June A. Nadolny wrote:
I wonder why take heed posted these sermons in 2012

Why are you playing the Devil's part here, constantly accusing everyone of everything under the sun?

June A. Nadolny wrote:
Website: Stop Baptist Predators Blogspot
http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2017/
Blog Entry of Christa Brown of JANUARY 25, 2017 - continued -
Backward steps in 2016
Despite the decade's many gains, 2016 was a year in which that “hopeless” word often took hold in my head. Not only was there the continuing flood of clergy abuse cases with the same awful patterns of cover-ups and do-nothingness, but there were also institutional decisions that made the Baptist badlands seem even bleaker.
For starters, in 2016, the Southern Baptist Convention, this country’s largest Protestant faith group, elected a known clergy sex abuse cover-upper as its president. It was as though the cover-up of child sex crimes had rendered the pastor promotion-worthy rather than making him subject to accountability.
The Baptist General Convention of Texas, the largest statewide Baptist denominational entity, announced that it was abolishing its confidential file of abusive ministers. Though the BGCT’s public relations people spun this as a positive, survivors saw it for what it was -- a step backwards.
- to be continued

June A. Nadolny wrote:
take heed . .
With respect to Spurgeon's comments commending RC Mystic “Madame Guyon”,
you give excuses, you make allowances, you show deference
but
With respect to John-UK, your professed “brother in Christ” who also commended RC Mystic “Madame Guyon”, you pronounce an unqualified censure

Spurgeon was wrong in his assessment of Guyon and if he were still alive, I would criticise him also. Difference is that Spurgeon would have been open to reassess his opinion and would have repented. John is nothing like Spurgeon either in attitude or knowledge.

If I am critical of both, how am I a respecter of persons?

You on the other hand can condemn Guyon but justify those who commend her! Not wise.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
you're a respecter of persons.

You will note that since his departure it has been really peaceful here.

You are imitating him and trying to stoke the flames and cause division, which does not reflect well on you.

Why don't you start answering some questions instead of always posing them?

1. Was Spurgeon right in his assessment of Guyon?
2. If so, why do you condemn Guyon?
3. If you condemn Guyon, why do you seek to justify John UK and Spurgeon?

June A. Nadolny wrote:
These are the words of C. H. Spurgeon, the "prince of preachers"
Spurgeon had the greater light

You wrote 2/20/19 6:30PM

I would NEVER commend her or her works, nor refer to her as a "noble Christian woman".

Maybe you're still thinking through your own position on whether to commend a practicing Roman Catholic who never said that Romanism was wrong doctrinally or otherwise? Can someone who is genuinely born again remain in the Harlot church or remain silent about the gross errors she teaches and promotes? Can such a person genuinely have a closer "mystical" relationship to God than someone who obediently separates from the false church and walks by faith, not by mystical feelings?

June A. Nadolny wrote:
That's just rubbish! Spurgeon lived from 1834 to 1892.

However, name me one volume written by either the Reformers or Puritans who wrote against Roman Catholic mystics. The mystics operated within the RCC, followed RC doctrine and practice etc and therefore were never the specific target of attacks by the Reformers or Puritans. Their specific form of "religion" has come to the fore in the 20th century as Rome stepped up her ecumenical efforts and attempted to fudge the differences between Protestants and Catholics on experiential grounds. Guyon is held out to us as a model RC Christian whom even Protestants could not object to as mysticism was on the rise

In the 20th century we have seen an explosion in the publication of the writings of these mystics, and also in Protestants answering these writings objecting to their use of seemingly orthodox language to hide their real Romanist teaching and their wholly unorthodox mysticism.

It is very telling how you keep parroting the same sentiments but refuse to answer the dilemma you've created for yourself.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
take heed and read . .
You trip over yourself to excuse and absolve C. H. Spurgeon for commending RC Mystic “Madame Guyon” . . and I quote:
“Also, Spurgeon was much too generous in his assessment of many, whether RC or otherwise. It is understandable therefore that Spurgeon mischaracterised her.”
Yet you deliver a harsh censor against John-UK for doing likewise? And I quote:
1) 2/3/19 9:35 PM Take heed
“This sycophantic swooning over the departure of JUK is quite sickening. The man said he believed in a gracious salvation and justification by faith alone but then went on to recommend Billy Graham despite his ecumenism and also Guyon a RC mystic”

June A. Nadolny wrote:
That's just rubbish! Spurgeon lived from 1834 to 1892.
Spurgeon was well-read and well-acquainted with the writings of the Reformers as well as the writings of Roman Catholics. He was well-informed on Romanism/Popery.

I have provided quotes from Spurgeon's sermons in which he commends Roman Catholic mystic “Madame Guyon”,
so it is quite apparent that C. H. Spurgeon had access to the writings of “Madame Guyon” . . he quoted her . . he read what she wrote . . he commended her.

I am beginning to wonder whether even you know exactly what you're arguing for here.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
Why then does C. H. Spurge on commend her?

Why Graham did is clear viz. because he is an ecumenist and accepts RCs as Christians.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
Wow . . the "Johns and the Marys, the favorites of heaven" ? ?
Citation: 1) Source: God's Pupil, God's Preacher: An Autobiography / July 28, 1889 by C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892)
Link: http://www.biblebb.com/files/spurgeon/2318.htm

June A. Nadolny wrote:
Billy Graham: Servant of Rome, Not Servant of Christ
https://www.biblebasedministries.co.uk/2018/03/16/billy-graham-servant-of-rome-not-servant-of-christ/

Frank wrote:
Same hypocrisy as Jim exhibits.

Dr. Tim wrote:
“Another Democrat scandal in Virginia?” Yes. Read the Democrats’ platform, and you will quickly see that the entire party is a continuous, ongoing, epic and catastrophic national scandal. It is the morality of Gomorrah exacerbated by the politics of Herod; the wickedness of Jezebel compounded by the foolishness of Rehoboam. THIS is the party wicked Jim Lincoln and wicked George Will endorse. THIS is the cartel of reprobates who want to destroy everything good and decent and replace it with something vile and disgusting. THIS is not only scandalous, but downright evil, passel of perverts who will not rest until America takes her place on the dungheap of nations consumed by the wrath of God. May the party and its platform perish forever from the face of the earth.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
“ . .We give our hand to every man who loves the Lord Jesus Christ, be he what he may or who he may! ... I hold that there are many savingly called who do not believe in effectual calling and that there are a great many who persevere to the end, who do not believe the doctrine of final perseverance. We do hope that the hearts of many are a great deal better than their heads. We set not their fallacies down to any willful opposition to the truth as it is in Jesus, but simply to an error in their judgments, which we pray God to correct."
- C.H.Spurgeon - Sermon Entitled:
Effects of Sound Doctrine

You quote Spurgeon approvingly and yet these are the very things you don’t allow for as demonstrated in the loaded questions which you used to try and bait me. Shame that you’re so blind to it.

penned wrote:
so Brother John UK was run off now?

June A. Nadolny wrote:
*****
For clarification . . the above-ref post was made by John's brother in Christ
on 2/4/19 10:14 AM
See for yourself!

June A. Nadolny wrote:
******
Note: the above-ref. comment was posted by John's brother in Christ on 2/4/19 10:14 AM
on this thread
imo sir . . you have spoken as a true brother in Christ

June A. Nadolny wrote:
John's brother in Christ wrote:
"Only Vultures would be circling for bones as one would think he was 'suddenly' an apostate by all the clamour. He makes simple challenges to some posters who maintain that they are biblicists...show me the men who preach the same and the churches that do likewise and he could show you thousands on SermonAudio that hold to the same doctrine as himself, including the founder of SermonAudio. He doesn't hide the fact where he stands ... J C Ryle's evangelistic preaching and where he believes the 1689 confession is scriptural. So he will be sadly missed.
'And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.' Eph 4:32
*****
imo . . You have spoken as a true brother in Christ

June A. Nadolny wrote:
No sir, you haven't answered my questions.
1) So then . . what is the "great deal more that you believe?"
2) Does your definition of a brother in Christ include any and all who profess to be Christians, including Arminians and Pentecostals / Charismatics?
3) What about those who profess to be Christians and belong to so-called "mega churches?"
Are they your brothers in Christ?
And inasmuch as you are unwilling to answer my questions, neither will I answer yours.

June A. Nadolny wrote:
No sir, you haven't answered my questions.
So then . . what is the "great deal more that you believe?"
Does your definition of a brother in Christ include any and all who profess to be Christians, including Arminians and Pentecostals / Charismatics?
What about those who profess to be Christians and belong to so-called "mega churches?"
Are they your brothers in Christ?

Now how about you answer my questions?