Finneyism refers to the theological ideas and methods associated with Charles Grandison Finney (1792–1875), a prominent 19th-century American revivalist, preacher, and theologian. Finney’s views significantly shaped the development of revivalism in America, but they also departed from key tenets of historic Christian orthodoxy, particularly in his understanding of sin, grace, and salvation. Finneyism is often regarded as a form of theological heresy because it undermines central doctrines related to original sin, the atonement, and justification by faith alone.
History of Finneyism
Background of Charles Finney: Charles G. Finney was a lawyer-turned-preacher who became a leading figure in the Second Great Awakening (c. 1790–1840), a period of intense religious revival in the United States. Finney began his ministry in the 1820s and quickly gained a reputation for his dynamic preaching and innovative revival techniques. He rejected many aspects of traditional Reformed theology, particularly Calvinism, and sought to develop a new approach to conversion and revival.
Finney’s influence extended beyond theology to the practice of revivalism. His "New Measures"—which included protracted meetings, the use of an "anxious bench" (a precursor to the altar call), and emotional appeals—became hallmarks of revivalist methods in American evangelicalism.
Finney’s Theology: Finney’s theology was marked by a departure from Reformed orthodoxy, particularly in the areas of human nature, sin, and the atonement. He rejected the doctrine of original sin and total depravity, arguing that human beings are not born inherently sinful but instead have the ability to choose righteousness or sin. His theology became associated with what is sometimes called "moral government theology", which views God’s law and human free will as central to the Christian faith.
His major theological works, such as Lectures on Revivals of Religion (1835) and Systematic Theology (1846), presented a radically different understanding of Christian doctrine than the Calvinism that dominated much of American evangelicalism at the time.
Theology of Finneyism
Finneyism is characterized by several key theological positions that deviate from traditional Christian orthodoxy, particularly within Reformed and Evangelical circles:
Denial of Original Sin: One of the most significant departures in Finney’s theology is his rejection of the doctrine of original sin. Historic Christian orthodoxy, as articulated by theologians like Augustine and the Protestant Reformers, teaches that all humans inherit a sinful nature from Adam’s fall (Romans 5:12-19; Psalm 51:5). In contrast, Finney argued that human beings are not born with a sinful nature but instead become sinful through their choices. This view implies that people are capable of living sinless lives if they simply choose to obey God’s law.
This teaching places a heavy emphasis on human responsibility and denies the inherited corruption that traditional Christianity associates with human nature. According to Finney, sin is not an inherent condition but rather an act of the will.
Rejection of Substitutionary Atonement: Finney also rejected the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement, which teaches that Christ’s death on the cross was a substitutionary sacrifice that paid the penalty for human sin. Instead, Finney viewed Christ’s atonement primarily in moral or exemplary terms. He argued that Christ’s death was not a legal payment for sin but rather an example of love and sacrifice that inspires believers to live righteously.
This view contrasts with the historic Christian teaching that Jesus’ death was a propitiation for sin (Romans 3:25; 1 John 2:2), satisfying the righteous wrath of God and reconciling humanity to Him. Finney’s view diminishes the sacrificial and substitutionary aspects of the atonement that are central to orthodox Christian soteriology.
Perfectionism: Another distinctive feature of Finney’s theology is his belief in Christian perfectionism—the idea that believers can achieve sinless perfection in this life through an act of the will. Finney taught that it is possible for Christians to attain a state where they no longer commit sin if they fully submit to God’s law and rely on their own free will to choose righteousness.
This contrasts with the traditional Christian understanding that, while Christians are called to pursue holiness (1 Peter 1:16; Hebrews 12:14), they will continue to struggle with sin until glorification (Romans 7:18-25). The doctrine of sanctification is viewed as an ongoing process, not a state of sinless perfection in this life.
Emphasis on Human Free Will: Finneyism places a strong emphasis on human free will in matters of salvation. Finney rejected the Calvinist doctrine of total depravity, which teaches that humans are so affected by sin that they cannot come to God without His grace. Instead, Finney argued that human beings have the inherent ability to choose or reject salvation, and that salvation is contingent on an individual’s decision to repent and believe.
This leads to an emphasis on moral reformation and human effort in the process of salvation, as opposed to the traditional Reformed emphasis on God’s sovereign grace in regenerating the sinner (Ephesians 2:1-10). Finney’s theology tends to make human decision the decisive factor in salvation, rather than God’s grace.
Revivalism and the Role of Techniques: Finney believed that revival was not a supernatural work of God’s Spirit alone but something that could be produced through the use of certain methods and techniques. His "New Measures" emphasized the role of the preacher and the emotional response of the audience in bringing about conversion. He rejected the idea that revivals were solely a work of divine sovereignty and instead saw them as something that could be engineered through human effort.
This approach contrasts with the historic Christian view that revival is the result of the Holy Spirit’s sovereign work in drawing sinners to repentance and faith, rather than the product of human methods.
Why Finneyism is Considered Heretical
Finney’s theology deviates from historic Christian orthodoxy on several key points, leading many theologians to view it as heretical or at least seriously flawed. Here are the main reasons:
Denial of Original Sin and Total Depravity: Finney’s rejection of original sin and total depravity undermines the biblical teaching that human beings are born in a state of spiritual death, unable to save themselves apart from God’s grace (Ephesians 2:1-3; Romans 3:10-18). By asserting that humans can choose to live righteously without God’s enabling grace, Finneyism minimizes the depth of human sinfulness and the need for divine intervention in salvation.
Rejection of Penal Substitutionary Atonement: Finney’s dismissal of penal substitutionary atonement strikes at the heart of the Christian gospel. The Bible teaches that Jesus’ death was a satisfaction of divine justice, where He bore the penalty for sin in the place of sinners (Isaiah 53:4-6; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Finney’s moral influence view of the atonement undermines the biblical teaching that salvation is accomplished through Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice.
Perfectionism: Finney’s belief in Christian perfectionism conflicts with the biblical doctrine of sanctification. The New Testament teaches that Christians will continue to battle with sin throughout their lives and will not reach perfection until they are glorified in the presence of God (1 John 1:8-9; Philippians 3:12-14). By claiming that Christians can achieve sinless perfection in this life, Finneyism places an unrealistic and unbiblical burden on believers.
Overemphasis on Human Free Will: Finney’s theology overemphasizes human free will at the expense of God’s sovereignty and grace. The Bible teaches that salvation is a work of God’s grace alone, initiated by God’s sovereign will (John 6:44; Romans 9:16). Finney’s emphasis on human ability to choose righteousness neglects the biblical teaching that it is God who works in us both to will and to act according to His good pleasure (Philippians 2:13).
Mechanistic View of Revivals: Finney’s belief that revivals could be produced by human methods runs counter to the historic Christian view that revival is a sovereign work of God. While human preaching and evangelism are important, it is ultimately the Holy Spirit who convicts hearts and brings people to repentance and faith (John 16:8-11). Finney’s approach suggests that human efforts can manipulate spiritual outcomes, which diminishes the role of the Holy Spirit.
The Historic Christian Orthodox View
The historic Christian orthodox view, particularly within Reformed theology, contrasts sharply with Finneyism on several key points:
Original Sin and Total Depravity: Orthodox Christianity affirms the doctrine of original sin, teaching that all humans inherit a sinful nature from Adam and are spiritually dead in their sins, unable to come to God without His sovereign grace (Romans 5:12; Ephesians 2:1). Salvation is by grace alone, not by human effort or moral reformation (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Penal Substitutionary Atonement: The historic Christian faith holds that Christ’s death on the cross was a substitutionary sacrifice that paid the penalty for sin, satisfying the justice of God (Isaiah 53:4-6; 1 Peter 3:18). This is the heart of the gospel: that Jesus died in the place of sinners, bearing the punishment that we deserved.
Sanctification, Not Perfectionism: While Christians are called to pursue holiness (Hebrews 12:14), the Bible teaches that sanctification is an ongoing process, not an instant state of sinless perfection (1 John 1:8-9). Believers will continue to struggle with sin but are progressively conformed to the image of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:29).
Sovereignty of God in Salvation: Orthodox Christian theology emphasizes the sovereignty of God in salvation. God is the one who regenerates the human heart, enabling sinners to repent and believe (John 6:44; Romans 9:16). Salvation is ultimately the work of God’s grace, not human willpower.
Revival as a Work of the Holy Spirit: Historically, the church has viewed revival as a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit, not something that can be produced by human techniques or manipulation. True revival comes when God, in His sovereign timing, brings widespread conviction of sin, repentance, and spiritual renewal.
Conclusion
Finneyism represents a significant departure from historic Christian orthodoxy, particularly in its denial of original sin, its rejection of penal substitutionary atonement, and its emphasis on human free will and perfectionism. Finney’s theology, with its overemphasis on human responsibility and revival methods, stands in contrast to the biblical teaching that salvation is a sovereign work of God’s grace through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The historic Christian faith, as articulated in Scripture and affirmed by the church throughout history, holds that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone—a truth that Finneyism, in many respects, distorts.
-----
Related Resources @Monergism