Some of the things he believed and taught were directly contradicted by his own words and teachings and Spurgeon was aware of this fact as shown by an excerpt I posted from one of his writings above.
You didn't demonstrate that Spurgeon contradicted himself. All you demonstrated was that Spurgeon affirmed the notion of
compatibilism: that God's sovereignty and man's responsibility are compatible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism
is the belief that
free will and
determinism are compatible ideas, and that it is possible to believe both without being logically inconsistent
Seriously, if you agree with Spurgeon's explanation of compatibilism - and therefore affirm compatibilism - you've just undone your entire theology and lended credence to Calvinism
Once you affirm compatibilism, the end is near for your synergism
He wrestled with Calvinistic teachings
No he didn't. He believed Calvinism was lifted off the pages of the Bible itself. To say he wrestled with Calvinism is to say he wrestled with the truthfulness of Scripture
and had some Calvinistic leanings in his beliefs and writings
He didn't merely have a "Calvinistic leaning", but was a full blown Calvinist by conviction and believed the god of Arminianism was a demon.
I do not serve the god of the Arminians at all; I have nothing to do with him, and I do not bow down before the Baal they have set up; he is not my God, nor shall he ever be; I fear him not, nor tremble at his presence…The God that saith today and denieth tomorrow, that justifieth today and condemns the next…is no relation to my God in the least degree. He may be a relation of Ashtaroth or Baal, but Jehovah never was or can be his name. - C.H. Spurgeon
but he was much more of what Calvinists hate as "hyper-evangelical"
Calvinists don't hate evangelism. Nor is there even such a thing as "hyper-evangelicalism". Calvinists love evangelism, and have historically been the greatest evangelists for a reason: because election drives evangelism. Without election, there wouldn't exist anyone who will positively respond to the gospel message. Without election, every single person would remain hard-hearted to the gospel message, reject it, and end up in hell. Spurgeon and all Calvinists have the same attitude about election and evangelism as the Apostle Paul had:
2 Timothy 2:10
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
The reason Paul endured hardship, persecution, and other things is "for the sake of the elect, that they may obtain salvation".
Without election, the church pews would be empty. Without election, heaven would be empty.
than he was "hyper-Calvinistic", as he clearly rebuked hyper-Calvinism.
As well he should rebuke Hyper-Calvinism, as Hyper-Calvinism is a perversion of Calvinism, just as Pelagianism is a perversion of Arminianism.
He is upheld and admired by independent fundamental Baptists because in all of these things, he remained a fervent evangelist
As any good Calvinist is.
Your post implied that being a Calvinist is somehow at odds with being an evangelist. Both theologically and historically, that is simply not true.
Calvinists have every assurance that their evangelistic efforts will not be in vain. Calvinists sleep soundly at night knowing that their message will, without fail, bring every single sinner God intends to save to faith in Christ.
Calvinists know that evangelism has a 100% success rate.
Calvinists know that they do not need to water down or soften the rough edges of the gospel to make it more palatable to fallen men in order to get "as many responses as possible". Instead, we know that the gospel message is designed perfectly to not only bring the elect to repentance and faith, but also to serve as an indictment against those who reject it.
Calvinists know that preaching the gospel message is sufficient, and the Holy Spirit works through that message to visit sinners with salvation. They know they don't have to manipulate heart strings by playing "Just As I Am" 500 times in a church service to stir up emotion, in order to get a positive response to the gospel.
I could go on and on
