Analyzing Spurgeon (Demonology Series)

Introduction

After seeing many clever and heart-felt gushy devotionals people were posting from Spurgeon, I decided to actually investigate some of his lectures. What I didn't expect was how demonic all of it was, clinically reversing key doctrines one after the other: to the point where they have more parallels with Satan's religions than Christianity.

Obviously nobody wants to be in the spotlight of criticism, and pastor-teachers oust themselves by what they teach (Matthew 7:16), however for the sake of analyzing Satanic reversals in Spurgeon's lectures, it's useful research so it can be referenced with 'thumbprints' from other religions like Islam or Hinduism. Best we learn from the mistakes of others so their work doesn't become wasted and we don't repeat those same mistakes.

This isn't an attack 'on the man' or character assassination (in fact I like pancakes just as much as Spurgeon). Spurgeon's now face-to-face with Christ and obviously knows his entire ministry was pure bunk, so I'm certain he'd want people to stop mindlessly quoting his mistakes and for someone to actually correct everything for once.

Spurgeon's Works Salvation

It's often said that Spurgeon believed salvation through faith: after careful sleuthing he adds caveats that makes it indistinguishable from works salvation. Spurgeon quite slyly tacks on the fact that once you believe, you THEN become self-righteous and holy: unable to sin, unable to stop believing, and you'll IMMEDIATELY transform your life (which contradicts 1 Peter 2:2). If you don't do that or fail in any of those situations, "you were never saved to begin with". Well folks, that's works salvation!

Romans 3:10 As it's written: there's none righteous, no, not even one

Romans 3:10 καθὼς γέγραπται ὅτι Οὐκ ἔστιν δίκαιος οὐδὲ εἷς·

Any sort of meritorious action on our part, whether it's "holy living", a "changed lifestyle", "doing good deeds", "always keeping your faith"... these are an attempt to make ourselves righteous. And if there is any change, it's a result of years and years of learning Bible Doctrine. If you hallucinate and make yourself perform a lifestyle change, well, that's done from your own works and from a point of ignorance. If YOU can do it, an atheist or theist in any religion can as well.

This actually falls into Satan's first temptation, magically turning stones into bread also means you magically believe in your own mind that there's a quick fix to instantly 'becoming holy' and bypass years of studying.

For starters we'll see how Spurgeon implies we're only saved through belief and not of ourselves (or selfsalvation as he calls it), but then does a 180 and greedily emphasizes a changed lifestyle and a godly life.

It appears Spurgeon thinks 'repentance' is some sort of religious action because he says it's not for selfsalvation; it is a common tactic Christians use where "repent" and "repentance" is its own entire thing far removed from the original meaning. The Greek word metanoia simply means changing from one state of thought to another. If I decide to eat a pizza instead of a burger, well that's metanoia (or 'repent' in English although rarely defined as such anymore). In terms of salvation, if I decide to change my mind from NOT believing Christ paid for my sins TO believing He has paid for my sins, well, I've "repented" or metanoia-ed but it's single-use only. Therefore Spurgeon actually contradicts himself by saying selfsalvation is not actually selfsalvation by changing your mind (repent), because that's all salvation is. Yikes.

Then Spurgeon tells us how we're saved by "faith", we must have a "purity of life" and now lead a "godly and gracious life". Okay... that's no longer salvation by simply having believed (belief + 0), that's salvation by belief with other required actions (belief + 1). It doesn't matter if you want to lie and say it's God doing [that] in you, none of this is ever mentioned for any salvation verses; it couldn't be because it would exclude demographics from a free gift (someone who is mentally challenged can't perform a ridiculous amount of religious exercises and thus would be excluded). Furthermore like anything in life, learning God takes time like any other discipline so why would being a Christian be any different?

Notice the emphasis of THEIR faith; this will become important as "emphasis of self" is a major and recurring theme in most everything Spurgeon writes, as if it's a work of us and not God. So it's OUR faith where holiness lies and not Christ?! That's so Satanic.

1 Samuel 2:2 "There is no one holy like the LORD; there is no one besides you; there is no Rock like our God.

1 Samuel 2:2 ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἅγιος ὡς κύριος καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν δίκαιος ὡς ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔστιν ἅγιος πλὴν σοῦ

1 Samuel 2:2 אֵין־קָד֥וֹשׁ כַּיהוָ֖ה כִּ֣י אֵ֣ין בִּלְתֶּ֑ךָ וְאֵ֥ין צ֖וּר כֵּאלֹהֵֽינוּ׃

There is NOTHING holy about "OUR faith in Christ", only Christ Himself is holy, period!

So "sincere repentance" or "true repentance" or "genuine repentance" are phrases not found in the Bible, that should clue anyone who actually cares about scriptual accuracy to raise an eyebrow. As mentioned previously, the meaning of repent would be contradictory in the scope of salvation if it's an action we're to do to be saved. If believers continuously 'repented' they would be flipping states between being a believer and unbeliever rapidly. What's criminal is that Spurgeon knew the correct interpretation of metanoia in the Greek but opted for completely redefining the term into a whole process rather than a single-use action; not too dissimilar how Prolifers know about Genesis 2:7 but discard its meaning.

There's no grammar in the Greek implying that 'metanoia' (repent) is a weird continual process that a believer must do until their last breath, so Spurgeon's lying against the original language texts.

Finally, Spurgeon ultimately contradicts himself with: "Selfsalvation by his repentance is a hope ingrained in human nature" and "believers repent until their dying day", because 'repenting until your dying day' is an act of self-salvation by the very human nature Spurgeon was supposedly warning of.

A few key things to notice in what Spurgeon has said:

1. The emphasis of self, look at how many times "you / us / we" is repeated.


2. He wrongly assumes that we can never sin again as soon "we're born of God".


3. He wrongly assumes swearing automatically constitutes a sin.


4. He forgets that changing yourself "from unclean living" is an action an atheist can do, too.


5. He reverses the "old dragon" (Satan) to be obviously evil, and not masquerading like an angel of light.


6. He plays into Satan's second temptation (in Matthew) that public works or display has any merit.

Spurgeon thinks you stop sinning once you're saved and by proxy tacks on faith-keeping along with good works, all the while trying to sell it as 'grace'. I guess Spurgeon willingly ignored 1 John 1:8 and Genesis 2:25, and didn't think we needed to use 1 John 1:9 to be in God's System. Which is funny... because if there's one thing we as Christians should do until our last dying day is use 1 John 1:9 a thousand times a day, not some emotional 'repenting' procedure stoked by emotion, ego, religion, hallucinations etc.

1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1 John 1:8 ἐὰν εἴπωμεν ὅτι ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἔχομεν, ἑαυτοὺς πλανῶμεν καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἡμῖν.

Genesis 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Genesis 2:25 וַיִּֽהְי֤וּ שְׁנֵיהֶם֙ עֲרוּמִּ֔ים הָֽאָדָ֖ם וְאִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֖א יִתְבֹּשָֽׁשׁוּ׃

Yes our sins are paid for, but we will continue to sin because the human body has the old sin nature! Therefore when we do inevitably sin we go offline from God as would be expected. When we use 1 John 1:9 we become purified and refilled with the Spirit and we're back online... until we repeat the process, and then need to use 1 John 1:9 again like breathing.

Notice that God sanctioned nudity between Adam and the woman, so it was totally fine. Likewise swearing or "profane language" is totally fine in the right contexts as well whether it's for humour or stress: Christ swore at the Pharisees in Matthew 12:34. Saying otherwise is legalism.

Spurgeon also assumes Satan's operations always involve very visible and obvious 'evil' sins; he doesn't realize that Satan wants us to perform human good and moral sins, Satan himself does not like unclean living for HE MASQUERADES AS AN ANGEL OF LIGHT. So if the "old dragon" was evil in the way Spurgeon is describing this would contradict the Bible warning us he's as an angel of light and addictive to our old sin nature, emotion, thoughts... is it not the ultimate 4D chess move to feed people the idea that they NEED to be moral for salvation or that they NEED to follow legalism?

1 Corinthians 3:12, Matthew 7:23, 2 Corinthians 11:14-15, Matthew 4/Luke 4 temptations.... there are warnings that Satan will absolutely stunt our souls if we don't mature REGARDLESS IF WE'RE SINLESS post-death, because the issue isn't sin (which is paid for) it's maturing in Bible Doctrine. If God truly didn't want us to sin or flagellate ourselves, He'd either not have made us at all or made us so small that it wouldn't feasibly be possible (which is actually one of Satan's arguments: make them so small that all truth is never known and everyone remains happy automatons, that or break integrity of the divine essence box).

Every Christian needs to burn this into their retinas:

2 Corinthians 11:14-15 And no wonder for Satan himself is masquerading as an angel of light. Therefore it's not surprising if his agents are also masquerading as the agents of righteousness; whose end shall be according TO THEIR WORKS.

2 Corinthians 11:14-15 καὶ οὐ θαῦμα, αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ σατανᾶς μετασχηματίζεται εἰς ἄγγελον φωτός. οὐ μέγα οὖν εἰ καὶ οἱ διάκονοι αὐτοῦ μετασχηματίζονται ὡς διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης· ὧν τὸ τέλος ἔσται κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν.

AGENTS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. It does not say agents of sin like how Spurgeon is reversing them to be and just obsessing over. We also know they're big into works since that will be their end. It's important to view the Angelic Conflict as: divine good (from God) vs. dollarstore good (which comes from Satan and us). It's not good vs. evil, because if Satan were obviously evil there wouldn't BE an Angelic Conflict and there wouldn't be so many warnings against religion, being a modern-day pharisee, and the fact Satan isn't playing the obvious bad guy, but instead resides in every Church and recruits his own unbeliever pastor-teachers in every major religion. It's beyond me why depictions of Satan in traditional and orthodox Christianity always portray Satan as some evil pathetic creature rather than someone looking more attractive and beautiful than any known human being, because that's what 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 states.

Even in translation it's pretty obvious. God will slap 2 Timothy 2:15 at Spurgeon like a wall of bricks. A lot of people are accidentally saved because God made it so easy, but re-read Matthew 7:23, notice the focus isn't on atheists or Christians who eventually stopped believing and were saved (in fact 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 proves many atheists are saved but just don't inherit anything)... it's fixed squarely on people like Spurgeon or Sproul. King James VI & I who preceded Spurgeon wrote very vividly that Salvation is only by belief and not by some sort of transformed lifestyle and James knew the original languages very well himself (I couldn't contain my excitement when I read that as a teenager as it was always rarer than it should be to find anyone in Christendom correctly state the gospel).

We as Christians should be worried that Matthew 7:23 focuses on the atheist Christian (that could not even spare a microsecond to believe that salvation was free and paid-for without any lifestyle changes or self-emphasis), but 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 implies those who stopped believing and involved themselves in worldly pleasure are saved. All of the atheist Christians and carnal Christians who harassed and turned away people from Bible Doctrine are going to be in a much worse position than those in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. What's LESS than inheriting nothing? Probably having an empty soul with no personality, just like daddy Satan wants 🥰

Satan doesn't care what bodies we have (whether it's a biological body, interim body or ressurection body) if the soul behind them is successfully empty, small and forever braindead. Furthermore, the ressurection bodies [themselves] aren't in the image (mental) of Christ, Spurgeon apparently has no idea what that means. He also erroneously implies our soul gets turned off until the ressurection: the soul remains on in an interim body it never gets turned off.

Carefully notice the emphasis-of-self: US / WE / ME-ME-ME-ME. The action of 'saving souls' is immediately placed on us according to Spurgeon's theology. WE do not save souls, and if we think we do, we're probably banging a drum trying to loop people in religion, because God always sets the stage, not US.

Nothing in the spiritual life is of us if we're in God's system. God does the work if we're using 1 John 1:9.

THINK OF THE CHILDREN *insert plucking heartstrings*. Again Spurgeon wrongly assumes we're not all sinners.

A classic problem which Spurgeon employs that most religious people do, is lambast wealth without understanding what God means. If you place your wealth FIRST before Bible Doctrine, then the focus in your life becomes that wealth and not God. And this applies to anything, really. It's not wrong to have wealth or to even enjoy it if you also have Bible Doctrine. But without Christ's thinking ANY wealth of any kind when you've become a believer turns to ash without perpetual usage of 1 John 1:9.

There's no such thing as a "full surrender" and the Bible does not use that language -- I'd have loved to ask Spurgeon which verse he got that from because it doesn't exist. We're constantly unreliable and the more of Christ's thinking you get, the worse sin punches you in the face. Look at the Apostle Paul, he kept falling victim to a lot of real bad mental sins and ended up with a biological 'thorn' as both a reminder and also a way to accelerate growth: learning best always comes through adversity and so God uses the 'bad' for 'good'. Nobody wants a thorn but through that thorn Paul's soul became even larger than it could have without.

What? WHERE does it say we will be tried on the bema by our sincerity and uprightness? All of our works are dead, there is nothing we do that is 'sincere' or 'upright'.

1 Corinthians 3:12 now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

1 Corinthians 3:12 εἰ δέ τις ἐποικοδομεῖ ἐπὶ τὸν θεμέλιον χρυσίον, ἀργύριον, λίθους τιμίους, ξύλα, χόρτον, καλάμην,

The "wood / hay / stubble" are the things we've done ourselves. The jewels and metals are the divine works done while being in God's System (which one of the requirements is that these are something an atheist cannot do). And so far everything Spurgeon has described are processes and atheist could do without ever believing in Christ or ever learning Bible Doctrine.

This is the problem when you hallucinate yourself a scholar, it's irresistable to add to what you think is the Bible but never says.

Problem #1: there's not a single verse that says we are to "trust Christ" as an action for development (due to the issue of Matthew 15:8, you can "trust" who think is Christ but that can get you nowhere), this language is foreign to the Bible's original language text. There's nothing meritorious we do on our part. You could make an argument for Psalm 25:2's "בָ֭טַחְתִּי" (confidence), but if you have confidence or trust in God it's because you simply learned the Word without any meritorious actions prior. Spurgeon is making "trust" THE action to do rather than first learning the words Christ spoke.

Problem #2: notice how many times Spurgeon repeats "obey/obdient" in conjunction with trusting. It's very common for works-salvation people to bludgeon you with OBEY OBEY much like repent. You can "trust", you can "obey", you can do "good works", all of this is useless merchandise towards God (1 Corinthians 3:15). Furthermore God is very serious about consent, if a person doesn't want to consent to Him or His Word, it's allowed as we have volition. It goes both ways because God will also allow you to believe in a rotten gospel like Spurgeon's if you so desire.

Problem #3: the "obey" Spurgeon is talking about is a vindictive religious one that requires works. You MUST ALSO obey -- or else! Again, there is no verse that ever says "you MUST ALSO obey", it just does not exist. Why add words into God's mouth He never said? Now God does say we should love Him in the first commandment which includes using 1 John 1:9... but how many Christians bother to do that?

When the Bible talks about "obedience", notice it's in conjunction with the Holy Spirit, implying, we are to use 1 John 1:9 so we're refilled. Entirely conditional on our part if we want to or not. Nothing to do with salvation, nothing to do with OUR actions, nothing to do with works or lifestyle changes, of course.

Acts 5:32 And we are His witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Spirit, who God has given to them that obey Him.

Acts 5:32 καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν μάρτυρες τῶν ῥημάτων τούτων, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὃ ἔδωκεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς πειθαρχοῦσιν αὐτῷ.

Ephesians 5:18 and don't be drunk with wine where there's debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit

Ephesians 5:18 καὶ μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ, ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία, ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν πνεύματι,

Here we go again.

The Bible never uses the phrase "true Christian". You're either a Christian the moment you believed and became trichotomous (which is permanent even if you stop believing as per Luke 8:12), or you're not, and you remain dichotomous and don't want to believe Christ paid for your sins. Every denomination will use the term "true Christian" as a fulcrum to challenge various things they don't like: and notice it's always used to measure visible works or emotion that they see. Well atheists can replicate everything these "true Christians" are doing (probably even more proficiently I might add), so obviously what makes someone a Christian is not a physical action that can be seen.

Matthew 7:22-23 MANY will say to me on that day: "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in YOUR NAME and in YOUR NAME cast out demons and in YOUR NAME perform many super-miracles? Then I will profess to them: "I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work the lawlessness"

Matthew 7:22-23 πολλοὶ ἐροῦσίν μοι ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, κύριε κύριε, οὐ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι ἐπροφητεύσαμεν, καὶ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι δαιμόνια ἐξεβάλομεν, καὶ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι δυνάμεις πολλὰς ἐποιήσαμεν; 23 καὶ τότε ὁμολογήσω αὐτοῖς ὅτι οὐδέποτε ἔγνων ὑμᾶς· ἀποχωρεῖτε ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ οἱ ἐργαζόμενοι τὴν ἀνομίαν.

Exodus 20:7 You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God: for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless that takes his name in vain."

Exodus 20:7 לֹ֥א תִשָּׂ֛א אֶת־שֵֽׁם־יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ לַשָּׁ֑וְא כִּ֣י לֹ֤א יְנַקֶּה֙ יְהוָ֔ה אֵ֛ת אֲשֶׁר־יִשָּׂ֥א אֶת־שְׁמ֖וֹ לַשָּֽׁוְא׃ פ

Matthew 23:5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men...

Matthew 23:5 πάντα δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν ποιοῦσιν πρὸς τὸ θεαθῆναι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις...

Notice that the majority of people complaining to God are those who are religious that sold various things in God's name when He had nothing to do with it? So if you have the balls to say "true Christians / sincere Christians / genuine Christians XYZ" and sell that in God's name, you're going to be right behind the people in Matthew 7:22.

Again he's trivializing belief (πιστεύων) with a fulcrum just like "true Christian". Nowhere in the Bible does it distinguish different flavours of "believing Christ paid for your sins", you either do or you don't! And once you do, it's permanent (Ephesians 1:13). I would argue with Spurgeon that it's a more dangerous condition to add conditions to the Cross because then you end up right in Matthew 7:22 & Matthew 15:8, just who did Spurgeon think Christ was talking about?!

And wow, "a state of grace", so Grace is a variable STATE now? This concept and wording is not even found in the Bible.

Acts 15:11 But through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we believe (then are) saved, even as they.

Acts 15:11 ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ πιστεύομεν σωθῆναι καθ᾽ ὃν τρόπον κἀκεῖνοι.

Notice, just believe (which through Grace by Christ) we're saved. It's not a variable state.

These are all actions apart from ONLY belief; you can "live by Christ" (or whatever your imagination thinks that is) all you want, but if you haven't believed Christ paid for your sins WITHOUT adding to it, you've not believed He paid for them. It's not a payment if there's a catch, that would be a loan. There is also nothing immoral about earning profit or being rich, and in fact God often rewards believers with wealth: wasn't King David pretty rich? Rich in doctrine and rich in physical wealth.

Spurgeon is admitting the very thing he's trying to 'warn' of: adding to the Cross.

While the Cross has paid for all of our sin (through omniscience), there's no "putting" or "placing" of this sin. We will continue to always sin (1 John 1:8, 1 John 1:10). Spurgeon immediately devolves in using "trust" and "accept" again, none of which are ever used by the Bible. We are unreliable through the old sin nature so it's never : trusting / accepting / inviting / making / doing / putting / placing.

Notice the return of emphasis of self again. When WE preach WE have to say, "you you you you / me me me me" etc. Where's God in all of this? If you self-elect yourself as a pastor and make all of the work about yourself, then you cut God out of the picture. And anyone who self-elects themselves as a pastor, God will honour that on the bema and measure you against all of the pastors He ordained vs. self-elected ones, and you will get completely obliterated: God often gives us what we want when we scream for it, even when it's wrong (look at the Israelites in the desert). Pastor-teachers are judged to a higher standard than all of those who are under a pastor-teacher, a normal person would exude extreme caution before THEY appoint themselves as a pastor-teacher or teach a completely backwards gospel. It's never 'you', it's always God, and if YOU put yourself in front of God you'll regret it forever.

There's nothing in any salvation verse emphasizing that "we're guilty", it should be obvious that everyone has an old sin nature (take one look outside your window and see how people behave), it's never questioned. Guilt is also a sin in and of itself, so there's never any "feeling guilty for your sins" otherwise you're just sinning over your sins. And finally, there's no 'trusting', not a single verse for salvation ever says "you must TRUST Christ FOR salvation".

By the time Spurgeon finally decides to use "by faith in Jesus Christ" he then reverses it again by saying WE obtain full forgiveness. Okay... WE don't 'obtain' anything as obtaining is a meritorious act, salvation is always non-meritorious. HE gifts us salvation through belief and as a result we possess salvation by Him (1 Thessalonians 5:9 shouldn't be translated as 'obtain'), not ourselves.

I've no idea what Spurgeon means by "FULL forgiveness", this doesn't exist in any verse and has nothing to do with the Bible as far as I'm concerned. It would be pretty stupid to challenge it saying there's half-forgiveness, or quarter-forgiveness.

Famous last words as Spurgeon himself has indeed mangled the Gospel enough to make Satan blush, and then lies saying he hasn't (classic). So our FAITH is the cause of God, too? That makes no sense as then we no longer have volition and is skirting dangerously close to calvinism. Our belief is purely ours which is why it's our decision to make or break. Spurgeon mangles by adding "accept" once again. You can "accept" Christ all you want and not BELIEVE He paid for your sins with no strings attached, and therefore not be saved: I'm sure the people in Matthew 7:22 'accepted' who they thought was Christ every day and night but they never believed He paid for their sins without strings. This is WHY the Bible only ever uses "believe".

And there we have it.
Spurgeon's gospel of works where he reverses grace requiring invisible strings:

1. Claiming that "going back to the world" voids salvation, despite Spurgeon just stating the thief on the cross was saved (that's both simultaneously lying and being hypocritical without realizing it)
2. Changing believing in Jesus Christ to TRUSTING in Jesus Christ (overriding what the BIBLE says)
3. Adding works by demanding you have to be "sincere" which is a meritorious action

He we go again with the "true believers", you won't find this vocabulary anywhere in the Bible. So why use it? Saying there's a special grading of believers who have believed Jesus is the Christ & paid for their sins is demanding works: you've either believed at some point or you haven't, that is completely separate from post-salvation maturity. Enforcing that you have to 'loathe sin' means you've not learned any Bible Doctrine, because the only way you actually understand how sin negatively impacts your life and everyone around you is by the slow process of learning the Bible. Sitting there loathing won't accomplish anything and loathing isn't learning; loathing itself would be considered a sin -- for if you were sinless you wouldn't loathe anything. This is NOT something that instantenously occurs in a person regardless of how much they may convince themselves that they "loathe sin" with obviously 'bad' things. Which by the way: reversing the gospel and adding works but saying that it's 'only faith', is sinful. Not using 1 John 1:9 is sinful. Loathing is sinful. Hating is sinful.

Yes, even the act of loathing and hating sin, is a sin in itself. How's that for a paradox?

Again Sprugeon reverts to using trust, it's never 'trust' or 'accept' or 'invite' or 'feel guilty'. As Paul says, we'll always be sinning in our earthen vessels, and we will always sin.

I hate to say it, but if Spurgeon was telling people to "trust" in Christ without believing, and then telling them they had to magically gaslight themselves into thinking their lifestyles were transformed to human legalism, they're not going to be saved. They've failed to do the will of the Father and instead still INSIST you need to perform works all under the guise of not performing works.

And the final most greivous thing is, Spurgeon claims he himself is bringing "souls to Christ" and not *Christ* bringing souls to Christ. Which is funny because prior Spurgeon said: "~ but the man’s faith, and even that is the Holy Spirit’s gift". So if our faith is the Holy Spirit's gift, does that mean Spurgeon is now claiming our faith is actually Spurgeon's gift if he's the one bringing in the souls? Ouch. Contradictions and hypocrisy galore.

And yeah, there's still a lot of emphasis of the self "I have, I have / me me me".

ME ME ME ME ME ME YOU YOU YOU YOU US US US US WE WE WE WE WE, but never Him. 🙄

Renouncing works is ironically, a work in itself. There are no verses saying there are different grades of holiness in each believer. This just goes back to 1 Samuel 2:2 which I've already quoted, did Spurgeon ever read 1 Samuel 2:2?

If you think you become holier over time, well, that's not only a work but it's self-righteousness incarnate. I have no words for anyone who thinks they're holy or become holier over time. The only thing that changes over time is your soul: are you getting Christ's thinking in your soul? Or are you saying that you can actually be holy. There is no "trusting" of any kind, we're completely hopeless so the only thing we can do is believe and then live & learn the Bible in God's system.

I don't think Spurgeon understands 2 Peter 3:18, we're growing in the grace [of God]. I have no idea what growing "in love with grace" means as that's affixing something of which there's no verses or Biblical basis to support... unless you're randomly throwing grace around and seeing what sticks or sounds nice WHILE not understanding what grace means!

Spurgeon is also claiming that by knowing God's laws searching OUR hearts is a prerequisite. Well for starters there are no verses for searching our hearts (once again it's nonsense vocabulary), and secondly searching anything is a work. Effectively this reverses Hebrews 4:12, because it's the Word of God that acts as a critic to our mind (heart), we don't act as a critic to God's Word which is essentially what Spurgeon is claiming with US doing 'the searching'. Ah yes reversing what the Bible says, a hallmark of demon influence.

Saying that our sense of unworthiness causes us to delight in anything makes zero sense; which by the way 'sensing unworthiness' is a work as well once again. Spurgeon's usage of "the royal heart of God" has no basis in any verses, I've seen some people reference this to 1 Peter 2:9, but that's not what the verse means.

Again with the "true believer" and "trusting". But we have a new one, "relying". There is no relying on Christ, there's not a single verse that says we are to rely on Christ. Again, the people in Matthew 15:8 most certainly are 'relying' on who they thought was Christ while simultaneously doing everything they can NOT to be in God's system.

A lot of Christians have the wrong Christ and instead want Satan's replacement; they're perfectly happy with this replacement throughout their whole lives. So what good did all of that "trusting" and "relying" and "inviting" and "committing" do? God is very clear about this: LEARN AND LIVE THE BIBLE in His system which requires using 1 John 1:9 a thousand or more times a day. You can trust and rely and commit all you want and never live and learn the Bible.

2 Timothy 3:7 always "learning", and never able to come into the knowledge of the truth.

2 Timothy 3:7 πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα.

Spurgeon once again claims there are different grades of faith (which is works of course, if it's anything more than only believe).

In fact, Spurgeon throws so many adjectives that we have all of these "faiths" none of which are mentioned in the Bible or have any Biblical basis:

1. true faith
2. spiritual faith
3. truly believe
4. important truth
5. really believe

Ironically the only valid one Spurgeon mentioned was "dead faith" which he himself was afflicted with: because in James 1 & 2, the believer who's on standby and carnal has dead faith as a result of not using 1 John 1:9 and being in God's System.

There's also no emotion tied to believing for salvation (Spurgeon himself even said that but now he's contradicting himself by creating various faith grades and advising you need to FEEL being touched by every nerve). So tying a host of 'gradiented faiths' to grace/savlation or whatever Spurgeon is trying to do, makes no sense.

And here we go, Spurgeon says believing is NOT ENOUGH. It's even conditional now, because we CAN'T possibly be in the same condition of those who are atheists 🙄... even though atheists usually are more moral and sane than Christians anyways. Look at all of the horrendous Prolifers dripping with uncontrollable malice, you wouldn't want to be in the same room as them.

You can still be a believer and no longer have faith or neglect to use 1 John 1:9 in God's System (dead faith), that's WHY the Bible is emphasizing that for crying out loud.

EVERYONE'S sins have already been paid-for on the cross regardless if they're believers or unbelievers (it's finished), "removal of your sin" makes no sense in the context of salvation, you can't remove what is already paid (unless we're talking about the constant usage of 1 John 1:9 to get refilled after sinning which Spurgeon is not and ignored his entire life). Furthermore, believing is just the way God uses for us to say 'yes' to the gift of salvation. Our belief is not the replacement to BIBLE DOCTRINE, which Spurgeon is implying.

It is in fact possible for unbelievers to operate on Bible Doctrine, because all Bible Doctrine is the default truth -- God authored what is unequivocally truth. I would actually argue I see more unbelievers than believers who unintentionally know Bible Doctrine without realizing it, Christendom is getting [that] bad...

Again with the "true" this "true" that. None of these adjectives are used in the Greek. You've either believed for salvation or you haven't (single use!). That's it. And whether or not you decide to continue believing in God for maturity AFTER salvation is up to you.

Asserting, proving, for profit, necessity -- all of these are works.

It's so bad for Spurgeon to cyclically repeat all of these adjectives as if they're something profound or even Biblical, when they couldn't be any more demonically influenced.

Spurgeon tries to spin that the things WE do "he / he / he / he, me / me / me me" are justified if they're in "the faith that makes them live". This is still greviously misunderstanding what the Bible is saying. WE don't do anything, if God uses us it's HE who is doing the work. And again... it is NOT necessary for God to do work in you for salvation or for upkeeping salvation, because we all start as spiritual babies. A spiritual baby cannot have divine work done through them: for Christ's thinking is still vacant in that person. A brain surgeon can't successfully perform an operation 'just because they've decided to have a lifestyle change in careers for a microsecond.'

In this instance Spurgeon just cannot separate his own personal good works from God Works (which never, ever, have anything to do with salvation ANYWAYS).

Lots of Satanic reversal to unpack here:

1. Belief is the catalyst with rapport with God, so of course you can't please God without it. If you don't believe in God or don't believe in His System or 1 John 1:9, of course you're not going to have a vertical relationship. Without belief you actually can't do anything in life: if you don't believe it's appropriate to get out of bed, well, you're staying in bed indefinitely.


2. You can be an unbeliever and do all of the works Spurgeon or any Lordship Salvationist has ever done.


3. "abiding in unbelief" Spurgeon is implying they've lost salvation, this is false.


4. The emphasis on the rich man wasn't because he was rich, but because of his mental attitude. You can still be rich and be saved, there's not a single verse that says material wealth nullifies your salvation, as mentioned before I think Spurgeon forgets King David had riches and wealth beyond what anyone living now will ever see.


5. Christ was being sarcastic with the eye of the needle, which is why it ended with GOD all things are possible. There are no difficulties with salvation because all we have to do is believe which is akin to a vote, really.

A big problem of Sprugeon (and Orthodox Christianity) is ignoring the literary devices employed by the Bible, yes... Christ uses: sarcasm, euphemisms, irony, humour... without seeing that you read every little thing literally like in James 1 & 2 where James is making a mock quote of the very works salvation people of whom use his mock quote to prove their position. 😂

You have to have a lot of 'faith' in translations and cherry picked context like Spurgeon to believe every article in the English language is analogous to Ancient Greek and Hebrew. It's not. I would like to reiterate the fact that if you love the Word, should it not be natural to start studying the original words Christ spoke?

It's nothing but pure arrogance to rely on English translations as your basis for measuring Biblical statements or truths.

Hebrews 11:3-6 (KJV) Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Hebrews 11:3-6 Πίστει νοοῦμεν κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας ῥήματι θεοῦ, εἰς τὸ μὴ ἐκ φαινομένων τὸ βλεπόμενον γεγονέναι. Πίστει πλείονα θυσίαν Ἄβελ παρὰ Κάϊν προσήνεγκεν τῷ θεῷ, δι᾽ ἧς ἐμαρτυρήθη εἶναι δίκαιος, μαρτυροῦντος ἐπὶ τοῖς δώροις αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ δι᾽ αὐτῆς ἀποθανὼν ἔτι λαλεῖ. Πίστει Ἐνὼχ μετετέθη τοῦ μὴ ἰδεῖν θάνατον, καὶ οὐχ ηὑρίσκετο διότι μετέθηκεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεός. πρὸ γὰρ τῆς μεταθέσεως μεμαρτύρηται εὐαρεστηκέναι τῷ θεῷ· χωρὶς δὲ πίστεως ἀδύνατον εὐαρεστῆσαι, πιστεῦσαι γὰρ δεῖ τὸν προσερχόμενον θεῷ, ὅτι ἔστιν καὶ τοῖς ἐκζητοῦσιν αὐτὸν μισθαποδότης γίνεται.

"δεῖ" here is probably better translated as necessary; by using "must" Spurgeon is kind of making it such that everyone MUST do this... well... God isn't going to hold you up at gunpoint for anything: if you want Him it's necessary to believe... if you don't, you're free to go on your way.

There's a few things Spurgeon forgot to mention:

1. Hebrews is not a book for salvation, it's a book for believers post-salvation.


2. Notice every time it mentions a believer, it was only ever believing GOD would do the work. There's nothing about "sincere repentance" or any of the self-efforts Spurgeon is talking about.


3. Spurgeon is exclusively living off of the English translation, and quotes many translation issues inherent to the English text (but I suppose even if he wasn't, he'd still find a way to fit his beliefs into the original languages rather than allowng the original languages to speak for themselves).


4. Cain offered up vegetables whereas Abel offered up his thinking. Spurgeon wants us to offer vegetables by virtue of some spotaneous 'lifestyle change' rather than studying the Bible to gradually transform our thinking.

Don't you think if you loved God and loved His words you would actively perform an exegesis in the original language texts?

As far as salvation verses are concerned -- of which the book of Hebrews IS NOT -- there is no "coming to God" (προσερχόμενον τῷ θεῷ) for salvation, because that's a meritorious action. There is also no "MUST believe XYZ" or "MUST accept XYZ" as Spurgeon is claiming... for to believe anything other than Christ paying for your sins is adding to salvation. And trivializing believing as "REALLY BELIEVE" is adding works.

As already mentioned, the book of Hebrews is not for salvation (it's actually one of the most theologically complicated books in the entire Bible!), you have to be a spiritual moron to conflate it as such. Seeking or coming are works.

It's never "we must", WE WE WE WE, ME ME ME ME. It's He does. He does it all, not us.

The "cost" to the believer is their thinking since there's nothing else God is after, He's infinite so He doesn't need our vegetables or creations (which He created the basis for anyways so it's like giving God back what He already created that He wouldn't have created anyways if it weren't for us). If God's System is unpopular with 99% of Christendom how much more unpopular will it be to everyone else. Getting Christ's thinking in yours is extremely overwhelming as it's supernatural information that biology was never really 'meant' to handle which is why your IQ gets boosted over time as you continue to use 1 John 1:9. Satan's argument is that it should be impossible to learn Bible while being in a human body (one of the reasons why Christ took on the role of becoming the God-Man to prove otherwise), therefore your physical brain is going to have a lot of growing pains learning this information. Of course if you never grow up in Bible Doctrine like Spurgeon you think anything bad in your life is the cost and never use Bible Doctrine to apply what you're supposed to be learning from that adversity.

Notice the emphasis of self again, "WE MUST WE MUST WE MUST". There is no "we must" otherwise that's works. If *WE* must do something (other than deciding YES to 'believe Christ paid for your sins'), then it's no longer 100% Christ. There is no we.

• Diligently seeking God is a work
• Finding Christ is a work
• "Really come to God" is a work

I'm not sure what "great gospel reward" even means; we're not REWARDED salvation, it's GIFTED to us. Spurgeon says "grace" in so many different strange situations implying he really doesn't understand the meaning; Grace has become a flavour word for Spurgeon to be sprinkled in everything and anything.

Here we go again, uprightness and honesty are works, and Spurgeon once again uses the adverb REALLY, to challenge different grades of pleasing. So using this as a justification for us pleasing God is completely wrong, did Spurgeon forget to read about Cain and Abel? It's not about what YOU do, but your mentality towards God. If you want to make your works count and claim they're from God and righteous, you've completely missed the plot. The majority of the time while you use 1 John 1:9 and God uses you, you won't even know how or in what ways until maybe years later or maybe not even until you're dead and face-to-face with Christ.

Uprightness and honesty are works; and I bet more atheists are upright and honest than Christians.

There it is again: ON OUR PART. We have no part in this.

And Spurgeon once again makes belief trivialized by establishing that there's a difference between "fullest belief" and "belief". And there's also 'trusting' again. If we can barely trust ourselves, how is using "trust" as a constant going to work for our spiritual lives?

It's required that we constantly audit ourselves because of how unreliable we are. Look at how emotion can easily derail our logical thought patterns.

Bingo, here we go. Spurgeon unwittingly makes the notion of having to continually have faith a work requirement TO 'continually' be saved. Spurgeon forgot to read Christ's explanation of different believer classes, and also the fact that 'faith' just acts as the method TO ask to be saved. Believe once, that's it, it's irrevocable which is why you should really consider before doing it. Faith-keeping on the other hand is a meritorious action.

If faith-keeping were a thing there'd be copious amounts of verses describing rapidly flipping through "saved" and "unsaved" states but there aren't. It also morphs God into a bully.

God wants a 100% for all to believe including the demons (John 6:40). Saying otherwise is contradicting God's will for everyone. It's funny how works salvation people claim they're for salvation when they make it convoluted as possible and cheer on others who don't get saved; the exact antithesis of God's thinking.

Here we go with the "trusting" again, need I say more?

A "lasting faith" would be classified as good works, because, YOU need to maintain [that] faith. Rather than just believing Christ paid for your sins to vote YES to God and permanently be sealed and saved, regardless if you stop believing.

Furthermore, what would it even matter if you believed God existed for your entire life on earth, but believed in the most horrible doctrines. The pharisees had "lasting faith" in God until they died, Satan has "lasting faith" that God exists. But if you don't believe Christ paid for sins without works, then you're not saved. And if you don't get Christ's thinking in your thinking, you're forever a baby Christian. 🍼

Again Spurgeon makes sin an issue when it's already paid-for. What malady of sin will there be when the cross is already finished?

This also disguises the fact of why God even established it so that we're all born with an old sin nature by default (which was very deliberate): so that we learn Him unlocked. If you can't sin that's a kind of lock, you don't truly know the ramifications of sin: which is why the angels are observing us to fill in the gaps they can't experience themselves. And any sin that does occur: when you live and learn Bible it all gets piped into a learning experience.

To deny the perpetual existence of the old sin nature and ignore the sins you WILL be doing through self-gaslighting, is completely bypassing the whole point.

Incorrect Doctrines

Problem #1, 'hating' something is actually a sin. So just like before Spurgeon makes a double contradiction of saying you have to sin by hating sin... well if you HATE sin you're sinning!

Problem #2, you can't hate what you don't know about, only hallucinate. A lot of what Christians (and Spurgeon) imagine as sin are the real obvious things, and a lot of sin you don't learn about until you have enough Bible Doctrine TO understand it. Not using 1 John 1:9 is a sin because being offline for a prolonged period of time causes spiritual atrophy and also violates the first commandment.

Problem #3: it makes no difference if we 'willingly acknowledge' sin or not, that has no effect on our perception or our defense to it. Of course Spurgeon substitutes EMOTION (hating it) as the cure for sin instead of BIBLE DOCTRINE. This feeds back into problem #2 because you can't hate what you don't know, only imagine.

Spurgeon is obsessing over his interpretation of bruising, it's weird like a funhouse mirror. None of the pain Christ felt and continues to feel, will we even come close to feeling because newsflash: we will never be conscious of a spiritual death like that, it's so bad that the maximum physical pain you could feed your body wouldn't make a dent to what Christ felt and continues to feel. And notice how he reversed sin to PAST TENSE just like how he substitutes unbeliever with sinner, as if only an unbeliever can commit things HE imagines are sins. This isn't something a person with Bible Doctrine would say in a million years: you'd either have to be an atheist or under chronic demon influence.

Also the real 'torment' is what you know, not what you feel. This is why words (can) hurt more than physical damage.

A few problems:

1. God won't hear our prayers if we don't use 1 John 1:9
• The only caveat to this is, if you 'ask the ceiling' for the truth while you're still ignorant: then God sets up the stage for you to get it. Of course you're still free to ignore it once the 'package' is delivered.


2. You can only be taught when you're in God's system under a right-pastor teacher (unless you ARE a pastor-teacher learning the orignal languages)

There's not a single verse that says "trust in grace". The Grace of God exists as absolute truth; He doesn't need OUR trusting of anything. It doesn't do anything for Him (Isaiah 64:6) and it certainly won't do anything for us if we say "you have to trust in XYZ" and then forget that that salvation is just to believe once. Take a shot every time Spurgeon says "trust" or "WE must" and you'll be blackout drunk.

Also because 'trusting' is a work, 'trusting in the Grace of God' is no different than 'trusting in works'. Again, all of the religious people throughout the ages are ALL trusting in who they think is God, it never does them any good.

There is no "confidence in Christ" for salvation, there is no "accepting the proclamation" for salvation. None of these are the Bible's internal vocabulary and they're all works emphasizing our involvement. Spurgeon has also made it very clear to us that in order to accept/trust/hope this 'free' pardon, you must have a changed lifestyle otherwise you're not a "true Christian". 🙄

Another problem with Spurgeon's wording is how he's viewing it from mankind "accepting" his convoluted idea of salvation rather than GOD gifting us salvation, from Spurgeon's perspective the emphasis always remains on man rather than God.

Your eyes should always be on God, not yourself or others.

Huh?! It was always believe once (for salvation), even in the old covenant.

The atoning blood isn't literal blood, so if there were a generation of men believing that, they're definitely not 'eusebos' ("godly") then, for anyone eusebos would know the blood is an allusion to Christ's thinking: which is why He didn't physically die while paying for our sins. I have strong suspicions that Spurgeon is inferring that the 'atoning blood' is literal blood. 😞

Notice the extreme emphasis of self again; Spurgeon redirects all of this as being a work of ourselves rather than God. There is no "heart" or anything emotional and reading the Bible without God's system and you'll just be wasting your time. With 1 John 1:9, God directs what you should/shouldn't be studying when you ask Him, God directs where you should be living, God directs your occupation... but according to Spurgeon it's US who directs ourselves.

Obviously being in God's system is voluntary, but so few want His system and would rather have an emotional self-righteous journey like one Spurgeon is describing. You have to really gaslight yourself to the maximum to think you're permanently sinless after salvation. Sin also means you make mistakes, and how many mistakes has Spurgeon (whose supposedly sinless), made?

*ding ding ding*, it's obvious we're permanently sinful in these imperfect bodies.

Once again the focus is one again shifted to emphasis-of-the-self, me me me:

• YOU are going to
• Say to YOURSELF
• I WILL try to

There's no such thing as "preaching earnestly", this vocabulary doesn't even exist in the Bible. Furthermore, you need to ask God whether or not the stage is set for you to be a pastor: which would require you to become something even beyond a scholar.

We're actually warned NOT to witness unless God sets the stage (1 peter 1:12). If you go out and preach to people blindly just to force the Gospel down peoples' throats when they don't want it, it violates the following principles:

• God brings the people to the messenger, the messenger doesn't go to the people on their own accord.
• God always sets the stage for the believer, if YOU force and do things YOU want to do, it may not be the right course of action.
• God ALLOWS people to reject Him; if they don't want Him, force-feeding won't change that and in fact make it worse.

It's also bizarre Spurgeon insists on "blessing" for us to witness; when you're using 1 John 1:9 in God's System you're living God's blessing 24/7.

God does not and will not force people to believe if they don't want it, it would be a sin and a violation of volition for God to demand people to believe. Yet, this is the theme Spurgeon is implying "force feed them the Bible even if they don't want it!"

Secondly, once again he can't help himself to using "accept". God won't hear us if we're not refilled, and there are many warnings about this:

Psalm 66:18 (65:18) If I exhibit sin in my heart (mind), the Lord will not hear me

Psalm 66:18 (65:18) אָ֭וֶן אִם־רָאִ֣יתִי בְלִבִּ֑י לֹ֖א יִשְׁמַ֣ע׀ אֲדֹנָֽי׃

Ephesians 5:18 and don't be drunk with wine where there's debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit

Ephesians 5:18 καὶ μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ, ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία, ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν πνεύματι

So you can faith this and faith that, but if you've not done 1 John 1:9 you're dead, and it's dead faith. This is the resulting problem when you melt post-salvation functions with salvation itself.

Again with emphasizing us WE DO, WE WE WE US US US. There's no such thing as "true confience (in God)". Also Spurgeon's analogy is bunk, there IS such a thing as too much salt in cooking, just as it's possible to over-study the Bible and go insane. God's actual point was that EVEN A LITTLE BIT of salt, salts the whole world -- just as the death of one man paid for everyone, the learning and living of Bible of one person can bless the whole world.

I also like how Spurgeon outrights admits it with "your work", so it's works humans are doing and not God's divine work.

Again Spurgeon replaces belief with 'trust'.

There's not a single verse in the Bible that says "TRUE godliness" and not a single verse that says we have SPONTANEOUS change. If God wanted any of these things, He would have created us with perfect knowledge and sinlessness in advanced (it's actually one of Satan's arguments that God should have done things this way). Learning the Word takes time. As Christ is our prototype to follow, He learned the Word through the Spirit until He was mature enough for the cross; Christ didn't just get born and go to the cross immediately from a "spontaneously changed" nature.

Nuance nuance nuance. Spurgeon isn't paying attention or asking the questions WHY God set up the things that they are, instead opting for a path of least resistance to his own emotion and bias to what he thinks is accurate. We always have to self-audit and especially ask God 'the big questions': if you don't ask He's not going to respond to things you didn't ask for, else that'd be forcing.

Satanic Reversal

Here are a few dedicated quotes I encountered where Spurgeon employs full-blown Satanic reversal, it's quite shocking. He's contradicting even plain English translation when the translations get it correct.

It's shocking how many Prolifer parallels there are with Spurgeon, he reverses Genesis by saying life comes THROUGH Eve rather than life coming through God Himself. Life (and especially not soul-life) does not come through Eve, life comes through the breath of lives (נִשְׁמַ֣ת חַיִּ֑ים), which is God *ding ding ding*, or more specifically Jesus Christ.

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve (חַוָּ֑ה) because she was the mother of all living.

Genesis 3:20 וַיִּקְרָ֧א הָֽאָדָ֛ם שֵׁ֥ם אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ חַוָּ֑ה כִּ֛י הִ֥וא הָֽיְתָ֖ה אֵ֥ם כָּל־חָֽי׃

Genesis 7:22 (KJV) All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Genesis 7:22 כֹּ֡ל אֲשֶׁר֩ נִשְׁמַת־ר֙וּחַ חַיִּ֜ים בְּאַפָּ֗יו מִכֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר בֶּחָֽרָבָ֖ה מֵֽתוּ׃

Being the progenitor does not mean you're also the breath of lives. Both Adam and Eve's biology is now gone, so life cannot possibly come through something that's now deceased.

This is once again adding emphasis on the biology and making the zygote magical. Spurgeon is pulling the same thing as to how Catholics worship Mary or how Texans worship zygotes. Yes Adam and Eve are our biological progenitors, but these bodies are practically just puppets... that's not soul life. Just as Spurgeon couldn't refrain from adding emphasis to Christ's biological body rather than His Doctrine: it's not the body it's Christ's soul. This is also one of Satan's arguments: that the body should have merit, which is why he placed so much emphasis on his superior angelic body. What good are bodies if the soul is rotten?

1. Spurgeon demonically scrambles "the battle is the Lord's" as "the battle is AGAINST Christ (in us)". Why would the battle be 'against' Christ (that can almost be interpreted as if Christ is actually in the wrong so the battle itself is against Him), there's nothing Satan can do to 'hurt' God, except attempt to hurt us (of which Satan believes God will somehow stop smiling the more he hurts us). Everything WE do causes a mess, which is exactly why the battle is the Lord's and not us. And even if we correct the Satanic reversed portions, that still makes no sense because WE'RE unreliable, there is no emphasis of self or battles of our own. While Christ does use us, Him dwelling in US isn't a requirement for Him 'to battle' Satan. If we didn't exist and it was just Satan, there'd be nothing for God to do.
• It's true that the trial is Satan against God, and whether or not we choose Him: but the battle is always the Lord's and never us, regardless if Christ is or isn't dwelling in us at any given moment.

1 Samuel 17:47 ~ for the battle is the LORD's, and He will give you into our hands.

1 Samuel 17:47 יְהוָ֑ה כִּ֤י לַֽיהוָה֙ הַמִּלְחָמָ֔ה וְנָתַ֥ן אֶתְכֶ֖ם בְּיָדֵֽנוּ׃ ~

2. Spurgeon has reversed it again: Satan does care ("trouble") about unbelievers because we all start out as unbelievers who can potentially get interested in Bible Doctrine, and interest in Bible Doctrine means Satan is losing the trial: Satan believes we won't choose Christ and instead choose religion or flat out atheism. THIS IS WHY there's a constant ideological 'fog' over everyone, and believer and unbeliever alike remain as zombies. Satan is constantly using unbelievers and Christians. Why else do they almost always perfectly mimic "why would a loving God XYZ" at any evil in the world, or, why else does religion so perfectly reverse Bible Doctrine each and every time? Religion in the world is a huge market, and most Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists (...) never ultimately want to believe Christ paid for their sins: and like the demonically controlled Christians just obsess over "good works" as having merit.


3. And of course Spurgeon immediately goes on fixating about sin again and not "sinning as we like". Did Spurgeon not read 1 John 1:10 and Hebrews 10:26? Hypnotizing yourself to "stop sinning" through demon assistance for things YOU THINK are sins and defining a human personality for God, now means you're failing over to sins you probably can't 'see' due to said lack of Bible Doctrine (sin is like a hose, force yourself to stop sinning in one area and another part pops up). Christians use human thinking to convince themselves they've stopped sinning or are somehow 'different' from others due to their newfound self-righteous attitude (of course some eventually fold because it's a lot of mental strain to keep up the charade or the religious high wears off). It's such a human way to view God. Is God's infinity actually finity then? Is Satan actually going to be an obvious bad guy we want? Is Christ's non-physical payment on the cross actually a loan?

Look at how many WE WE WE WE WEs are in there. WE need to do this, WE need to do that. But never Him. 🙄 There is nothing "we" can do, and assuming if Spurgeon could actually properly say "the battle is the Lord's" (which even that was too difficult apparently), what good would a human-centric fantasy of "resisting Satan" have if you don't know God or know Bible Doctrine? Saying you're not afraid of Satan does absolutely nothing. And Satan will even cheer you on for that -- AS LONG AS YOUR SOUL REMAINS EMPTY.

1. There's no such thing as "really living" or "genuine living" or "sincerely living", these prependisms just serve to create a virtual state so people like Spurgeon can squeak in the fact you still have to do works while LYING and saying they're not.


2. It's kind of curious to say "a Christ" rather than THE Christ, why should He ever be trivialized, there's only one Christ (unless we're considering Satan's counterfeits).


3. Why would OUR rejoicing and joy be full of glory??? Only God gives the glory, we generate none of our own but according to Spurgeon we can by works 😂. Do you know how many verses there are talking about the glory OF GOD?

John 17:22 And the glory which You gave me I have given them; that they may be (like) one, even as We are (like) one

John 17:22 κἀγὼ τὴν δόξαν ἣν δέδωκάς μοι δέδωκα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα ὦσιν ἓν καθὼς ἡμεῖς ἕν·

4. And so, by Spurgeon saying the Bible is often left unread, it slaps him in the face for he himself couldn't read it... and of course that's a very common demonic trait for the victim to say something that they're not following or reversing the very thing they claim. Projecting what they fail to do. Look at how Donald Trump lies and says Joe Biden is sleepy and always falling asleep, only to fall asleep in court himself.

There you have it, Spurgeon reverses Jesus Christ the God-Man into Jesus Christ the man-child. It should be noted that in archaic English "man child" really meant a male child or if you prefer, a child of man(kind). Despite Spurgeon saying this in 1876 (which the term was already less common at that point) it's still a technical blunder of carelessness: for if you knew the Greek you'd be more cautious to imply the secondary meanings of child and man in the same phrase.

Instead of Jesus Christ being fully God and fully man, He's now fully man and fully child, and by context of modern vocabulary extremely immature as He's a manchild. This is probably one of the most blasphemous things you could call God (we blaspheme God every day but He still loves us!). I'm certain the demons had a good laugh when they gave Spurgeon the 'idea' to call Christ a man-child by using then-already archaic vocabulary from the English translations that he took inspiration from, but Spurgeon never caught on to the joke.

The way Spurgeon writes and talks you can tell he spent most of his time using dated English translations (like the AV1611) rather than referencing the Greek and Hebrew original texts.

1. Just when you thought it couldn't get worse, Spurgeon misreads Genesis 3:21. The reason why God created them the lambskins was because they were biting into their old sin nature and were 'ashamed' of their nudity when they weren't before sinning. Why would you be ashamed when you're the only two people on earth?! Therefore giving them the lambskin was placating their desires. If Adam still had Bible Doctrine remaining he wouldn't have asked for a lambskin. Remember... God gives us what we want even if it's the 'wrong' thing.


2. Spurgeon then calls God's perfect righteousness the lambskin (lasting raiment) which was purely requested through sin. Oh man...

I don't know what to tell you. Atheists generally have a better interpretation of English translation than what Spurgeon did. You really have to hate God to call Him a manchild, call His righteousness a lambskin, and deny He decides when to creates soul life but that it's the biology itself instead.

The last time I checked... a primordial finite lambskin (even if made perfectly) had nothing in common with Christ's righteousness (infinite uncreated being). This is a PARODY of the Bible not a sermon.

1. The old convenant never HAD works (in fact many aspects of the Mosaic law were a joke at works because people kept asking God for works to have merit) and there will never be 'works' in any covenant! Did Spurgeon fall asleep, what kind of Bible is he reading? Even Paul quotes King David in regards to how it was never works then or now:

Romans 4:6 Even as David also describes the blessedness of the man, to whom God imputes righteousness WITHOUT WORKS

Romans 4:6 καθάπερ καὶ Δαυεὶδ λέγει τὸν μακαρισμὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ᾧ ὁ θεὸς λογίζεται δικαιοσύνην χωρὶς ἔργων,

2. Every time animal sacrifices were done, it was to symbolize coming Messiah and 1 John 1:9. After the sacrifice they ate the meat. It's also shocking Spurgeon calls it "the first had grown old and was void by transgression", or... you know, the Messiah came and paid for our sins and now we also have 1 John 1:9 24/7 which they never had under the old covenant.


3. Then the pieces de resistance, Spurgeon calls God a substance. It's apparently a common thing in the demons' agenda to reverse Christ into "substance" whenever they get the opportunity, even outside of the context Christianity. ὑπόστασις is actually a nickname for Christ and also technical vocabulary to encompasses Him being the GOD-MAN.

Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Hebrews 11:1 Now it's (about) confidence (in the) Word, Christ's thinking (on) trial, evidence, unseen.

Hebrews 11:1 Ἔστιν δὲ πίστις ἐλπιζομένων ὑπόστασις πραγμάτων ἔλεγχος οὐ βλεπομένων.

1. Woahhhh! Spurgeon reverses Christ into an "its", "its sacrifice" rather than His sacrifice.


2. Then he reverses Christ's title (the chosen one) as chosen ones for all of us instead, and claims WE get brought to glory. This is probably the most Satanic thing Spurgeon has ever said in a single sentence. Here's all of the verses Spurgeon's effectively reversed:

Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

Isaiah 42:8 אֲנִ֥י יְהוָ֖ה ה֣וּא שְׁמִ֑י וּכְבוֹדִי֙ לְאַחֵ֣ר לֹֽא־אֶתֵּ֔ן וּתְהִלָּתִ֖י לַפְּסִילִֽים׃

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

Romans 3:23 πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον καὶ ὑστεροῦνται τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ,

1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen generation, (a) royal priesthood, a holy ethnic, a secured people, that the virtues (you) report, out from the darkness you (He) called, into the wonderful (of) His, light

1 Peter 2:9 μεῖς δὲ γένος ἐκλεκτόν, βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, ἔθνος ἅγιον, λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, ὅπως τὰς ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλέσαντος εἰς τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς·

Isaiah 42:1 Behold my servant whom I uphold: my chosen one in whom I delight, I will put my Spirit on Him and He will bring justice to the nations.

Isaiah 42:1 הֵ֤ן עַבְדִּי֙ אֶתְמָךְ־בּ֔וֹ בְּחִירִ֖ירָצְתָ֣ה נַפְשִׁ֑י נָתַ֤תִּי רוּחִי֙ עָלָ֔יו מִשְׁפָּ֖ט לַגּוֹיִ֥ם יוֹצִֽיא׃

Note that the difference between בְּחִירִ֖י and γένος ἐκλεκτόν, is that we're not to be conflated with *the* chosen one (Jesus Christ), but rather as a result of Christ we inherit His wealth as per royal priesthood. Saying we're "chosen ones" (of grace) completely distorts this.

3. Saying that we're also the chosen ones *of grace* makes it sound like Calvinism where God chooses who's saved and who isn't, rather than it being a gift given to us based on whether we want it.

We have a lot of problems here.

1. God does bless unbelievers and His Grace is infinite. To put a cap on God's Grace saying it's reserved only for a select special few that gaslight themselves with a specific attitude (and quite a nasty attitude), is not really understanding Grace at all.


2. Is not someone saying you CANNOT SIN pretending to be clean in the sight of God? Spurgeon contradicts himself there.


3. Satan and the demons know ALL about Grace, that's the exact reason for the Angelic Conflict.


4. How can WE 'frustrate' the Grace of God? The Grace of God remains constant regardless of what WE think or do. The Grace of God existed before HE created everything.

Our faith has nothing 'good' about it and it's not the mother of anything, only God is good.

Mark 10:18 (KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Mark 10:18 ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ· τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός.

You cannot 'feel' the holy spirit, ever. Biology cannot feel something that is immaterial: you can't 'feel' math or your thoughts can you? There are no verses to support this ridiculous claim either. The "spiritual" life of the believer simply means the thinking life, because that's all a soul does is think. The body is what 'feels' neural responses and has nothing to do with our soul other than being controlled by it. This is why Ephesians 5:18 uses an analogy to getting drunk (which is something we can feel and relate to).

That's certainly not what the Apostle Peter said. Being "sorry" or "guilty" is a sin in itself, and you won't find these words being used in the Greek at all.

Acts 2:38 (KJV) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter saying to them: "mind-change (from unbelief to belief) and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the eradciation of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 2:38 Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς· μετανοήσατε, [φησίν,] καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος.

Which part of the Greek says "be sorry for what you have done" and "forsake your old ways" and "be turned and become new men"? We start out as figurative newborn babies who have no idea about God's character, Bible Doctrine, what some of the (actual) worst sins are, etc. And notice the focus is about learning the Word and not "feeling guilty" or "pretending in your own mind that you're somehow a changed person". It took Christ 30 years to grow in Bible Doctrine, what kind of arrogance would one have to think they're immediately a spiritual giant after one microsecond? You'll also notice that Spurgeon has surgically omitted the ending where Peter calls salvation *a gift*.

1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babies crave the pure milk of the Word, in order that you grow into rescuing (your thinking)

1 Peter 2:2 ὡς ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη τὸ λογικὸν ἄδολον γάλα ἐπιποθήσατε, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῷ αὐξηθῆτε εἰς σωτηρίαν

You can't seriously stuff that in metanoia because the redefinition of it came about through Orthodox Christianity, originally (and as properly defined) it just means changing your mind about a thing or someone. Furthermore if God gifts (δωρεὰν) you something but then rescinded it, it would cease to be a gift: that's what we call a loan.

Job 1:21 and said: "naked I came out of my mother's womb, and naked I will return: the LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD."

Job 1:21 וַיֹּאמֶר֩ עָרֹ֙ם (יָצָתִי) [יָצָ֜אתִי] מִבֶּ֣טֶן אִמִּ֗י וְעָרֹם֙ אָשׁ֣וּב שָׁ֔מָה יְהוָ֣ה נָתַ֔ן וַיהוָ֖ה לָקָ֑ח יְהִ֛י שֵׁ֥ם יְהוָ֖ה מְבֹרָֽךְ׃

The fact God gifts should not be conflated with the fact He ultimately has the ability to give and take away everything. Our souls are always running off of God, regardless if we have believed or not for He created them. Obviously anything temporal that has been gifted in our lives on earth eventually fades away after we die, but the gift of eternal life is infinite.

One big tip to what Peter was saying is being baptized in Christ's name; how can you be physically baptized in someone's immaterial "name"? You can't, this is all referring to a single-use mental process of believing and then irrevocably being gifted the Holy Spirit along with permanent salvation. Everything Peter was explaining was purely mental, not outwardly as Spurgeon is redefining.

1. You can look beautiful on the outside making it look like you've "forsaken old ways", but inside mentally be full of garbage.


2. Atheists can be sorry for what they've done, forsake their old ways, and going through a religious process to become "new men", but never actually believe Christ paid for their sins (and in fact other religions have parallel processes to this).


3. It can only be a unique non-meritorious mental action in context of what was spoken; something that's specific to Christianity that cannot be done as an atheist. Oh, like believing in Christ without strings attached.

Matthew 23:27 woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but inside are filled with dead bones, and everything (that's) unclean.

Matthew 23:27 οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι παρομοιάζετε τάφοις κεκονιαμένοις, οἵτινες ἔξωθεν μὲν φαίνονται ὡραῖοι ἔσωθεν δὲ γέμουσιν ὀστέων νεκρῶν καὶ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας.

Notice it was always the religious academics clashing with Christ and not the prostitutes or tax collectors? Those prostitutes and tax collectors will have more Bible Doctrine learned than any religious people who go down a path of self-righteousness. It's beyond me why Spurgeon couldn't see the parallels between himself and the religious crowd Christ was warning of.

1. Christ didn't have a human nature in the same way we do due to Isaiah 55:8 (so ὑπόστασις is mixing both the human and the divine). Christ's humanity doesn't automatically mean a nature that's both unique to our souls and old sin nature re: "His soul was exceeding sorrowful" 🤢.


2. Spurgeon then immediately and predictably adds emphasis to Christ's physical body (despite talking about his immaterial and non-physical soul)... and here's the best part, he adds the adjective PRECIOUS which many Prolifers do as well. Even the language mimics what we have today: "Ohhhh don't kill those PRECIOUS babies which are actually embryos, we must save all INNOCENT HUMANS embryos BECAUSE THEY'RE PRECIOUS LIFE. OHHH THE PRECIOUS BODY AND BLOOD OF JESUS, you are saved by the precious literal now-disintegrated-after-hundreds-of-years blood of Jesus." [ad nauseam]

Same language, same misguidance. This is the reason why Prolife is so bad, it's a magnification of the whole principle of placing emphasis on material and believing in yourself instead of believing in God, but also ignoring rapport and talking with God. How many of these people do you suppose actually argued with & asked God in their head about abortion? None. They found a bias and want to stick with it.

1. It's a reversal to call the "mystery" a LITERAL mystery. It's only a mystery to those who don't know Bible Doctrine, that's the joke. Sprugeon played right into it because he can't read the Bible. The demons like to use this in many religions, that why in Roman Catholicism they obsess over the "mysteries".


2. Spurgeon is claiming preachers can heal with commanding the Holy Spirit? Yeah okay. There are no healing or miracles like that anymore.


3. Gospel this, divine decree that, elect this, elect that. Souls are only saved if they want to be saved by believing for a microsecond whether or not Christ paid for their sins. That's it. There's no weird religious processes or 'magic' ritual healings.

1. God cannot be 'killed', to say that sin is so great that it literally kills God is purely Satanic and a gross misunderstanding of HOW sin is even paid for or what sin is. Sin is ultimately attempting to do a [potentially] right thing the wrong way.


2. It's shocking someone who claims to read the Bible would say YOU or anything could "put God out of His throne". God would neither be infinite or 'God' if something could defy His attributes.


3. Saying that a finite action (sin) can kill or dent infinity is placing God in a humanistic box once again.

Revelation 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Revelation 22:13 ἐγὼ τὸ ἄλφα καὶ τὸ ω, ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος, ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τὸ τέλος.

Metanoia IS the "faith in Jesus". Spurgeon has fractured them into two distinct entities to add a clause that doesn't exist (adding works and making salvation a "process" rather than a gift).

Emphasis-of-Self Spotlight

Even though it has been covered with Spurgeon's copious emphasis-of-self sections prior, I'm placing a few notable ones here. If Spurgeon had read the Bhagavad Gita, he'd also have realized that everything he believed and taught was parallel to Hinduism, including his fixation on himself and even the ability to be sinless or never incur sin:

BG 2.45 त्रैगुण्यविषया वेदा निस्त्रैगुण्यो भवार्जुन निर्द्वन्द्वो नित्यसत्त्वस्थो निर्योगक्षेम आत्मवान्

BG 2.45 The Vedas deal with the subject of the three modes of material nature. O Arjuna, become transcedental to the three modes. Free yourself from (all) dualities (without concern) for material gain and safety, and be established in the self.

BG 2.38 सुखदु:खे समे कृत्वा लाभालाभौ जयाजयौ ततो युद्धाय युज्यस्व नैवं पापमवाप्स्यसि

BG 2.38 Do you fight for the sake of it without considering happiness or unhappiness, loss or profit, victory or defeat. (Fighting) in this way you will never incur sin.

Emphasis of self, "WE BRING", so it's no longer Christ doing the work, it's us.

Notice how Spurgeon swaps 'unbelievers' with 'sinners', implying you're somehow no longer a 'sinner' once you're brought to Jesus BY THE POWER OF THE SPIRIT, or that he the Great Spurgeon himself is somehow separate from "sinners". No stones from Satan's castle are going anywhere if it's just a gospel of pseudo-grace which inhibits people from doing belief + 0 (John 6:40), and also inhibits people from learning Bible Doctrine (Philippians 2:5). The MAIN goal of Satan is to inhibit Bible Doctrine to keep our thinking small, always has been (Matthew 4:1-3). And guess what, Spurgeon is helping fortify Satan's mighty castle by teaching demon doctrines 🫠

1. I don't know what "soul blessing" is supposed to be (nonsense vocabulary), but God blesses us 24/7 while we use 1 John 1:9 and stay in His system, as well as blessing those around us.


2. You can only have fruit if you're mature. That's the whole point of the analogy: only MATURE trees bear fruit, duh. A new believer won't have any fruit until they get into God's System and learn enough. And of course it's still not related to salvation, just a POTENTIAL byproduct. The Christians screaming "YOU MUST HAVE FRUIT" are the very ones who don't have any, because if you were actually mature in Bible Doctrine you wouldn't behave like that.


3. The 'pursuit' of the believer (well, is always going to be learning Bible Doctrine) but is also what GOD wants you to do with your life, not what 'you' yourself or what 'Spurgeon' thinks you should be doing like defaulting to soul winning which may actually be the wrong course of action.


4. Satan himself sponsors soul winning when necessary (it was one of his techniques for the early church), this was an attempt to thin out the Church so much that there weren't enough pastor-teachers and enough baby Christians running around to start generating weird and reversed ideas about Bible Doctrine. It's a very effective technique because then you make both God and Christianity look insane.


5. There's never any of OUR EFFORTS or OUR winning souls for Christ. Christ wins souls for Christ when someone wants it; because it's a gift He provides upon request.

Of course, immediately to the 'bearing fruit'. Works-obsessed Christians love batting this one around without even understanding the premise the analogy is using.

1. As mentioned previously only a mature tree bears fruit. A new believer cannot bear fruit.


2. You are serving God with your lips if you think YOUR works are what the spiritual life is rather than studying and learning Bible Doctrine.


3. In Satan's system you can have pastors, monks, leaders -- bear satanic fruit once they're trained up in [that] false system, which inevitably always places self-emphasis.


4. There's no mention of "personal fruit", once again adding a prependism that doesn't exist anywhere.

I hate to disappoint Spurgeon, but there's not a SINGLE verse that actually says "you must put your trust in Christ" or "you must repent from sin else your sins will not be blotted out". These statements are the antithesis of what the Bible says in the original language text.

It's not due dilligence to add things you 'feel' the Bible should say.

English Translation Bungles

This section is dedicated to parts where Spurgeon is playing on real bad English translations and failed to consult the original language texts. Granted during his time period access to original manuscripts and lexicons were dramatically more difficult, but if DNA could be discovered during his lifetime (1869), I'm sure he could have spent the extra time to find some sort of resource to correct his reliance on English translation. If the original words Christ spoke mean something to you, you'd do anything to have them.

1 John 2:1 (KJV) My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

1 John 2:1 My dear children: these words I am writing to you, so that you can stop sinning (shift to aorist tense). In fact, if anyone sins, THE Hero Advocate we have, face-to-face with Father: Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. In fact, He is the Propitiation Substitute for our sins; not only the Substitute for ours (hemeteros, jointly), but also the Substitute for [the sins of] the whole world.

1 John 2:1 Τεκνία μου, ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε. καὶ ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ, παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον·

Well, sometimes literal "little children" know more bible doctrines than adults and then reverse it when they become jaded adults. But, the "little children" translation is wrong, it's meant as a figurative affectionate statement (i.e. in English you might tell someone 'my darling'), but instead translators and Christians read it literally like a bunch of robots... Spurgeon being no exception apparently. It has nothing to do with literal children, of course if you only live and breathe English translation you'll always assume the translation is literal.

Regarding James 1:21; in context the Word is not saving us for salvation but rescuing ("saving") OUR THINKING. Not every "save" refers to salvation. The reason why soul is used is because... what does a soul do? All that it does is think, therefore if you're going to use the Word to rescue it, you're taking Christ's thinking and adding it to yours. This can't be done UNLESS you're first saved (trichotomous), so it's ridiculous to conflate the two principles as salvation. It's very common for Christians to just melt all concepts in the Bible and ignore nuance to immediately referring to salvation and nothing else. And then they slap works on top claiming that it's not works.

So God is not a "ghost", Greek never uses such terminology, pneuma is always Spirit. And Spurgeon really has no understanding of why God the Spirit is operating in the Church Age dispensation. God won't CONVINCE you of anything if you don't want it, that violates God's love. God will give you all of the chances in the world, but utlimately if you don't want Him, He won't force it. Love never forces. Spurgeon's God however seems to demand forcing and convincing.

The big kicker is that we all start out weird and perhaps a little bit religious like Spurgeon (our old sin natures find religion more appealing and/or we get religious ideas from someone else at some point). Eventually if you are interested in God (actually interested in learning Him, Who He is etc) you will grow out of this rut. If you don't and continue to clutch onto works salvation and religion until your last breath you never really wanted God nor were you interested in Him, in the end. God foreknows all of this too, He is more than happy to give you want you want even if it's very much the wrong choice... so we should all audit ourselves and exert the utmost caution when we assume Satan's wares are obviously evil or obviously false. Demons are smarter than you or I, hallucinating that you're wiser than their mind games is a great error on your part. That's why the Bible ONLY IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGES can completely counteract Satanic thought, English translations usually play right into Satan's ideologies (re: Prolife).

Yes some sins constitute toward the 'sin unto death' (where you get so out of line and ignore all divine discipline, God prematurely ends your life: this is magnified if you're a believer and go haywire).

Trump-Spurgeon

The more I discovered what Sprugeon believed, the more he had increasing parallels to Donald Trump:

1. Donald Trump supports Prolife, Spurgeon would have supported Prolife based on the trajectory of his doctrines if the concept existed in his day. Some have said Spurgeon called it "infanticide", but in the sermons where he used the phrase it wasn't used in context of abortion but of actual children so this is certifiably false (not to mention Prolife is a recent invention in the last past 50 years or so). A lot of what Spurgeon has said elsewhere has the same groundwork for the upcoming 'Prolife', but that's also because Prolife's "root" is making biology magical/holy/special beyond what it is. Anyone who gets overly excited about Jesus' physical blood has completely lost the plot and isn't using 1 John 1:9.


2. Donald Trump called himself the "Chosen One", Spurgeon calls all believers the "Chosen Ones"


3. Donald Trump is all about self-emphasis and selfishness, Spurgeon is all about self-emphasis and selfishness.


4. Donald Trump said there was no reason to use 1 John 1:9 because he wasn't sinning, Spurgeon never used 1 John 1:9 because he believed he wasn't sinning either


5. Donald Trump is constantly lying and makes accusations that he's a victim of, Spurgeon is constantly lying against the Bible and makes accusations he was affected by (re: accusing others of not 'really reading' the Bible when he himself couldn't be bothered to learn the original languages)

It can be assumed this "thumbprint" of behaviour is a big tell for anyone under heavy demonic influence. Both Spurgeon and Trump 'believed' at some point but refused God's System, never using 1 John 1:9.

Know Them By What They Teach

I hate to say it but Spurgeon's take on the Bible is worse than an atheist reading the Bible in translation, at least an atheist can competently repeat what they've read even in translation without adding stuff. You can in fact believe 'God exists' (Satan and all angelic beings believes God exists obviously) but never believe that Christ paid for your sins. In this case you'd be classified as a "believing unbeliever", someone who is indistinguishable from an atheist because on a technicality they are one, and this is ratified in Matthew 7:22 and Matthew 5:20.

The Pharisees didn't deny God's existence (they didn't want to believe Christ was I AM, but that's another story), but they didn't and wouldn't believe salvation had no strings attached. Spurgeon's provably allergic to the original language texts, uses foreign vocabulary, and he gets salvation wrong by saying it's free but then proceeds to tack on 1001 different random things: most of which don't even have verses for.

All of Spurgeon's mistakes are eerily analogous to other religions.

1. Heavy Satanic reversal in nearly everything:
• Claiming salvation isn't by works but proceeding to explain all of the works we must do
• Reversing Salvation as a gift into a reward instead
• Claiming that we get holier over time
• Claiming that we have glory of our own
• Claiming the blood of Christ is physical
• Reverses the GOD-MAN into the Man-Child
• Reverses Christ into mere substance
• Reverses Christ's title of being the Chosen One into all of us as being the Chosen Ones


2. Lying by saying salvation is "by grace", but then tacking on works such as changing your lifestyle and performing faith upkeep.


3. Having a poor understanding of the content material and adding bizarre vocabulary to things not found in the original language text


4. Mirroring a common problem of all religion whereby they turn Christ's "blood" as something physical rather than analogy to Christ's thinking. This is also why all religions that promote anti-abortion make the zygote holy as they assign special characteristics to the biology. Had Spurgeon been alive today he would undoubtedly been a part of the anti-abortion movement.

Because Spurgeon's reversals were so Satanic I think he was under demon influence his entire ministry. Reversing things this badly can imply you never wanted to believe that salvation was just believing Christ paid for your sins with no "true faith" or "real lifestyle change", and so you effectively become a demon pastor.

Spurgeon was so confident in his erroneous doctrines without performing due diligence and exegesis that he had it permanently displayed in the Angelic Conflict for all to see on his gravestone (avoid a legacy like this at all costs):

Of course there's no "waiting for the appearing", the microsecond your body is completely finished dying your soul goes straight to being face-to-face with Jesus Christ in an interim body, until we get ressurection bodies.

All of Spurgeon's sermons and writings are not in vain; they can be used to see what an obvious thumbprint of the Lordship Salvation looks like, along with when someone is performing obvious Satanic reversal in nearly everything they do... because we too can become or remain indefinitely like Spurgeon -- to the inevitable end that we don't want the true God but a counterfeit with extreme childishness and vindictiveness.

References

• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/christ-conqueror-of-satan/
• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/salvation-by-works-a-criminal-doctrine/
• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/how-to-converse-with-god/
• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/how-to-please-god/
• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/the-soul-winner/
• https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/apostolic-exhortation/

Copyright © Under the Bible | All Rights Reserved