Free Willie you ask would I want this if Finney was correct?
No. I choose and rejoice for justification by the imputed
righteousness in Christ. I believe that it is impossible
to keep all the law as Finney says you must.
That is the same deception that was occuring in Galatia.
A return to the law.
Finney is a heretic. He has and is misleading masses of
Christians. He is why many have fallen away, because they
know they cannot be be totally without sin and acceptable to
God without justification.
Finney should not be exalted rather a disclaimer should be given that he is a heretic and denies the basic fundamental of the Gospel.
Beware of reading his material as they will bring confusion
and deception. Forget the few good things he can say, he
was a man under delusion.
Here are more of his quotes and it explains why I do not want
what Finney has to offer.
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 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...In these respects, then, the sinning Christian and the unconverted sinner are upon precisely the same ground. (p. 46)
...full present obedience is a condition of justification. But again, to the question, can man be justified while sin remains in him? Surely he cannot, either upon legal or gospel principles, unless the law be repealed...But can he be pardoned and accepted, and justified, in the gospel sense, while sin, any degree of sin, remains in him? Certainly not (p. 57).
The relations of the old school view of justification to their view of depravity is obvious. They hold, as we have seen, that the constitution in every faculty and part is sinful. Of course, a return to personal, present holiness, in the sense of entire conformity to the law, cannot with them be a condition of justification. They must have a justification while yet at least in some degree of sin. This must be brought about by imputed righteousness. The intellect revolts at a justification in sin. So a scheme is devised to divert the eye of the law and of the lawgiver from the sinner to his substitute, who has perfectly obeyed the law (p. 339).