had many misgivings about the fundamental doctrines taught in that denomination.[6]

Theology
Finney was a primary influence on the "revival" style of theology which emerged in the 19th century. Though coming from a Calvinistic background, Finney rejected tenets of "Old Divinity" Calvinism which he felt were unbiblical and counter to evangelism and Christian mission.

Finney's theology is difficult to classify, as can be observed in his masterwork, Religious Revivals. In this work, he emphasizes the involvement of a person's will in salvation.[10] Whether he believed the will was free to repent or not repent, or whether he viewed God as inclining the will irresistibly (as in Calvinist doctrine, where the will of an elect individual is changed by God so that they now desire to repent, thus repenting with their will and not against it, but not being free in whether they choose repentance since they must choose what their will is inclined towards), is not made clear. Finney, like most Protestants, affirmed salvation by grace through faith alone, not by works or by obedience.[11][12] Finney also affirmed that works were the evidence of faith. The presence of unrepentant sin thus evidenced that a person had not received salvation.[citation needed]

In his Systematic Theology, Finney remarks that "I have felt greater hesitancy in forming and expressing my views upon this Perseverance of the saints, than upon almost any other question in theology."[13] At the same time, he took the presence of unrepented sin in the life of a professing Christian as evidence that they must immediately repent or be lost.[citation needed] Finney draws support for this position from Peter's treatment of the baptized Simon (see Acts 8) and Paul's instruction of discipline to the Corinthian church (see 1 Corinthians 5). This type of teaching underscores the strong emphasis on personal holiness found in Finney's writings.

Finney's understanding of the atonement was that it satisfied "public justice" and that it opened up the way for God to pardon people of their sin. This was the so-called New Divinity which was popular at that time period. In this view, Christ's death satisfied public justice rather than retributive justice. As Finney put it, it was not a "commercial transaction." This view of the atonement is typically known as the governmental view or government view.

Princeton Theological Seminary Professor Albert Baldwin Dod reviewed Finney's 1835 book Lectures on Revivals of Religion[14] and rejected it as theologically unsound.[15] Dod was a defender of Old School Calvinist orthodoxy (see Princeton theologians) and was especially critical of Finney's view of the doctrine of total depravity.[16]

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/charles-gr ... z2tzPlOyWM

You are reading doctored Finney is a good guy stuff. Read http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm
or Wikipedia

His theology was so wacky it could only be Calvinist. Perhaps they are so wacky even the Calvinist didn't want him.
Either way he was the inventor of the Altar call and his theology was a total mess.

[Justaned]

Wait with that goofy of a theology he may have been a Word of Faither!

[victoryword]

You are reading doctored Finney is a good guy stuff. Read http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm
or Wikipedia

His theology was so wacky it could only be Calvinist. Perhaps they are so wacky even the Calvinist didn't want him.
Either way he was the inventor of the Altar call and his theology was a total mess.

Ed

You do know that this is a Pro-Spurgeon (i.e. "Calvinist") web site that is offering this critique of Spurgeon's theology. Now, I don't begrudge you of accusing me of finding "doctored" Finney sites but you just went and found mea Calvinist "I hate Finney" site and then claimed that his theology was so whacky that it could only be "Calvinist". Yet, these are the Calvinists that are criticizing him Ed from which you derive the idea that his theology was whacky as Calvinists.

If a Calvinist doesn't want you, you should be honored