About this blog:

This site was not developed with the intention of drawing a large number of visitors using trivial methods and shallowness. There is rejoicing among the angels when even one sinner repents and believes in Jesus Christ. (Luke 15:10) If, for as long as this site exists, just one sinner is led to repentance and belief in Christ with the aid of the material presented here, the purpose of this site has been served.

Profile

My photo

Married to @SueBirdChaplin, LaneCh on Youtube, Host of Rightly Divided, Reagan Conservative, J.D., Deacon at Christ Reformed of Anaheim (Rom.7:24-25a)

Connect

Puritan Picks

Instagram

Instagram

Google+ Followers

The Tip Jar

*Buying from any of the ads below helps support future Youtube projects.

Go Stand Speak

Monergism Books

Thank You Cards

Links

Follow by Email

Popular Posts

There was an error in this gadget

Blog Archive

Visitors

Paid Advertising

    • Site Meter

      "That's Entertainment!"
      (The Confusion of Church and Theater)
      [White Horse Inn]

      Wednesday, February 6, 2008

      (In five parts)


      White Horse Inn


      (If you would like the embed code for the four-video playlist, just let me know.)
      EMAIL


      END OF POST.

      5 comments:

      Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

      To present Finney's "measures" as connected to the worldly, fleshly, and tortured measures of today is disingenuous.

      Finney was against almost all forms of entertainment, and his excited measures centered around the conviction of sin through preaching (That surely is absent today).

      It is true that later in his ministry Finney morphed into a strange theology, but his revivals were accompanied by long prayer meetings, fastings, and many times a city wide effect that has had lasting effects even to today.

      You may disagree with Finney in his measures, but to make them a cousin of what goes on today is unsubstantiated. As a matter of fact, Finney would not be welcome to preach in almost any church today, not because of strange methods, but because his preaching was too strong and his definition of discipleship would seem very legalistic today.

      Loose Finney in any of the churches you depicted and he would pronounce them anathema. And contrary to the critics today, he would come into that town and preach against those churches and ask God to bring revival to the city. That is more difficult than lamenting about them from a distance. And Finney would have rebuked sister Amy as Finney would never agreed with a woman preacher.

      dlytle said...

      What a sad, sad eye opener. It makes me all the more urgent to get the true, biblical gospel to the lost. I thank God for you, Lane.

      Lane Chaplin said...

      Hi, Rick. Compared to evidence I have heard regarding Finney and his measures (which are a part of his evangelism), I believe what you've shared is based primarily on your assumptions about what Finney would have used in the name of evangelism instead of what he actually did use. I believe what you've shared is not actually based on fact but rather your assumption of what he would have done. You may not be aware of the material evidence I've been exposed to so I'm going to attach the following for you to review:

      Blog Post One

      Blog Post Two (This is mainly for the two mp3 streams at the end)


      Five Video History and Summary of Finney and his "Evangelism"


      Five Phil Johnson on Charles Finney


      Mike Horton on Charles Finney


      After you review this material, I believe you will have a better understanding as to why Kielar, Johnson, MacArthur, Horton, the White Horse Inn, CRN, Apprising, OldTruth, and myself among many others take the stance we do regarding Finney.

      Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

      Thank you for the links. As I had alluded, Finney's ministry practically was in two parts. His first half was evangelism which was accompanied by some life changing events in people's lives, and the second half in which he morphed into strange and heretical theology ending at Oberlin.

      His theology was hyper legalistic and I contend that his theology and personal practice should not be linked to the worldly, pragmatic, and entertainment soaked expressions of Christianity by men like Warren, Osteen, Hybels, and a legion of unnamed followers.

      Finney's theology was heretical, but his call to discipleship included a total rejecton of sin and its practice. How can that be linked to the seeker/emergent/purpose strains of casualy Christianity. I reject Finney's later theology, but his conversion and revival ministry were used of God in spite of his shortcomings.

      I am familiar with the views of the people you mentioned.

      Lane Chaplin said...

      All of those links I provided allude to the reasons to an extent, but I believe the second link (Blog Post Two) with Kielar's sermon and the White Horse Inn answers your question thoroughly. I could list the reasons here, but it would really be more efficient and perhaps beneficial to listen to the mp3s. With the Kielar sermon, if you start it at time stamp 26:45, it will take you to where he gives specific examples of how Finney has influenced what we're seeing today. If you start from that time stamp and listen to the rest of the sermon through, I believe you will see that your question is answered thoroughly. I will say here, though, that a major part of this critique is decisional regeneration, but I'm hesitant to do so because it really is so enlightening to listen to that mp3 from that time stamp to the end.

      As far as his ministry being in two parts, from what I've read in Phil's article, it seems that Finney wasn't exactly exalting God from the start if the account of his ordination into Presbyterianism is accurate which I trust it is from reading Finney's own words.

      Related Posts with Thumbnails



      A Blue Ink Blog