At the same time he was used of God in a mighty way for the saving of souls and held a high standard of personal piety. I have also benefited by some of his writings in my personal walk with the Lord.

Added: I removed the link to the video as LaneCh misrepresents Finney right at the very beginning of the video. LaneCh states that “if Adam leads us into sin not by our inheriting his guilty and corruption but by following his poor example that leads logically to the view of Christ as saving us by example and that is exactly what where where Finney is lead.”

This statement is not factual. Finney was never led to the position that Christ saves us by example. Finney clearly taught we are saved not by the example of Christ but by the merits of his death and resurrection.

While I strongly disagree with Finney on his stand on original sin I also strongly disagree with the Calvinistic TULIP teaching that LaneCh teaches and I hold it is a deplorable thing to misrepresent others. While I hope LaneCh didn’t do this willfully it would appear to me that if a person took a simple perusal of Finney’s Systematic Theology they would quickly see that Finney held that we are saved by the merit of the death and resurrection of Christ not by his example.

For an in depth history and critique of Finney’s beliefs see this video from the White Horse Inn on youtube called Charles Finney and American Revivalism.

[Ed. The above links were removed due to the site clearly misrepresents Finney's doctrinal position in its claim that "the view of Christ as saving us by example and that is exactly what where where Finney is lead".]

I graduated from ORU so I am familiar with the dangers of mixing truth and error.

Respectfully,
Liza