Charles Finney a true prophet?

 

Freemasonry

Prior to his conversion, he was a Freemason, but became a staunch opponent of Masonry, and wrote an extensive book attacking it, entitled The Character, Claims, and Practical Workings of Freemasonry.

Life

Born in Warren, Connecticut, 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. 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 resigned from all of his duties at his law office to attend to his calling to preach the gospel. At the age of 29 under George Washington Gale, Finney studied to become and eventually became a licensed minister in the Presbyterian Church, though he then had and would continue to have many misgivings about the fundamental doctrines taught in that denomination.

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.

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."

In “THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH” CHAPTER XVII

 

Of the Perseverance of the Saints

It says…

“I. They, whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his

Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly

persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.

 

III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.”

 

  Meaning that, like David, One can Fall into Adultery, Murder, and not loose their salvation as long as he returned to the lord that would prove he was always saved, this is not what the Bible teaches and the twisting of scriptures are evident by Finney’s interpretation.

 

Example (Finney says)….

 

“(2.) It is said that David did not persevere in obedience in the sense that obedience was his rule, and sin only the exception. To this I reply,

[1.] That it is not pretended that there is any doubt respecting the final salvation of David, king of Israel.

[2.] That David did not persevere in the sense above defined wants proof. His Psalms, together with his whole history, show that he was a highly spiritual man. He was an eminent type of Christ, and for a man in his circumstances was a remarkable saint. To be sure David practiced polygamy, and did many things (Adultery, Murder) that in us, under the light of the gospel, would be sin. But it should be considered that David lived under a dispensation of comparative obscurity, and therefore many things which would now be unlawful and sinful, were not so in him. That David, with comparatively few exceptions, lived up to the light he had, can not be reasonably called in question. He is said to have been a man after God's own heart. I know this is said of him as a king, but I know also that as king this could not have been said of him unless he had feared and served the Lord, and in the main lived up to the light with which he was surrounded.”

 David committed Adultery and Murder; both are punishable under the law…

 “Lev 24:17 and he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.”

 “Lev 20:10 and the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”

 Finney knows this; why else would David need to repent?

 

Finney says…

“With these remarks, I proceed to the examination of 2 Peter 2:9--22:

“The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, the dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. 2pe 2:9-22”

 

Finney comments…

“Now observe, the apostle calls the persons of whom he speaks "wells without water: clouds that are carried with a tempest;" that is, without rain. His whole description of them shows that he is speaking of false professors or hypocrites. But it is inferred that they are fallen saints, because it is said they have "forsaken the right way, and are gone astray after the error of Balaam, &c." But this does not necessarily imply that they were in heart ever in the right way, but that they have forsaken the right way so far as the outward life is concerned, in which respect they had doubtless been in the right way or they would not have been admitted to membership in the church.

But it is said of these false professors that "they allure through lust and much wantonness those who were clean escaped from those who live in error." But neither does this necessitate the conclusion that they had escaped in heart from those that lived in error, but merely that they had for the time being outwardly abandoned their idolatrous practices and companions and had made a profession and put on the form of Christianity.

But it is also said, verses 20--22, “For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are entangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worse than the beginning. 21. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and, The sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”

Neither does this necessitate the conclusion that they had in heart escaped from the pollutions that are in the world, but merely that they had outwardly reformed. What is said in the last verse seems to favor this construction. Verse 22, "But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. That is, the dog has returned to his vomit, because he remains a dog and is not changed, and the sow that is washed to her wallowing in the mire, because she is still a sow, and her washing has not changed her nature. So, the apostle would say. by returning to their former ways do the persons in question show they have experienced no radical change, but on the contrary that they are only like a washed sow, sinners still who have been only outwardly cleansed, while within they are same as ever. This appears to me to be all that can fairly be made out of this passage.” 

 

Finney says…

“I will now attend to 1 Tim. 1:19, 20: "Holding faith and a good conscience, which some having put away, concerning faith have made shipwreck. Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme."

  Of this text I may say, that the apostle was writing to Timothy as an eminent religious teacher, and was giving him cautions respecting his influence in that relation. Hymeneus and Alexander, as we may infer from this, and which is still more plainly taught in other passages, were religious teachers who had cast off or perverted the true faith or doctrine of the gospel, and thus made shipwreck. They had put away faith and a good conscience, and by so doing had made shipwreck of the true gospel. This passage does not teach that these men were true Christians, nor does it necessarily imply that any had been true saints who had gone with them. The expression "some having put away," does not necessarily imply that they once had true faith and a good conscience, but only that they taught that which was inconsistent with either; or it may mean that they had rejected or refused both faith and a good conscience: that they practised and taught things inconsistent with either true faith, or with the true gospel, or with a good conscience, and had therefore run upon a rock and wrecked their souls and the souls of those who followed them. But this proves nothing in respect to their ever having real saints.

Finney says…

“The case of Judas has been relied upon as an instance of utter apostacy and of consequent destruction. It is said that in the Psalms Judas is spoken of as the familiar friend of Christ in whom he trusted. Psalms 41:9. "Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me."

There is no reason to believe that Ps. 41, originally respected either Christ or Judas. Christ quotes the 9th verse as is common in the New Testament, not because it was originally spoken of himself or of Judas, but because his case was like that of the Psalmist. In the passage in which Christ quotes these words, he directly negatives the idea of Judas being one of his true disciples. He says, John 13:18, I speak not of you all; I know whom I have chosen; but, that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me."

Here Christ plainly teaches that he to whom he applied these words, was not chosen in the sense of being chosen to salvation, or in the sense of his being a true saint. He says:

John 6:64. "But there are some of you who believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given him of my Father. Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of is a devil? 71. He spake of Judas lscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve."

Finney says…

“I consider next l Tim. 5:12.”Having damnation because they have cast off their first faith." This passage stands in the following connection:

“1 Tim. 5:9. Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man: 10. Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work. 11. But the younger widows refuse, for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry; 12. Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith. 13. And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also, and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.”

Finney says…

“The passages we have examined are so far as I know the principal ones upon which reliance has been placed to disprove the doctrine in question. I have read over attentively several times the views of Mr. Fletcher in his Scripture Scales, and the passages quoted by him to disprove this doctrine. His chief reliance is manifestly upon the numerous passages that imply the possibility and danger of falling rather than on any passages that unequivocally teach that any have or will utterly fall. I am not aware that any respectable writer has laid much stress upon other passages than those I have examined as expressly teaching or unequivocally implying the fact of the fall and ruin of real saints. There may be such writers and such passages as those of which I speak; but if there are, I do not recollect to have seen them.