When Spurgeon turned to the language of the Bible, he saw the Bible as the writing of God's Spirit. Therefore, Spurgeon desired to recognize the eloquence or the rhetorical practice evidenced by the manner or style of the Biblical text. For example, when referring to the Biblical words, "My God!" Spurgeon declared, "There is more eloquence in those two words than in all the orations of Demosthenes or Cicero."91 The Biblical text introduced for Spurgeon an eloquence superior to that of the classical masters. "I conceive that there was such a majesty about Jesus Christ," says Spurgeon, that "he spake on earth, as not Demosthenese, Cicero, nor Pericles, nor all the orators of ancient or modern times could ever approach . . . his was pathos that could break the stony heart."92

In contrast to some of his 19th century contemporaries who sought helpfully to recover a classical rhetoric familiarity for homiletics students, Spurgeon suggested that Jesus and not Cicero nor Aristotle was the one who should serve as the preacher's model orator. Similiarly, the Bible, and not De Orator nor Aristotle's Rhetoric, was Spurgeon's primary manual for rhetorical principle and style.

Furthermore, though Spurgeon seems to have enjoyed music, musical instruments, good art and architecture, he nevertheless would speak of the vanity of these good things if they were looked to for a recovery of gospel power in a generation. "It does seem impossible, does it not?" he asks, "that the mere preaching of Christ can do this [work with power]? And hence certain men must link to the preaching of Christ all the aids of music and architecture."93 Spurgeon therefore warned that if "religion consists in putting on a certain dress," and the preacher becomes a "mere performer" by attracting people "by the sweetness of music or the beauty of architecture," then religion becomes vain. Why? Because such use of power was "not so with Christ and his apostles; they were everywhere preaching the word and proclaiming that 'faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.'"94

Importantly, Spurgeon was accused of attracting audiences by performing. One critic recounted Spurgeon's "melodramatic-attitudes" and the fact that "he walked about on the platform just as if he had been treading the boards of the Drury Lane Theater, while performing some exciting tragedy."95 Spurgeon's response near the end of his ministry would have included an appeal to the motive behind those crowds attending the Tabernacle.

We know that the greatest crowd in London has been held together these thirty years by nothing but the preaching of Christ crucified. Where is our music? Where is our oratory? Where is anything of attractive architecture, or beauty or ritual? "A bare service," they call it. Yes, but Christ makes up for all deficiencies."96

Spurgeon may have underestimated his own giftedness for communication. But his statement possesses some genuine merit. The largest crowds in London, and perhaps in the Western world at that time, flocked to services that were recognized as "bare" because of their simplicity. They consisted in a prayer, congregational singing without an organ, and then a sermon. Spurgeon refers to the absence of an organ as testimony that something more than musical power can attract and change people. Spurgeon was not against organs. He called them "that wonderful box of music with which men praise God with wind." But lasting power he felt lay elsewhere. "We have nothing but the plainest possible singing," he recounted. "I am certain that the crowds do not come to hear that; and as for the preaching, I have purposely laid aside all the graces of oratory."97