00:00 Introduction 01:05 Who C.H. Spurgeon Was 02:34 Confession of Faith 03:12 Core Doctrines 03:25 Baptism 06:14 Lord’s …
23 COMMENTS
Ladies and gentlemen, this is how denominations formed. A single theologien, came up with their own body of beliefs, developed a following and BOOM 💥 new denomination!
A man that walked closer to the Word of God, than all including me to all the glory to God. Now we may know, we must be lead by the Spirit in our day to day walk. That is the only way we can do God's Will.
Roman Catholic here cool historical interesting video. Obviously I disagree with most things Charles spurgeon believed but enjoyed learning about them .
He was just about Jesus, we know where he is, so attack him all you want. Other denominations would just focus on jesus more this place would be a lot better
Thank you for this information, I’m sure you did a lot of study to bring this to the for, as well as a lot of work creating the video. What a blessing young man!👍🙏😊
Follow Jesus not man he is not your spiritual guide ‘nor will he answer to god for you. Preachers get fat on sermons while the poor and needy go without a remedy. Freely ye receive freely give. Jesus
Baptism took over from circumcision, 1 Cor 10:2 mentions Mose's baptism and the Jews leaving Egypt. The reformed teaching is infant baptism and adults that have never been baptised as a child , ie a Muslim.
38:02 Spurgeon named groups that were actually paedobaptist, heretical, or decentralized as evidence that there has always been baptist succession 😭 for such a genius this has gotta be the weakest, silliest thing he believed in, what in the world.
The topic of slavery came up on another thread, maybe another channel. I claimed slavery was a sin, maybe I used the word immoral. Someone else disagreed because it was something depicted both in the old and new testament. I wanted to argue that it is indeed a sin.
[[T::3::4]] As a starting point, I wanted to outline my process for determining morality using the Bible, regarding which I include all of the Gospels from the 12 apostles (to the degree they are available) and more books from the old testament than are included in the most common canon, such as the book of Enoch.
Sometimes there seem to be contradictions in the Bible, and sometimes there seem to be topic voids. In either situation where there isn't an explicit command or prohibition, and possibly even if it seems that there is, I have to deduce the morality from what is there. To do this I classify the morality of the Bible hierarchically in terms of most authoritatively moral to least authoritative.
— Most authoritative moral anchors:
The Garden of Eden pre-Fall in the old testament, and Jesus's message and actions in the full Gospels.
Everything else I judge morally relative to those.
— Only if there is insufficient information there, do I take a step down to the next anchor:
Scriptures that contain explicit commands from God, such as the Exodus commandments. To the degree that there's any confusion on how to interpret them, I use the most authoritative moral anchors as guide stones.
— If there is still insufficient information, the next step anchor:
What I can glean from prophetic warnings.
— If there is still insufficient information, the next step anchor:
What I can glean from how people are depicted relative to other people in the Bible. So maybe someone isn't that great by the highest standards, but they are better than the people around them in their story. And I am supposed to understand something based on that relative moral difference. Contingent on my conclusion is not contradicting the highest moral guides of the Garden of Eden and Jesus.
— Lastly (or perhaps firstly and throughout):
My internal conscience, praying to the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit to keep my conscience calibrated.
[[T::3::5]] This is my argument for why slavery is a sin according to the Bible.
Jesus did not own slaves. He did talk about "diakonos" and "doulos." The former can be translated as servant but also as minister. The latter can be translated as servant too, but also as bond servant or slave. (A bond servant is someone working to pay off a debt, as opposed to a human who is classified as property by virtue of an inherited trait such as race, sex, or societal placement at the point of birth.)
Most scriptures in the Gospels are multilayered. There's the literal scenario and the scenario as metaphor for the relationship between God and humans. You see the word "lord" used for the employer of the servant which might make one think, "Ew. Feudalim." But I think the word choice is to make the metaphor work. And it does not refer to the lord as an "owner" of the servant, as if the servant is property. There's a frequently repeated metaphor of being in debt associated with the use of the word "servant," the debt for which the servant must work to pay off. Again, this is different from a person being property owned by someone.
Further, it is clear that Jesus expects anyone with power over others or in a leadership role to be a servant to those over whom they have power.
:"Whoever will be first among you, he shall be your (doulos).": – Matthew 20:27
In other words, to be a lord one must be a (doulos) to those over whom you would lord. If you want to be lord over slaves, one must be a slave to the slaves. If you want to be lord over servants, one must be a servant to the servants.
:"Then the lord of that (doulos), being moved with pity, released him and forgave his debt.": – Matthew 18:27
Again the idea that the doulos is not a piece of property but a person working to pay off a debt.
But here is the longer passage which, read all together, makes the position more clear:
:"Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.
But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.
So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?
And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.": – Matthew 18:23 – 34
Jesus is not condoning the existence of kings who not only sell men but also women and children into bondage. He is pointing out a very real scenario that has existed (and still does in different forms) and using it to explain how God — unlike the immoral, pitiless, real world kings — does not do such a thing; and instead forgives all debts so that people can be free. However, he also warns that we — as people who have debtors — though debtors much less than those of God — are supposed to do likewise: forgive our debtors; and that if we do not, we will be punished for the debts we owe that God forgave instead of punishing us for.
Jesus is not silent on slavery. Nor does he condone it. Instead he admonishes the system of slavery and warns those in free positions, lords of the material world, that they should not engage in it lest God put them in the exact slavery they hold others in.
Slavery does not exist in the Garden of Eden and therefore does not contradict this.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is how denominations formed.
A single theologien, came up with their own body of beliefs, developed a following and BOOM 💥 new denomination!
When I watch his sermons, he is whats needed in Every American pulpit.
A man that walked closer to the Word of God, than all including me to all the glory to God. Now we may know, we must be lead by the Spirit in our day to day walk. That is the only way we can do God's Will.
Outstanding!!!
We need a video like this on John Wesley
Roman Catholic here cool historical interesting video. Obviously I disagree with most things Charles spurgeon believed but enjoyed learning about them .
This was good! Can you please do one on Thomas Aquinas-everything he believed?
To many Christian’s glory in men , the Bible says don,t glory in men!
He was just about Jesus, we know where he is, so attack him all you want. Other denominations would just focus on jesus more this place would be a lot better
What was your biggest encouragement doing all this research? Most surprising opinion spurgeon had? How has your opinion on him changed?
I think he has the right idea about Calvinism and Arminianism just like Chuck missler explained it
That was awesome thank you brother
Thank you for this information, I’m sure you did a lot of study to bring this to the for, as well as a lot of work creating the video. What a blessing young man!👍🙏😊
Would you do your excellent research and coverage of the Lordship Salvation controversy. A little clarity helps.
Follow Jesus not man he is not your spiritual guide ‘nor will he answer to god for you. Preachers get fat on sermons while the poor and needy go without a remedy. Freely ye receive freely give. Jesus
Excellent! Thank you for all the effort put forth to give us an extremely helpful summary of the doctrines of the "Prince of Preachers."
Why did you not mention his belief that Jesus is Michael the Archangel ?
Thank you for this video.. excellent summary! – WPS
Any other people here who come from an irreligious background that just love learning about Christianity?
Baptism took over from circumcision, 1 Cor 10:2 mentions Mose's baptism and the Jews leaving Egypt. The reformed teaching is infant baptism and adults that have never been baptised as a child , ie a Muslim.
38:02 Spurgeon named groups that were actually paedobaptist, heretical, or decentralized as evidence that there has always been baptist succession 😭 for such a genius this has gotta be the weakest, silliest thing he believed in, what in the world.
What a clown, confused, false teacher Spurgeon was on many fronts, he worshiped Calvin not the Lord Jesus
t=31:19
The topic of slavery came up on another thread, maybe another channel. I claimed slavery was a sin, maybe I used the word immoral. Someone else disagreed because it was something depicted both in the old and new testament. I wanted to argue that it is indeed a sin.
[[T::3::4]]
As a starting point, I wanted to outline my process for determining morality using the Bible, regarding which I include all of the Gospels from the 12 apostles (to the degree they are available) and more books from the old testament than are included in the most common canon, such as the book of Enoch.
Sometimes there seem to be contradictions in the Bible, and sometimes there seem to be topic voids. In either situation where there isn't an explicit command or prohibition, and possibly even if it seems that there is, I have to deduce the morality from what is there. To do this I classify the morality of the Bible hierarchically in terms of most authoritatively moral to least authoritative.
—
Most authoritative moral anchors:
The Garden of Eden pre-Fall in the old testament, and
Jesus's message and actions in the full Gospels.
Everything else I judge morally relative to those.
—
Only if there is insufficient information there, do I take a step down to the next anchor:
Scriptures that contain explicit commands from God, such as the Exodus commandments.
To the degree that there's any confusion on how to interpret them, I use the most authoritative moral anchors as guide stones.
—
If there is still insufficient information, the next step anchor:
What I can glean from prophetic warnings.
—
If there is still insufficient information, the next step anchor:
What I can glean from how people are depicted relative to other people in the Bible. So maybe someone isn't that great by the highest standards, but they are better than the people around them in their story. And I am supposed to understand something based on that relative moral difference. Contingent on my conclusion is not contradicting the highest moral guides of the Garden of Eden and Jesus.
—
Lastly (or perhaps firstly and throughout):
My internal conscience, praying to the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit to keep my conscience calibrated.
[[T::3::5]]
This is my argument for why slavery is a sin according to the Bible.
Jesus did not own slaves. He did talk about "diakonos" and "doulos." The former can be translated as servant but also as minister. The latter can be translated as servant too, but also as bond servant or slave. (A bond servant is someone working to pay off a debt, as opposed to a human who is classified as property by virtue of an inherited trait such as race, sex, or societal placement at the point of birth.)
Most scriptures in the Gospels are multilayered. There's the literal scenario and the scenario as metaphor for the relationship between God and humans. You see the word "lord" used for the employer of the servant which might make one think, "Ew. Feudalim." But I think the word choice is to make the metaphor work. And it does not refer to the lord as an "owner" of the servant, as if the servant is property. There's a frequently repeated metaphor of being in debt associated with the use of the word "servant," the debt for which the servant must work to pay off. Again, this is different from a person being property owned by someone.
Further, it is clear that Jesus expects anyone with power over others or in a leadership role to be a servant to those over whom they have power.
:"Whoever will be first among you, he shall be your (doulos).": – Matthew 20:27
In other words, to be a lord one must be a (doulos) to those over whom you would lord. If you want to be lord over slaves, one must be a slave to the slaves. If you want to be lord over servants, one must be a servant to the servants.
:"Then the lord of that (doulos), being moved with pity, released him and forgave his debt.": – Matthew 18:27
Again the idea that the doulos is not a piece of property but a person working to pay off a debt.
But here is the longer passage which, read all together, makes the position more clear:
:"Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.
But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.
So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?
And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.": – Matthew 18:23 – 34
Jesus is not condoning the existence of kings who not only sell men but also women and children into bondage. He is pointing out a very real scenario that has existed (and still does in different forms) and using it to explain how God — unlike the immoral, pitiless, real world kings — does not do such a thing; and instead forgives all debts so that people can be free. However, he also warns that we — as people who have debtors — though debtors much less than those of God — are supposed to do likewise: forgive our debtors; and that if we do not, we will be punished for the debts we owe that God forgave instead of punishing us for.
Jesus is not silent on slavery. Nor does he condone it. Instead he admonishes the system of slavery and warns those in free positions, lords of the material world, that they should not engage in it lest God put them in the exact slavery they hold others in.
Slavery does not exist in the Garden of Eden and therefore does not contradict this.