Zealous of good works....the Christian life!

[Iconoclast]

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0070.htm


Christians are saved from their sins , unto holiness of life. Good works and law keeping belong to Christians.

here we see this sermon addresses it very clearly;

"Zealous of good works."—Titus 2:14.

E SHALL not be afraid of leading any of you into a legal spirit this morning through what we shall say, for after our frequent exhortations to avoid anything like trusting in your works, attended as they have been, we trust, by the Holy Spirit, we are not afraid that you will so misunderstand us, as to suppose that when we speak of good works, to-day, we shall in any way whatsoever wish you to imagine that they can promote your eternal salvation. We laboured when here the Sabbath morning before last, to let you know the difference between the two covenants, the covenant of grace and the covenant of works; we shall beg you to remember what we then said, and if by any slips of the tongue we should say anything that should look like legality, we beg you will put the two together, and wherein we shall err from the great truth of justification by faith, to reject our testimony.

"Zealous of good works." There are some who hear us preach high doctrine, and constantly declare that we are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, who, therefore, suppose that we cannot preach good works, and that we could not preach a good sermon of exhortation to Christians, to live in holiness.

Well, we will not say that we can preach a good sermon, but we will say that we will try and preach one as to that matter that shall be as good as theirs, and as much lead the children of God to live in holiness as any of their exhortations can do, grounded as they are on trusting in the flesh, and based as they are on threatenings, regulations and promises, which they hope will induce God's children, but which are well enough for slaves, though of little avail in operating on the true-born believer.

The children of God are a holy people;—for this very purpose were they born and brought into the world, that they should be holy; for this they were redeemed with blood and made a peculiar people. God's end in election, the end of all his purposes, is not answered until they become a people "zealous of good works."

Some have confused this teaching and suggest that any hint of law keeping is a "works salvation" rather than a SALVATION THAT WORKS......ENJOY THIS SERMON!

 

[Iconoclast]

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0070.htm


Christians are saved from their sins , unto holiness of life. Good works and law keeping belong to Christians.

here we see this sermon addresses it very clearly;






Some have confused this teaching and suggest that any hint of law keeping is a "works salvation" rather than a SALVATION THAT WORKS......ENJOY THIS SERMON!

Here is a sample;

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0070.htm


Christians are saved from their sins , unto holiness of life. Good works and law keeping belong to Christians.

here we see this sermon addresses it very clearly;






Some have confused this teaching and suggest that any hint of law keeping is a "works salvation" rather than a SALVATION THAT WORKS......ENJOY THIS SERMON!

here is a sample from this sermon;

We think, if we read Scripture rightly, that no work can be good unless it is commanded of God

Again: nothing is a good work unless it is done with a good motive; and there is no motive which can be said to be good but the glory of God

"Where, then," you ask, "do they come from?" We answer, good works come from a real conversion, brought about by the Spirit of God.

Good works are the gifts of God, his choice pearls, which he sendeth down with his grace.

We are not against the law of God. We believe it is no longer binding on us as the covenant of salvation; but we have nothing to say against the law of God. "The law is holy; we are carnal, sold under sin."

The use of good works is, that they are a Christian's sermon. A sermon is not what a man says, but what he does. You who practice are preaching; it is not preaching and practising, but practising is preaching. The sermon that is preached by the mouth is soon forgotten, but what we preach by our lives is never forgotten. There is nothing like faithful practice and holy living, if we would preach to the world. The reason why Christianity does not advance with a mightier stride, is simply this:—that professors are in a large measure a disgrace to religion, and many of those who are joined to the church have no more godliness than those who are out of it

 

[John Public]

What is your point?

 

[Iconoclast]

What is your point?

Spurgeon's point seems to be that we are saved from sin ,saved onto holiness and good works which follow .
The good works are a sign of regeneration.

Without the good works a person has a reason to be concerned and examine himself .

False teachers don't like this kind of teaching because it's biblical and they would rather go with a shallow understanding of a few random facts rather than actually look at the biblical data as to what the Bible describes as conversion.

Christians are not lawless.

 

[Iconoclast]

What is your point?

Christians are saved from their sins , unto holiness of life. Good works and law keeping belong to Christians.

What do you believe about this statement?
What is the place and purpose of law in the life of a Christian?

CHS offered this;

We are not against the law of God. We believe it is no longer binding on us as the covenant of salvation; but we have nothing to say against the law of God. "The law is holy; we are carnal, sold under sin."

 

[John Public]

Frankly I do not care what Spurgeon said; even though I have read many of his quotes, he held to some pretty cockamamie conceptions. I care about the word & words of God, which Spurgeon, on the one hand recommending the
Authorized (KJ) Bible, stood for the only way to understand texts is by the dead originals. Which is it? You cannot hold both without being doubleminded. The man also smoked a pipe in perpetual sin, until his death; he refused to repent when admonished. Trust in the LORD with all thy heart; lean not on thine own understanding. Proverbs 3.5
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited.

Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.

For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways,and according to the fruit of his doings. Jeremias 17.5-10.

However, antinomianism is a false doctrine from hell. I have written an article, almost done, called In Defense & Confirmation of the Gospel against this lying statement. A simple study on I John is all it is. Yet, it is all that's required.
Once it has an electronic version perhaps the administrators will allow me to share it; or I'll send it to interested members

Iconoclast, brother or sister, it may upset you for someone to say this but if you're quoting Spurgeon, a man, more than the holy scriptures, that is idolatrous, friend.
The scriptures are clear the law has waxen old; without a temple wherein to offer sacrifices, and to perform the sundry ordinances Moses commanded, we cannot hope to keep it. Romans eight proclaims in its first eleven verses the restrictions of the law contrasted to life by walking in the Spirit which is in Christ Jesus, http://biblehub.com/kjv/romans/8.htm

The issue whereat many Christians err is the Spirit is constrained by the Law he penned, so it is not to say live by the Spirit less the law. The law, moral and ceremonial, has been affirmed in Christ; but the handwriting of ordinances against us, by walking in the Spirit, is the fulfillment of the law.
The Galatian error was to try to in carnality keep the law, thinking not Christ through His Spirit, 2 Corinthians 5.17,
is regeneration. How can the law regenerate if it cannot regulate the mind? What is the job of the law beyond exposition of what is sin, and what is holy?

 

[righteousdude2]

Frankly I do not care what Spurgeon said; even though I have read many of his quotes, he held to some pretty cockamamie conceptions. I care about the word & words of God, which Spurgeon, on the one hand recommending the
Authorized (KJ) Bible, stood for the only way to understand texts is by the dead originals. Which is it? You cannot hold both without being doubleminded. The man also smoked a pipe in perpetual sin, until his death; he refused to repent when admonished. Trust in the LORD with all thy heart; lean not on thine own understanding. Proverbs 3.5
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited.

Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.

For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways,and according to the fruit of his doings. Jeremias 17.5-10.

However, antinomianism is a false doctrine from hell. I have written an article, almost done, called In Defense & Confirmation of the Gospel against this lying statement. A simple study on I John is all it is. Yet, it is all that's required.
Once it has an electronic version perhaps the administrators will allow me to share it; or I'll send it to interested members

Iconoclast, brother or sister, it may upset you for someone to say this but if you're quoting Spurgeon, a man, more than the holy scriptures, that is idolatrous, friend.
The scriptures are clear the law has waxen old; without a temple wherein to offer sacrifices, and to perform the sundry ordinances Moses commanded, we cannot hope to keep it. Romans eight proclaims in its first eleven verses the restrictions of the law contrasted to life by walking in the Spirit which is in Christ Jesus, http://biblehub.com/kjv/romans/8.htm

The issue whereat many Christians err is the Spirit is constrained by the Law he penned, so it is not to say live by the Spirit less the law. The law, moral and ceremonial, has been affirmed in Christ; but the handwriting of ordinances against us, by walking in the Spirit, is the fulfillment of the law.
The Galatian error was to try to in carnality keep the law, thinking not Christ through His Spirit, 2 Corinthians 5.17,
is regeneration. How can the law regenerate if it cannot regulate the mind? What is the job of the law beyond exposition of what is sin, and what is holy?

Unfortunately there are those who think that quoting old, dead theologians gives their argument more validity. These men of old have some good things to contribute, but nothing should ever replace or take priority over the Word of God. I like your response.

 

[John Public]

Unfortunately there are those who think that quoting old, dead theologians gives their argument more validity. These men of old have some good things to contribute, but nothing should ever replace or take priority over the Word of God. I like your response.

Grace & mercy be unto you, brother. I wanted to message you, but you do not have that function enabled. If you'd like to read my article, then I'll send it to you at 111jpublic@gmail.com.

 

[Iconoclast]

Grace & mercy be unto you, brother. I wanted to message you, but you do not have that function enabled. If you'd like to read my article, then I'll send it to you at 111jpublic@gmail.com.

Thanks for your response I hope to respond more fully when I get to a keyboard later .
You raised alot of issues Here I find it very inconsistent on one hand in post 6 that you said you don't care what Spurgeon said.
I notice you claim to be an author and now you're suggesting to Dude that he read your article ...that is your words .
When Spurgeon offers his thoughts on this sermon [his words} and I offer it as a vehicle for discussion on this topic you launch into an attack on Spurgeon. And yet you don't care what he says but we're supposed to care what you say by reading your article?

 

[Iconoclast]

Unfortunately there are those who think that quoting old, dead theologians gives their argument more validity. These men of old have some good things to contribute, but nothing should ever replace or take priority over the Word of God. I like your response.

Or on the other hand Dude there are those who read old dead theologians who when they were quoted when they wrote what they did were quite alive and Biblical in their teaching.
When people quoted what they said or they themself put it in a book they were quite happy to do it.
Many of us prefer to look at those who were quite biblical in their content rather than look to modern-day false teachers on TBN.
You never questioned how you came to view the Bible the way you do, and compare it to other godly men who God gave to the church as pastors and teachers to help keep the church on track.
I find it amusing that anytime a person is quoted in a good solid link people rise up to ridicule or put it down as if its insignificant

 

[John Public]

Thanks for your response I hope to respond more fully when I get to a keyboard later .
You raised a lot of issues but here I find it very inconsistent on one hand in post 6 said you don't care what Spurgeon said.
and I notice you claim to be an author and now you're suggesting to dude that he read your article your words .
when Spurgeon offers his thoughts on this sermon and I offer it as a vehicle for discussion on this topic you launch into an attack on Spurgeon and yet you don't care what he says but we're supposed to care what you say by reading your article?

Time to put my author hat on my head.
Your grammar, punctuation & syntax are terrible. That attempt at paragraph which we call a run-on deserves at least several spots where a comma after a conjunction, a semicolon or the formation of a new sentence is necessary for comprehension. Also, there are no spaces after periods at the end of a sentence. The word "and" is a conjunction much overused in the lexis; the word "and" never begins or completes a sentence because the statement, "and I notice you claim…", would require capitalization in addition to the use of a comma to avert it becoming a fragment.

The Writ says in Proverbs 18.13 we should hear a matter before answering; did you bother to hear it? No.
Every whit of what I said is all factual, so guess whose duty it is to verify these things?
Now, why did not you answer my point about Spurgeon talking out of both sides of his mouth when he made his statements about originals only? It is relevant to the post.
Glaringly, and mayhap painfully, you totally dodged a gentle rebuke. I'm simply explain it this way: Spurgeon was not inspired by God and perfected, also preserved; Spurgeon was created (ref. Genesis 1.26-27) to serve the Creator, whereas the Bible, 2 Timothy 3.15-16, meets those former points.
To have more quotes of Spurgeon than the scriptures is flatly concerning. I read the works of Luther, Bunyan, King James I & VI, & have read Calvin, Moody, Tozer, A.W. Pink, Riplinger, Graham, Swaggart (biggest heretic on the list), in addition to others. However, I study 21 chapters of none of
these a day, for they are not the holy words Jeremiah ate up, 15.16, as bread. Why quote a sinful man more than the scriptures? That is rankly idolatrous. Yes, I hold to Keach's Catechism, the 1689 London Baptist Confession, too; but I quote the Bible before those! Ask me what Question 100
would be in Keach's, and I am ignorant; yet ask me about Psalm 100 and I'll refer you to the fifth verse.

Now, let us deal with your false charge. What is not clear about the message function being disabled on righteousdude2's account? Did you read my post carefully, because, if you did, you would have seen the words "interested souls", so since he seems to agree with me antinomianism, which these Spurgeon quotes are against, I offer to send my article, In Defense & Confirmation of the Gospel.
Furthermore, do you not get how many hours that article has taken to write reading the primary epistle of John, quoting it, paraphrasing, referencing to his gospel? The whole article is mostly quotes from the Bible unlike this thread.
You would do wisely to consider the saying of our Lord & Saviour, for it is written:
Luke's gospel ch. six,
36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

37Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

The gospel according to St. Matthew ch. seven,
1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.


You hardly have room to talk when you can reference Spurgeon's sermon to such great, multicolored, illustrious detail, but cannot read enough of my post in context, except just to mock, Iconoclast.
Oh, thou destroyer of icons, thou "…attacker of cherished beliefs or institutions"*, your handle is befitting!
(ref. American Heritage dictionary, 4th edition, "iconoclast", accessed 25/10/15 1246.)

 

[InTheLight]

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

[Iconoclast]

Time to put my author hat on my head.
Your grammar, punctuation & syntax are terrible. That attempt at paragraph which we call a run-on deserves at least several spots where a comma after a conjunction, a semicolon or the formation of a new sentence is necessary for comprehension. Also, there are no spaces after periods at the end of a sentence. The word "and" is a conjunction much overused in the lexis; the word "and" never begins or completes a sentence because the statement, "and I notice you claim…", would require capitalization in addition to the use of a comma to avert it becoming a fragment.

The Writ says in Proverbs 18.13 we should hear a matter before answering; did you bother to hear it? No.
Every whit of what I said is all factual, so guess whose duty it is to verify these things?
Now, why did not you answer my point about Spurgeon talking out of both sides of his mouth when he made his statements about originals only? It is relevant to the post.
Glaringly, and mayhap painfully, you totally dodged a gentle rebuke. I'm simply explain it this way: Spurgeon was not inspired by God and perfected, also preserved; Spurgeon was created (ref. Genesis 1.26-27) to serve the Creator, whereas the Bible, 2 Timothy 3.15-16, meets those former points.
To have more quotes of Spurgeon than the scriptures is flatly concerning. I read the works of Luther, Bunyan, King James I & VI, & have read Calvin, Moody, Tozer, A.W. Pink, Riplinger, Graham, Swaggart (biggest heretic on the list), in addition to others. However, I study 21 chapters of none of
these a day, for they are not the holy words Jeremiah ate up, 15.16, as bread. Why quote a sinful man more than the scriptures? That is rankly idolatrous. Yes, I hold to Keach's Catechism, the 1689 London Baptist Confession, too; but I quote the Bible before those! Ask me what Question 100
would be in Keach's, and I am ignorant; yet ask me about Psalm 100 and I'll refer you to the fifth verse.

Now, let us deal with your false charge. What is not clear about the message function being disabled on righteousdude2's account? Did you read my post carefully, because, if you did, you would have seen the words "interested souls", so since he seems to agree with me antinomianism, which these Spurgeon quotes are against, I offer to send my article, In Defense & Confirmation of the Gospel.
Furthermore, do you not get how many hours that article has taken to write reading the primary epistle of John, quoting it, paraphrasing, referencing to his gospel? The whole article is mostly quotes from the Bible unlike this thread.
You would do wisely to consider the saying of our Lord & Saviour, for it is written:
Luke's gospel ch. six,
36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

37Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

The gospel according to St. Matthew ch. seven,
1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.


You hardly have room to talk when you can reference Spurgeon's sermon to such great, multicolored, illustrious detail, but cannot read enough of my post in context, except just to mock, Iconoclast.
Oh, thou destroyer of icons, thou "…attacker of cherished beliefs or institutions"*, your handle is befitting!
(ref. American Heritage dictionary, 4th edition, "iconoclast", accessed 25/10/15 1246.)

Okay listen [edited] I used voice to text going down the highway 70 miles an hour so my phone might not be up on grammar syntax and everything else you looking for but don't worry when I get to the keyboard I'll deal with your clown post

 

[John Public]

I have nothing to say to someone who cannot take a meek, gentle correction from another follower of Christ, excepting may your blinded eyes be one day opened, may God bless you for reviling, and may God have mercy on you because it endureth forever, not because of how you treat others.

 

[Iconoclast]

I have nothing to say to someone who cannot take a meek, gentle correction from another follower of Christ, excepting may your blinded eyes be one day opened, may God bless you for reviling, and may God have mercy on you because it endureth forever, not because of how you treat others.

I know the difference of a well meant correction or something meant to edify and a direct attack and don't worry I will respond when I get to a keyboard

 

[Reformed]

Old, dead theologians (like Spurgeon) serve a valuable purpose for the Church. They direct our focus to the Word of God and godly Christian living. I know Iconoclast, and he is not venerating Charles Spurgeon, although Spurgeon was a great preacher who saw thousands come to Christ during his years of ministry.

As far as the title of the thread, we are to be zealous for good works. Not because Charles Spurgeon says so, but because scripture tells us it is God's purpose for us:

Ephesians 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

 

[Iconoclast]

John Public

Frankly I do not care what Spurgeon said; even though I have read many of his quotes, he held to some pretty cockamamie conceptions.

The thread was concerning a sermon I read . It deals with the role of good works and law keeping in the life of a Christian.
Zealous of good works....the Christian life! In the OP I said this;
Some have confused this teaching and suggest that any hint of law keeping is a "works salvation" rather than a SALVATION THAT WORKS......ENJOY THIS SERMON!

No one forced you to read it or enjoy it. It is put up for discussion. I know some on BB have wrong views of the law and grace. THis can be a fruitful discussion. You have an axe to grind against Spurgeon....swell...start your own thread.

I care about the word & words of God,

So did Spurgeon.

which Spurgeon, on the one hand recommending the
Authorized (KJ) Bible, stood for the only way to understand texts is by the dead originals. Which is it?

You suggest you are an "author". You are critical of my writing, or as it turns out...voice to text-
Not everyone who fancies themselves as a writer is good at it.
The above bolded portion is not clear at all.
Do you have a direct quote?
Can someone recommend the KJV and believe that the greek text ?{if that is what you are talking about?}
This is not dealing with the OP at all.

You cannot hold both without being doubleminded.

I know men who teach from the greek text that do both.

The man also smoked a pipe in perpetual sin, until his death; he refused to repent when admonished.

Your personal gripe with Spurgeon and his view of Christian liberty is also the subject of another thread.
prov3:5
Jeremias 17.5-10. have nothing to do with this thread.

However, antinomianism is a false doctrine from hell.

Correct...and yet several on BB are Antinomian.

I have written an article, almost done, called In Defense & Confirmation of the Gospel against this lying statement.

WHAT LYING STATEMENT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Make yourself clear when you write something. If you cannot be clear in a post, how is a book going to work out?

A simple study on I John is all it is. Yet, it is all that's required.
Once it has an electronic version perhaps the administrators will allow me to share it; or I'll send it to interested members

Cannot wait!

Iconoclast, brother or sister, it may upset you for someone to say this but if you're quoting Spurgeon, a man, more than the holy scriptures, that is idolatrous, friend.

Ah yes...the meek servant supposedly new on BB...since Monday has determined in the judgment of charity that I Idolize Spurgeon because I offer a sermon and pick out a few sentences as discussion points. Yes I believe this .

IF ANYONE WANTED TO ACTUALLY DISCUSS THE SERMON SCRIPTURE WILL BE OFFERED.

The scriptures are clear the law has waxen old; without a temple wherein to offer sacrifices, and to perform the sundry ordinances Moses commanded, we cannot hope to keep it. Romans eight proclaims in its first eleven verses the restrictions of the law contrasted to life by walking in the Spirit which is in Christ Jesus,

Did you read the sermon? If you did I would question your comprehension because it is clear Spurgeon went out of the way to show He was not in any way suggesting law keeping for justifiaction.

The issue whereat many Christians err is the Spirit is constrained by the Law he penned, so it is not to say live by the Spirit less the law. The law, moral and ceremonial, has been affirmed in Christ; but the handwriting of ordinances against us, by walking in the Spirit, is the fulfillment of the law.
The Galatian error was to try to in carnality keep the law, thinking not Christ through His Spirit, 2 Corinthians 5.17,
is regeneration

This objection shows you did not grasp what Spurgeon made clear.

. How can the law regenerate if it cannot regulate the mind? What is the job of the law beyond exposition of what is sin, and what is holy?

if you read the sermon you would not ask this....but Spurgeon is beneath you.

Time to put my author hat on my head.
Your grammar, punctuation & syntax are terrible. That attempt at paragraph which we call a run-on deserves at least several spots where a comma after a conjunction, a semicolon or the formation of a new sentence is necessary for comprehension. Also, there are no spaces after periods at the end of a sentence. The word "and" is a conjunction much overused in the lexis; the word "and" never begins or completes a sentence because the statement, "and I notice you claim…", would require capitalization in addition to the use of a comma to avert it becoming a fragment.

Now I can offer a response to you. I pointed out to you my short posts were deliveredusing voice to text In a commercial vehicle doing 70 along the interstate. My headset does have a noise cancelling feature but the truck, tires, wind , and rain can cause much distortion and i cannot be stopping to edit and rewrite it as I travel as I have a time element to be concerned about.

If I totally lacked writing ability or proper grammar do you think it is proper to publicly call attention to it?
You did not address the OP at all...just the grammar .

I notice you suggest you are.....an evangelist, author, muscian,....and MEEK SERVANT..Cautious
Is it that quality of "meek servant " that had you do this? Or was the "meekness expressed later when You suggested I was a blind hypocrite?

The Writ says in Proverbs 18.13 we should hear a matter before answering; did you bother to hear it? No.

Your gripe with Spurgeon is off topic.

Every whit of what I said is all factual, so guess whose duty it is to verify these things?
Now, why did not you answer my point about Spurgeon talking out of both sides of his mouth when he made his statements about originals only? It is relevant to the post.

It has nothing to do with the OP

Stay tuned for pt 2;

 

[Iconoclast]

Glaringly, and mayhap painfully, you totally dodged a gentle rebuke

No....I saw it as a clear personal attack which is what it is. No problem as I do not have thin skin. Bring it on "meek servant". I will respond usually at the end of my driving day or night. Iwelcome any biblical correction, but I will respond to ungodly attacks by those who set themselves up to be accusers of the brethren and would judge another s servant.

. I'm simply explain it this way: Spurgeon was not inspired by God and perfected, also preserved;

Who said he was? i do not agree with all he taught but he has been a blessing to multitudes.
I am sure his writings and sermons pale next to your brilliant musings but so far you must have just lacked opportunity to be readRoflmaoRoflmao

Spurgeon was created (ref. Genesis 1.26-27) to serve the Creator, whereas the Bible, 2 Timothy 3.15-16, meets those former points.
To have more quotes of Spurgeon than the scriptures is flatly concerning.

You have offered no verses on the Op. The verses you offered had to do with what exactly?

I read the works of Luther, Bunyan, King James I & VI, & have read Calvin, Moody, Tozer, A.W. Pink, Riplinger, Graham, Swaggart (biggest heretic on the list), in addition to others. However, I study 21 chapters of none of
these a day, for they are not the holy words Jeremiah ate up, 15.16, as bread.

So no reason for you to be here among us then is there? We are all sinful men so why waste your time reading what we offer?

Why quote a sinful man more than the scriptures? That is rankly idolatrous.

Earlier i spoke of your post as a clown post! Are you looking to amuse and be funny like a clown?
I offered this sermon for discussion, people can offer as much scripture as they want to on the topic.
I have no need to offer scriptures other that what is offered in the sermon title as no discussion has taken place on the topic yet.

Yes, I hold to Keach's Catechism, the 1689 London Baptist Confession, too;

So did Spurgeon. Do you want a cookie or something?

but I quote the Bible before those!

The confession starts out with this;
1._____ The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1-3; Hebrews 1:1; Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19,20 )

also;
( Luke 24:27, 44; Romans 3:2 )( 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 John 5:9 )
( John 16:13,14; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12; 1 John 2:20, 27)( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Galatians 1:8,9; John 6:45; 1 Corinthians 2:9-12; 1 Corinthians 11:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 14:26,40)
( 2 Peter 3:16; Psalms 19:7; Psalms 119:130)( Romans 3:2; Isaiah 8:20; Acts 15:15; John 5:39; 1 Corinthians 14:6, 9, 11, 12, 24, 28; Colossians 3:16 )( 2 Peter 1:20, 21; Acts 15:15, 16)( Matthew 22:29, 31, 32; Ephesians 2:20; Acts 28:23)
pt2
These numbers are verses offered by these "sinful men" concerning the scripture.

Now, let us deal with your false charge

.
What false charge? You say i am offering the words of men , the you suggest to Dude that he reads your own words of you...a sinful man.
I love when people like you show up ripping on the teaching and words of men, then offer your words instead...lolRoflmaoCautious

7Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

St. Matthew ch. seven,
1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

You hardly have room to talk when you can reference Spurgeon's sermon to such great, multicolored, illustrious detail, but cannot read enough of my post in context, except just to mock, Iconoclast.
Oh, thou destroyer of icons, thou "…attacker of cherished beliefs or institutions"*, your handle is befitting!

Sure thing ...MEEK SERVANT SO IN YOUR MEEKNESS YOU CALL ME A BLIND HYPOCRITE IN NEED OF MY EYES BEING OPEN....YES VERY HUMBLE AND FULL OF GRACE

 

[Iconoclast]

Old, dead theologians (like Spurgeon) serve a valuable purpose for the Church. They direct our focus to the Word of God and godly Christian living. I know Iconoclast, and he is not venerating Charles Spurgeon, although Spurgeon was a great preacher who saw thousands come to Christ during his years of ministry.

As far as the title of the thread, we are to be zealous for good works. Not because Charles Spurgeon says so, but because scripture tells us it is God's purpose for us:

Thank you brother. I do confess that I enjoy Spurgeon when I read outside of my Bible. I do not agree with everything he said or taught but have learned much from Him.
When I would prepare a lesson on my own...I would then read any and all sermons by Spurgeon on related verses to the lesson to see if I missed anything and many times found some great gems of truth as CHS was all about the scriptures and Jesus 24/7.

I had at first bought a 15 volume set of sermons, and they were so good, I sold them, a radial arm saw, and a plymouth to buy the New Park street Pulpit and Metroplitan Tabernacle. I have never regretted it.
on the road I have a cd of all His writings.

His sermons trigger so many thoughts sometime i do not finish the one I am reading as it points me to sections of scripture to consider in a fresh way.
In our day some are too lazy to see any value of keeping "old dead Theologians" as wise companions who have gone before us. No they would rather watch these clowns on TBN and daystar and all these bogus charlatans instead o reading from trusted guides who have stood the test of time.ThumbsupThumbsupThumbsup

 

[righteousdude2]

Or on the other hand Dude there are those who read old dead theologians who when they were quoted when they wrote what they did were quite alive and Biblical in their teaching.
When people quoted what they said or they themself put it in a book they were quite happy to do it.
Many of us prefer to look at those who were quite biblical in their content rather than look to modern-day false teachers on TBN.
You never questioned how you came to view the Bible the way you do, and compare it to other godly men who God gave to the church as pastors and teachers to help keep the church on track.
I find it amusing that anytime a person is quoted in a good solid link people rise up to ridicule or put it down as if its insignificant

Well, we have always had differences of opinions and views! So why should this be such a surprise to you? As for your TBN comment, you should know that I do not watch TBN, other than to catch a Gaither music event or a Billy Graham sermon!

As for the men who inspire me and whom I base my theology on, I thought that was evident, but I'll spell it out for you once again. I take my leads from the Scripture! And the Scripture is always being impressed upon me by the power and presence f the Holy Ghost that baptized me and lives within my heart!

I'd have thought that was where all of us who follow Him should be getting our lead and inspiration?