The PyroManiacs devote some space each weekend to highlights from the lifetime of works from the Prince of Preachers, Charles Haddon Spurgeon. The following excerpt is from The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, volume 48, sermon number 2,796, "A man of God alone with God."
"Can each one of us now say, in this sense, 'I have declared my ways' to the Lord? For this should be done, not only at our first coming to him, but continually throughout the whole of our life."
We should look over each day, and sum up the
errors of the day, and say, “I have declared my ways,’—my naughty ways, my
wicked ways, my wandering ways, my backsliding ways, my
cold, indifferent ways, my proud ways;—the way of my words, the way
of my thoughts, the way of my imagination, the way of my memory, for it
has a treacherous way of remembering evil and forgetting good;—the way of my actions towards thee, my God, and there is much to
regret there; the way of my actions in my family, in the world, and in the
church.”
What a sorrowful stock-taking each day would be to many professors
if they were honest to themselves and to their God! Even those who “walk
in the light, as God is in the light,” and have the closest fellowship
with him, yet know that it is a very sweet and blessed thing even for them
that “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin;”
for even they still sin, and it is necessary for each one of them to say continually,
“I have declared my ways.”
Do you try to hide
your sin, dear friend? It is useless for you to attempt to do so, for God ever
sees it. Why do you seek to conceal what is always before his eye?
Better far to confess it to him, that he may then cast it behind his back, and
remember it against you no more for ever.
I believe that, often, as
sinners confessing to God, we miss much true comfort for want of making a
clean breast of our transgressions. Yet the Lord knows what is in our heart
even though we do not own it. It has been well observed that, when
Moses tried to excuse himself to God for not wanting to go to deliver
Israel, he said that he was slow of speech, and God met that objection by
giving him Aaron his brother to speak for him; but the Lord, in his reply to
Moses, also said, “All the men are dead who sought thy life.”
Moses had
not said anything about that matter; but God knew that there was that
fear in his heart, so he put his finger on the sore place at once. It is well when
we can do that for ourselves; when, in our spirit, there is no guile;
when we come, as David did, in the 51st Psalm, and confess the very sin
which we have committed: “Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God,” calling it by
its right name, then is it that the soul begins to get peace
with God.
“But,” someone asks,
“are we, then, to confess to God every sin in detail?” No, that would be
impossible, and probably it would not even be useful; but there must be no
wish to conceal any sin from God. Such a desire would be a vain one,
for “all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have
to do.”
There must be an acknowledgment of the sins which we have
not yet seen in their full heinousness. Each of us will do well to offer David’s
prayer, “Cleanse thou me from secret faults.” If we have committed faults,
which are hidden even from ourselves, we desire to be delivered from
them so that they should not remain to our condemnation.
f you were asked to identify the Bible's most neglected command for the Christian today, how would you answer? Richard Stearns of World Vision has written that our greatest neglect—what he terms the "hole in our gospel"—is failure to address adequately the physical/material needs of the world's less fortunate. Is that true? Is this where Christians are most deserting Christ's work today?
today's pattern heads 180-degrees in the opposite direction, sweeping aside any doctrinal differences in the "broad-minded" search for unity. The modern evangelical ecumenical drive redefines love as acceptance and kindness as the universal embrace of any and all ideas with even the slightest patina of "Christian-ese." All that is required for entrance to the club is to be earnest and agreeable. Small wonder, then, that those raising their hands to identify unbiblical ideas and their source are more often scolded than applauded. The zeitgeist of today's Church finds it unkind and unloving to inspect the ideas of a would-be Christian leader or teacher, looking for any telltale seams in an otherwise congenial veneer that might uncover lupine intent.
Dr. Eakin is a sports medicine orthopædic surgeon in the Bay Area and part time teacher at Grace Bible Fellowship Church's Stanford campus ministry. He is the author of 
'm in Finland to speak to a group of Reforming church leaders on the subject of sola Scriptura. The conference here 
n our previous post, we asked the question that supersedes all others: What does it take to be right with God? The answer, as established in God's Word, is straightforward and consistent throughout: to be of the same glory as God Himself—holy, pure, perfect.
For what crime? The King Himself had declared that invitations were to be sent far and wide, to whomever could be found (v. 9). Not only that, invitations were sent out without regard to one's moral standing (v. 10); in fact, the event was to include (v. 10) "both bad and good." The man is at the banquet when confronted by the Lord, implying his intention to participate in the communal gathering. Ostensibly he is there on the basis of fulfilling his part in a "covenant of vocation" while on Earth. There is no mention of any obvious treachery, and his presence at the banquet would presume at least an outward demonstration of allegiance to the King. None of his fellow celebrants seem to have any inclination that the man's admission to the event was illegitimate.
Compare this with Wright. On all three measures, Wright's theology misses the mark. How so? (1) His ideas would introduce a disciple's faithful obedience as a factor in determining his acceptance before God, in violation of Isaiah 61:10. (2) Wright's theology minimizes or negates altogether the gospel's insistence on a specific garment exchange which serves to cleanse the sinner's stained nature, in violation of Zechariah 3:4. Finally, (3) Wright insists that no one will be justified, or declared righteous—including, by analogy, wearing any robe of righteousness—until he reaches Heaven. This perspective dismisses outright any prerequisite dress code that must be applied prior to the afterlife and one's ultimate encounter with Lord Jesus Christ, in clear violation of the Lord's own teaching in Matt. 22:11-13. On all three accounts, Wright's ideas oppose the distinct and indisputable instruction of the Word of God.
hat does it take to be right with God? That is the central question of human existence. What are God's criteria for eternal life with Him? What does He require?
But the prideful human heart is wired to reject God's offer of Christ's righteous robe, and to come up with one of its own. Ever since Adam and Eve made garments of leaves in the vain attempt to cover the shame brought on by their sin, it has been mankind's nature to reject the covering God would apply, and endeavor instead to apply an alternative. This, in fact, is the impetus behind every false religion. Every false form of belief in the world is predicated, at its core, upon developing some alternative garment that might cover the sin and shame of its converts and somehow still allow them to stand acceptable before God.
y friend and one-time joint pastor of 
