SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Looking for feedback: Free From Sin Teaching

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next Page )
PosterThread
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

>>>I just do not believe it with Finney's hard trigger damnation theology.

Please provide me with one clear reference from Finney where he says that a Christian that sins is no longer a Christian. You will find no such reference.

>>>I explained earlier that the point of having a sacrificial system is to allow for the relationship to continue if we should sin.

So you would hold that some one the intermittently commits adultery is still a Christian?

>>>So I know with certainty that I do not love my kids more than God loves His children and I would never think to instill fear in my progeny so as to say that if they walk in sinless perfection of heart and deed they are accepted and if not I would cast them into outer darkness.

This example doesn't hold any weight unless you would be willing to sent your children who refuse to obey and practice disobedience to a fire where the worm doesn't die to burn for all eternity.

>>>But this kind of hair trigger doctrine is extremely dangerous and those reading it should run for the hills!

If it is wrong then I agree. But on the other hand we can say the same thing about your doctrine if it is wrong.

Therefore we have to look at the Word of God and see what it says.

>>>This is what I am talking about right here. This is the Gospel message that I was raised under. This has been the source of more distress in my life than I can count.

I can see where it would cause distress if you were falling into sin all the time. This teaching causes no distress in my life what so ever.

We don't have to sin. God offers full grace. Yes the flesh wants to see but if we are dilligent to add to our faith the fruits of the Spirit we have the promise that we will never fall.


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 11:55Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
I can see where it would cause distress if you were falling into sin all the time.



What is sin?


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 12:02Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Please provide me with one clear reference from Finney where he says that a Christian that sins is no longer a Christian. You will find no such reference.



UNITY OF MORAL ACTION
Lecture 9
Rev. Charles G. Finney


Objection: Does a Christian cease to be a Christian, whenever he commits a sin? I answer:

1. Whenever he sins, he must, for the time being, cease to be holy. This is self-evident. Whenever he sins, he must be condemned; he must incur the penalty of the law of God. If he does not, it must be because the law of God is abrogated. But if the law of God be abrogated, he has no rule of duty; consequently, he can neither be holy nor sinful. If it be said that the precept is still binding upon him, but that, with respect to the Christian, the penalty is forever set aside, or abrogated, I reply, that to abrogate the penalty is to repeal the precept; for a precept without penalty is no law. It is only counsel or advice. The Christian, therefore, is justified no longer than he obeys, and must be condemned when he disobeys; or Antinomianism is true. Until he repents, he cannot be forgiven. [u]In these respects, then, the sinning Christian and the unconverted sinner are upon precisely the same ground.[/u]


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 12:15Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

Did you not take time to read the paragraph that following the one you quoted.

"2. In two important respects the sinning Christian differs widely from the unconverted sinner:

(1.) In his relations to God. A Christian is a child of God. A sinning Christian is a disobedient child of God. An unconverted sinner is a child of the devil."
Unity of Moral Action

I know enough of Finney that he didn't teach that one sin will make you a child of the devil.


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 12:35Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi Bob,


This is from the Lectures on Revival series. Consider that Finney believed that men ought to eat for survival. Salting food would be sin because it can be hurtful to the body. He also believed that any expenses on ourselves that could be sent towards evangelism is sin. Consider this:

How to promote a Revival (3)

[u]Do you deny yourself even the hurtful superfluities of life, such as tea, coffee, and tobacco?[/u] Do you retrench your style of living, and scruple not to subject yourself to any inconvenience to save them? Do you daily pray for them in private? Are you laying by something to put into the treasury of the Lord when you go up to pray? If you are not doing these things, and if your soul is not agonized for the poor benighted heathen, why are you such a hypocrite as to pretend to be a Christian? Why, your profession is an insult to Jesus Christ!

From: Conscience Seared With a Hot Iron

.When you can waste God's money in administering to your lusts, when you can buy tobacco, tea, coffee, and such like fashionable but pernicious articles without deep compunction and remorse, your conscience is seared with a hot iron.

******

Would you say that Coffee and Tea are sin? Finney suggests that to partake of such is to have a seared conscience.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 12:40Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Did you not take time to read the paragraph that following the one you quoted.



Yes, in fact the proof of it is that many of them (though not this one) are here on SI audio. ;-)

Quote:
"2. In two important respects the sinning Christian differs widely from the unconverted sinner:

(1.) In his relations to God. A Christian is a child of God. A sinning Christian is a disobedient child of God. An unconverted sinner is a child of the devil."
Unity of Moral Action



All this is saying is that God would condemn a child of God to hell if they died before they repented. The explaination he gives does not help his case. It complicates it.

Moreover, the source of the problem is Finney's false view of penal substitution and imputed righteousness. Because Finney did not appreciate the finished work of the Cross he can believe no other than he believed. It is the consequence of not accepting the biblical revelation of the atonement of Christ.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 12:46Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

RobertW:

You know Robert you are digressing into making statements that cannot be supported. You can state it is your view that Finney held to use salt was sin but you can't prove it with a quote.

>>>Salting food would be sin because it can be hurtful to the body. He also believed that any expenses on ourselves that could be sent towards evangelism is sin.

As I noted before Finney didn't teach salt was sin nor did he teach that "any expenses on ourselves that could be sent toward evangelism is sin". If you want to hold that opinion that is fine but please don't state it as a fact because it is not true. If you are going to state it as a fact please support it with a clear quote.

>>>Would you say that Coffee and Tea are sin? Finney suggests that to partake of such is to have a seared conscience.

Personally I don't drink coffee or black tea. I do how ever drink herbal teas. I think it is fair to say that Finney taught coffee and black tea were sinful.

I don't think a minister has the right or liberty to try to bind their views like this on Christians and tell them coffee and tea are sinful. I would consider that legalism. If Finney wanted to count coffee and black tea as sin for himself well "Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth" (Rom 14:22).

>>>What is sin?

Defination of Sin

In short Wesley held and taught the position that sin was "an actual, voluntary transgression of the law; of the revealed, written law of God" (The Great Privilege of Those That Are Born of God section II.2) and that "even babes in Christ are so far perfect as not to commit sin" (Plain Account of Christian Perfection section 12.2).


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 12:57Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

RobertW
Bob said: Please provide me with one clear reference from Finney where he says that a Christian that sins is no longer a Christian. You will find no such reference.

I don't think you know Finney as well as you claim. Finney is closer to the P in TULIP than to one sin makes you a child of the devil.

>>>All this is saying is that God would condemn a child of God to hell if they died before they repented. The explaination he gives does not help his case. It complicates it.

So are you backing up on your claim that Finney taught that one sin made you a child of the devil?

>>>Moreover, the source of the problem is Finney's false view of penal substitution and imputed righteousness. Because Finney did not appreciate the finished work of the Cross he can believe no other than he believed. It is the consequence of not accepting the biblical revelation of the atonement of Christ.

Finney had many errors but one thing he did have that neither you or I have is results. He likely did more in an average day than you or I will do in a life time. So while you may disagree with his system, as I also do, making statements like he "did not appreciate the finished work of the Cross" and "not accepting the biblical revelation of the atonement of Christ" is quite an indictment of a man of God considering you have professed on this thread that you just lately gained the peace of God and you are a professed minister?

I think this thread has been taken pretty far off topic and I am not sure if at this point we are really going anywhere.

Nice to have met you and I am sure I will see more of you around here but I think at this point I will leave off further conversation along this line. If you would like to pick this up on email you can get me at bobmutch at gmail dot com.


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 13:10Profile
TaylorOtwell
Member



Joined: 2006/6/19
Posts: 927
Arkansas

 Re:

Quote:
Finney had many errors but one thing he did have that neither you or I have is results. He likely did more in an average day than you or I will do in a life time.



[i]For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness.[/i] - Romans 10:2-3

Quote:
I think this thread has been taken pretty far off topic and I am not sure if at this point we are really going anywhere.



Bob, to get this back on topic - I am wondering if you could provide an exposition of John 6:35-40 that is consistent with your 9 points you outlined in your original post. I still haven't seen this done - you can even PM it to me if you would like.

Thanks,
Taylor


_________________
Taylor Otwell

 2008/12/10 13:45Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi Bob,

Quote:
Finney had many errors but one thing he did have that neither you or I have is results. He likely did more in an average day than you or I will do in a life time.



I won't ask you to explain this. I know it is hyperbolic in nature. My comment on Finney and salt [u]is[/u] is a simplification of my overall understanding of the man's views based upon his teachings. If I am wrong I would more than happily retract it and forsake the notion all together. But we still have to reckon with coffee and tea being a sin.

The point is, is that in revivalism theology there is an ongoing attempt to expose people sins so as to bring them into godly sorrow and manufacture personal revival. It is the whole 'breaking up the fallow ground' thing. We can break up our fallow ground as we come before the Lord, but we must allow God to do the work. It takes the word of His grace to change a man. But this is not what men do, especially Finney. He looked and listened for what he esteemed as compromise and then pressed the points.

Quote:
So are you backing up on your claim that Finney taught that one sin made you a child of the devil?



I have wondered why you press this question? If a believer is one sin away from condemnation as you have affirmed at least twice, then why this question?

Quote:
Nice to have met you and I am sure I will see more of you around here but I think at this point I will leave off further conversation along this line. If you would like to pick this up on email you can get me at bobmutch at gmail dot com.



Well, Bob, you asked for input in the beginning. [u]I'm a real life case study of the effects of such a doctrine that ties justification to sanctification.[/u] And I live among people that also have grown up under this. I have seen it's devastating effects in the twilight hours of people's lives. Christian Perfection without a biblical view of justification can only ever bring despair. It may not be true in [u]your[/u] life, but it has been true in mine. It has been true also in others I know personally.

I have studied Finney, but am not an expert on him. He is hard to follow in his views because of his mix of philosophy and law into the Gospel. I believe He was 'profitable for the ministry'. That is why I undertook to share his Lectures on Revival on audio. there are some good things there. But we have to distinguish the good from the false.

At last my concern is for anyone that does not fully appreciate New Covenant justification. You mention Wesley also as if you have studied his views of Entire Sanctification. I believe in walking in Romans 8. I believe the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart and a good conscience. I have many writings and sermons to that effect. But I am also conscious that I am not perfect. I need the blood of Christ. I need our Great High Priest. I need a loving Heavenly Father. I need a Comforter that will come alongside to help. I need grace. I need mercy. I need an advocate with the Father. And I need to know that God loves me in such a way that [u]if[/u] I stumble, though He is able to keep me from falling, that I am not on the same ground with God as would be a sinner. No matter how we end this topic, that is the clear teaching of Finney. It seems to me that you share his view that we are one sin away from being lost. I simply cannot walk a knife edge like that.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 14:01Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy