Category Archives: Jonathan Edwards

The Kind of Preaching People Want

13 Sunday May 2018

Posted by in Culture, Jonathan Edwards, Micah, Preaching, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Published under the title, The Salvation of Souls, Richard A. Bailey and Gregory A. Wills, edited nine sermons of Jonathan Edwards on Christian ministry. One of the sermons entitled, “The Kind of Preaching People Want” considers the text:

Micah 2:11 (ESV)

11          If a man should go about and utter wind and lies,

saying, “I will preach to you of wine and strong drink,”

he would be the preacher for this people!

From this text, Edwards notes that this is the sort of preaching which will attract people (I one time heard John MacArthur say, you can gather a lot goats in one place and that doesn’t make them sheep). He posits this doctrine:

If the business of ministers was to further the gratification of men’s lusts, they would be much better received by many than they are now.

He then gives a series of examples of how such preaching would sound. And in reading this, it often seems as if Edwards was looking into the “church” of the country which was coming into being while he lived (he died prior to the Revolution):

If ministers were sent to tell people that they might gratify their lusts without danger; if they were sent to them that it was lawful for them to gratify their lusts …..

He then proceeds to set out a series of desires: drunkenness, sexual immorality, abusive business dealings, revenge. Or rather than openly claim such things were no sins — they were of little importance.

Or perhaps rather than deny that sin would merit hell; what if the minister presented:

Christ only in one of his offices and not in others; if they were to preach Christ only  in his priestly office and as a savior from the punishment of sin, and not also in his kingly office as a savior from the power and dominion of sin, and that being a King and a Lord to rule in us and over us, they would by many be much better received than they are now.

Edwards then proceeds through other potential faults in a minister — all designed to lead men to believe that Christ saved us to indulge in sin and be rewarded with a future of sinful pleasures. But these first two fault seems particularly to mark the broader so-called “evangelical” ministry in North America: preachers who lessen the severity of sin; and who, in the name of “grace” and “love” speak as if Christ would overlook — or even delight in sin.

Think of the bitter, often even slanderous speech, which marks social media. Or the envy and covetousness of our culture — not to mention intoxication and sexual immorality. Congregations are falling over themselves to accommodate the sexual revolution (as Al Mohler terms it) in the name of love. A well-known supposed evangelical writes a book which advocates a universal salvation in the name of “love”.

Edwards’ warning, which must have sounded bizarre to even the unbelievers in his congregation (remember, everyone went to church in Edwards’ day), seems to have been taken up as a how-to by the public Christian church.

What then must we do with this observation? Edwards first provides questions of self-examination. How do you receive true preaching of the Scripture? When the Word is rightly proclaimed, do you listen attentively? When your sin is reproved, do you receive and repent — or do you ignore it, or chafe?

What do you do if a preacher speaks smooth words which encourage your sins? Or if it is not a preacher, what if a friend or neighbor speaks in a way that encourages your lusts? Do you receive it eagerly? Do you find entertainment from “an impure story or a lascivious song?”

There is then reproof:

What horrid contempt you cast on God and Christ and heaven, in that you should prefer the gratification of your vile lusts before them, that you would be more pleased and entertained and give better attention to hear that by which your lusts might be gratified than that by which you may obtain an interest in Christ, in his precious blood and glorious benefits, and may have God for your portion; that to have all the glories and perfections of God and a Redeemer set before you is not so pleasing and entertaining to you as to hear of the objects of a carnal appetite; that worldly profit or sensual pleasures or the gratifications of your envy revenge is better to you than heaven.

Then as a final matter, Edwards ends with what it is to be a preacher who rightly brings the Word:

But how grievous may it be well be, when a minster does his utmost to see a congregation seeming to be regardless of what he says, and many of them sleeping a great part of the time, and other plainly manifesting a careless, regardless spirit. With what a complaint may such ministers that have been so treated rise up on the day of judgment before their Master that sent them and set them to work, declaring what pains they took and how they labored to their utmost to speak so as to influence and affect their minds and yet how regardless they were of the message they delivered.

This sermon at length and the entire book is well worth your time. The book is well edited. Each sermon is prefaced by an introduction that sets the time and place. The sermons are marked with notes which help explain the text. Very highly recommended.

 

Jonathan Edwards and Dale Carnegie

29 Tuesday Nov 2016

Posted by in Culture, Jonathan Edwards, Matthew, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

dalecarnegie-2books220px-jonathan_edwards_engraving

 

It all depends upon how you look at it. The first quotation is from Steven Watts’ Self-Help Messiah, Dale Carnegie and Success in Modern America (2013), page 147:

Carnegey [sic] may even have glimpsed his own future. “He who can tell us how to earn more money, lengthen our lives, better our health, increase our happiness, is sure of an attentive audience,” he wrote. “If you know what people want and can show them that they will get it following your proposals, success is yours.” 

And Jonathan Edwards sermon, “The Kind of Preaching People Want”. Here is an excerpt:

If ministers were sent to direct men how they might fulfill their lusts, they would be much better received than they are now. For instance, if ministers were sent to direct people how they might gratify their covetousness, and to tell them of means by which they might grow rich and get abundance of the world, they would be a great deal better received and harkened to than they are now. They would listen to such directions as these with much greater diligence than they do when the minister directs them how they may get heaven and obtain everlasting riches.

In The Salvation of Souls, edited by Bailey and Wills, pp. 62-63.

And as a bonus, Jesus:

Matthew 6:19–21 (ESV)

19 “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Edwards, Heaven is a World of Love

19 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Jonathan Edwards, Love, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Jonathan Edwards Heaven is a World of Love:

There, even in heaven, dwells the God from whom every stream of holy love, yea, every drop that is, or ever was, proceeds. There dwells God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, united as one, in infinitely dear, and incomprehensible, and mutual, and eternal love. There dwells God the Father, who is the father of mercies, and so the father of love, who so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son to die for it. There dwells Christ, the Lamb of God, the prince of peace and of love, who so loved the world that he shed his blood, and poured out his soul unto death for men. There dwells the great Mediator, through whom all the divine love is expressed toward men, and by whom the fruits of that love have been purchased, and through whom they are communicated, and through whom love is imparted to the hearts of all God’s people. There dwells Christ in both his natures, the human and the divine, sitting on the same throne with the Father. And there dwells the Holy Spirit — the Spirit of divine love, in whom the very essence of God, as it were, flows out, and is breathed forth in love, and by whose immediate influence all holy love is shed abroad in the hearts of all the saints on earth and in heaven. There, in heaven, this infinite fountain of love — this eternal Three in One — is set open without any obstacle to hinder access to it, as it flows forever. There this glorious God is manifested, and shines forth, in full glory, in beams of love. And there this glorious fountain forever flows forth in streams, yea, in rivers of love and delight, and these rivers swell, as it were, to an ocean of love, in which the souls of the ransomed may bathe with the sweetest enjoyment, and their hearts, as it were, be deluged with love! Again, I would consider heaven, with regard,

 

 

Edward Taylor, Rapture of Love.6

24 Thursday Apr 2014

Posted by in Desire, Edward Taylor, Jonathan Edwards, Literature, Meditation, Praise

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The previous post in this series may be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/edward-taylor-raptures-of-love-5/

Frost bitten love, frozen affections! Blush:

What icy crystal mountain lodge in you?

What wingless wishes, hopes pinfeathered, tush!

Sore hooft desires hereof do in you spring?

Oh hard black kernel at the core! Not pant?

Encastled in a heart of adamant!

 

What strange congealed heart have I when I

Under such beauty like the sun

Able to make frozen affection fly,

And icicles of frostbit love to run.

Yea, and desires locked in a heart of steel

Or adamant, break prison, nothing feel.

 

Wingless: ungrown

Pinfeathered: undeveloped

Hooft: hast?

Not pant? Don’t you desire?

 

 

In these two stanzas, the poet turns to his own heart and notes that even though he sees such beauty in Christ, he does not respond as he should. The necessity of true and right response of the affection was a point underscored by the son of Taylor’s friend, himself a theologian of some repute:

And in the text, the Apostle observes how true religion operated in the Christians he wrote to, under their persecutions, whereby these benefits of persecution appeared in them; or what manner of operation of true religion, in them, it was, whereby their religion, under persecution, was manifested to be true religion, and eminently appeared in the genuine beauty and amiableness of true religion, and also appeared to be increased and purified, and so was like to be found unto praise, and honor, and glory, at the appearing of Jesus Christ. And there were two kinds of operation, or exercise of true religion, in them, under their sufferings, that the Apostle takes notice of in the text, wherein these benefits appeared.

  1.  Love to Christ; “Whom having not seen, ye love.” The world was ready to wonder, what strange principle it was, that influenced them to expose themselves to so great sufferings, to forsake the things that were seen, and renounce all that was dear and pleasant, which was the object of sense: they seemed to the men of the world about them, as though they were beside themselves, and to act as though they hated themselves; there was nothing in their view, that could induce them thus to suffer, and support them under, and carry them through such trials. But although there was nothing that was seen, nothing that the world saw, or that the Christians themselves ever saw with their bodily eyes, that thus influenced and supported ’em; yet they had a supernatural principle of love to something unseen; they loved Jesus Christ, for they saw him spiritually, whom the world saw not, and whom they themselves had never seen with bodily eyes.

2. Joy in Christ. Though their outward sufferings were very grievous, yet their inward spiritual joys were greater than their sufferings, and these supported them, and enabled them to suffer with cheerfulness.

— 95 —

There are two things which the Apostle takes notice of in the text concerning this joy. (1) The manner in which it rises, the way in which Christ, though unseen, is the foundation of it, viz. by faith; which is the evidence of things not seen; “In whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice.” (2) The nature of this joy; “unspeakable and full of glory.” “Unspeakable” in the kind of it; very different from worldly joys, and carnal delights; of a vastly more pure, sublime and heavenly nature, being something supernatural, and truly divine, and so ineffably excellent; the sublimity, and exquisite sweetness of which, there were no words to set forth. Unspeakable also in degree; it pleasing God to give ’em this holy joy, with a liberal hand, and in large measure, in their state of persecution.

Their joy was “full of glory”: although the joy was unspeakable, and no words were sufficient to describe it; yet something might be said of it, and no words more fit to represent its excellency, than these, that it was “full of glory”; or, as it is in the original, “glorified joy.” In rejoicing with this joy, their minds were filled, as it were, with a glorious brightness, and their natures exalted and perfected: it was a most worthy, noble rejoicing, that did not corrupt and debase the mind, as many carnal joys do; but did greatly beautify and dignify it: it was a prelibation of the joy of heaven, that raised their minds to a degree of heavenly blessedness: it filled their minds with the light of God’s glory, and made ’em themselves to shine with some communication of that glory.

Hence the proposition or doctrine, that I would raise from these words is this,

DOCTRINE. True religion, in great part, consists in holy affections.

We see that the Apostle, in observing and remarking the operations and exercises of religion, in the Christians he wrote to, wherein their religion appeared to be true and of the right kind, when it had its greatest trial of what sort it was, being tried by persecution as gold is tried in the fire, and when their religion not only proved true, but was most pure, and cleansed from its dross and mixtures of that which was not true, and when religion appeared in them most in its genuine excellency and native beauty, and was found to praise, and honor, and glory; he singles out the religious affections of love and joy, that were then in exercise in them: these are the exercises of religion he takes notice of, wherein their religion did thus appear true and pure, and in its proper glory.

-Jonathan Edwards, Religious Affections, WJE, online, vol. 2.

Reasoning to Affections

23 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by in John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

“When he emerged onto the world stage as a revivalist, it was partly because he had become rationally persuaded that the emotions were not being given their due consideration in religious life. Like his contemporary Jonathan Edwards, he was a man of reason whose reason told him he needed to cultivate his heart. He was smart enough to know that it’s not good enough to be smart enough.”

Excerpt From: Sanders, Fred. “Wesley on the Christian Life: The Heart Renewed in Love.” Crossway, 2013. iBooks.

Jonathan Edwards The Preacher Part III

18 Wednesday Dec 2013

Posted by in Jonathan Edwards, Preaching

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The previous post in this series may be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2013/10/29/jonathan-edwards-the-preacher-part-ii/

Jonathan Edwards’ sermons were structured around theological content and commitment, “From first to last the sermons were, therefore, theological. There is nothing of the essayist or the superficial exhorter. If he did not begin with ‘life situations’ the life-situation was dealt with realistically in light of doctrine” (Trunball, 85).

Yet, such preaching was neither manipulative nor dull. Edwards did seek to affect the mind and heart:

Edwards was a striking combination of searching logic with a vivid, oriental imagination. This was kindled by strong, religious emotion founded upon a triumphant experience of conversion. Intellectual acumen, emotional intensity, and experimental faith—these together made him powerful. Trunball, 89.

But Edwards followed the biblical pattern of laying out the sermon as the means by which God works. Edwards did seek a definite transformation, but he sought it by means of the Spirit working through the Word, and otherwise:

The soul of reformation comes from the reformation of the soul. He was concerned to move the individual first of all. He believed profoundly in the sermon as the agency of conversion. Until men were converted, they remained listless and dull concerning the moral and social issues of the day. So he reasoned. Doctrinal preaching was never an end in itself. The special emphasis on the divine sovereignty was not a fad, but the basis of the belief that only as men recognize God’s dominion over life will they be moved to act to change the social order over which they have dominion. Trunball, 91

Trunball notes three elements of Edwards’ preaching. First, Edwards appealed to the affections, the desires of his hearers, “He believed that unless a man was moved by some affection he was by nature inactive” (Trunball, 96).  To achieve this end, Edwards both laid out the glory to had in Christ and the misery of such a loss.

“The second feature in his aim was to awaken the conscience for a verdict” (Trunball, 96).  Edwards did not seek a passive hearer, he intended for the hearer to make a decision concerning the matter set forth:

The purpose, then, was to foster in his hearers a warm, emotional type of religion, touched and vivified by a sense of personal and immediate communion with God (Trunball, 97).

Third, Edwards set forth a three-fold argument.

A) A human being by nature is opposed to and estranged from God:

“ ‘The unconverted are in a condition of infinite sinfulness—guilty of sin against infinite goodness and love—and therefore justly deserve the infinite punishment which now awaits them and form which only teh goodness of God has kept them free until this time’” (Trunball 98, quoting Edwards’ works, vol. 3, p. 245).

B) The effect of such opposition and estrangement is eternal punishment:

“ ‘This punishment is utterly beyond imagination—universal, eternal, intolerable—the most extreme that an infinite God infinitely enraged can invent.’”  (Ibid).

C) The only hope is the hope of God to be rescued by God: “ ‘The only hope of escape is by the free gift of salvation from God.’” (Ibid).

The tension and movement of Edwards’ theology created the force in Edwards’ sermons: The situation is desparate, but a way of escape exists in Jesus Christ.  When Edwards preached of hell, he made hell clear and sure not for abuse or sensationalism, but rather because he sought all to escape from the such an end.

A final note of how Edwards appeared in the pulpit:

 

During the first part of his ministry Edwards wrote out the sermons and read them from manuscript. His gestures were hardly more than those which he used in turning the leaves of the manuscript. Later in life, he preached without writing in full, and, as already indicated, he used notes and outlines. He would lean habitually upon the pulpit with his notes in the left hand, and his right hand was used to turn the pages. The subdued tones of the well-modulated voice were matched by the desperate passion of his heart as he sought to win assent ot the message he preached. The intensity of Edwards lay in the spriit of a man wholly convinced that he was a voice for God and had spiritual authority over the souls of men. Trunball, 100

Edward Taylor: Raptures of Love.1

29 Friday Nov 2013

Posted by in 2 Corinthians, Ascension, Christology, Edward Taylor, Jonathan Edwards, Joy, Literature, Love, Meditation

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Raptures of love, surprising loveliness,
That burst through heavens all, in rapid flashes,
Glances guilt o’re with smiling comeliness!
Wonders do palefac’d stand smit by such dashes.
Glory itself heartsick of love doth lie
Bleeding out love o’re loveless me and die.

Line 1:
Rather than begin with the expected iamb, the poem begins with an accented syllable: Raptures. (One might have expected something like “Now raptures”.) Taylor intends to convey the sensation of being startled.

Rapture is an interesting word because it means to grab something and transport it elsewhere. The love which Taylor sees does not merely stand before him like picture: it grabs hold of him. He does not merely see the “flashes” (line 2), he is being transported.

The Scripture makes plain that God’s love does stand idly outside of the human being, but rather the love of God in Jesus Christ must transform us:

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. 2 Corinthians 5:17.

Taylor puns on the word “love” by using it as a noun and as an adjective. The effect is to make “loveliness” mean more than mere delight — it is something which is attractive because it contains and conveys love.

Line 2:
“Heavens all”: Since the word “heaven” refers to the atmosphere, “outer space” and the place of God beyond the physical creation [heaven is not simply “far away”], the biblical writers will use the word “heavens” to refer to all three.

Jesus Christ at this time sits at the right hand of majesty on high (Hebrews 1:3). He is communicated to us by operation of the Holy Spirit.

Line 3
“Guilt o’re” covered in gold. The accented first syllable forces the movement forward in rapid fashion, thus the structure mirrors the content.

Line 4:
“Wonders” are looking on at the beauty of Christ the High Priest and feel shame and wonder.

Line 5:
Glory personified looks at the glory of Christ and falls lovesick. The image seems to be suggested by Canticles 5:8, “I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if ye find my beloved, that ye tell him, that I am sick of love.”

Line 6:
Taylor expresses the conflict of the saint who knows more than he feels. He knows that he should be as enraptured with the beauty of Christ as Wonder and Glory, but also sees that his affections are cold–thus, he is “loveless”.

It is strange and unfair that Puritans are thought to be dour, passionless people. While they openly condemned sin it was because sin is the cheat of joy and passion. Taylor, in full accord with Puritan teaching, hopes for greater passion and more love. The desire for passion and joy lay at the heart of Puritan teaching. Go to edwards.yale.edu and search for the words “beauty” (2480 entries) “joy” (3379).

Taylor will look upon his loveless in the 7th stanza (What strange congealed heart have I).

The last verb “die” is a bit ambiguous because the form is first person singular (die) not third person (dies). However, it seems best to understand Glory which is bleeding with love to be the subject who dies. The “wrong” form was dictated by the rhyme.

Charity and Its Fruits.2

19 Tuesday Nov 2013

Posted by in 1 Corinthians, Faith, Jonathan Edwards, Love, Obedience

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The previous post in this series will be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/charity-and-her-fruits-1-charity-or-love-the-sum-of-all-virtue/

 

Edwards next proceeds to demonstrate that all virtue that is saving or distinguishing of true Christians, is summed up in Christian love. Edwards sets his proposition upon three arguments: reason, Scripture and the proposition “faith working through love.”[1]

Reason

            It may seem strange that Edwards would dare to argue that “reason” could form basis for any Christian doctrine. The strangeness results not from anything defective Edwards’ thinking but rather from a cultural prejudice which sits upon no greater ground than prejudice. If there has been any good of post modernism, it is the understanding that no human being can claim to argue from some wholly neutral objective place.  The Christian theologian Van Til developed this understanding (in a non-postmodern framework) as presuppositional apologetics.[2] The presuppositions of Edwards which he develops in a rational manner are not sub-rational or unreasonable.  If anything, one who carefully follows Edwards’ thought throughout his works will discover that Edwards constructs a worldview which accords far more consistently with reality, experience and human nature than many of the “rational” arguments which claim the place of “reason”.[3]

Rightly understood, love tends towards virtue.

First. We may argue from what reason teaches of the nature of love. And if we duly consider the nature of love, two things will appear.

Edwards notes that love is what compels the human heart most strongly. And thus love will dispose a human being to rightly value God:

That love will dispose to all proper acts of respect to both God and men. This is evident because a true respect to either God or men consists in love. If a man sincerely loves God it will dispose him to give him all proper respect. Men need no other incitement to show all proper respect but love. Love to God will dispose a man to give honor to God. Love will dispose to worship and adore him, heartily to acknowledge his greatness and glory and dominion. So love will dispose to all acts of obedience to God. The servant who loves his master, and the subject who loves his prince, will be disposed to proper subjection and obedience. Love will dispose a person to behave towards God as a child to a father.

Likewise, love will lead to virtuous action toward other human beings.:

So a due consideration of the nature of love will show that it will dispose men to all duties towards their neighbors. If men have a hearty love to their neighbors, it will dispose them to all acts of justice towards them. Men are not disposed to wrong those whom they truly love. Real love and friendship will dispose persons to give others their due.

He notes that love leads to contentment, humility. In every sphere of human action, love would lead to right conduct. For example, Edwards notes that love present would dispose toward a right politics:

It would dispose a people to all the duties which they owe their rulers, to give them all that honor and subjection which is their due. And it would dispose rulers to rule the people over whom they are set justly, sincerely seeking their good.

He concludes:

And in fine, love would dispose men to do to others as they would that others should do to them, if they were in their neighbor’s circumstances, and their neighbor in theirs. Thus love would dispose to all duties, both towards God and towards men. And if love will dispose to all duties, then it follows that love is a root and spring, and, as it were, a comprehension of all virtues. It is a principle which, if implanted in the heart, is alone sufficient to produce all good dispositions; and every right disposition towards God and men is, as it were, summed up in it.

Second

Reason teaches that whatever performances or seeming virtues there are without love are insincere and hypocritical.

This follows from the proposition that behavior without love is essentially manipulative. It seeks a response and the response is the thing desired, not the good of the other.

Scripture

First, it is the unquestioned proposition of Scripture that love toward God and human beings is the entire purpose of the law:

Or if we take the law in a yet more extensive sense for the whole written Word of God, the Scripture still teaches us that love is the sum of what is required in it, as in Matthew 22:40. There Christ teaches that on those two precepts of loving God with all the heart, and our neighbor as ourselves, hang all the law and the prophets. That is, all the written Word of God. For that which was then called the law and the prophets was the whole written Word of God which was then extant.

And:

Hence love appears to be the sum of all that virtue and duty which God requires of us; and therefore must undoubtedly be the most essential thing, or the sum of all that virtue which is essential and distinguishing in real Christianity. That which is the sum of all duty is the sum of all real virtue.

Faith Works by Love

            Edwards first consider the matter of true faith. He distinguishes true faith from mere “speculative faith” by stating that true saving faith requires assent of the understand and consent of the heart.  What then is the true mark of the heart’s consent? Love:

Now the true spiritual consent of the heart cannot be distinguished from the love of the heart. He whose heart consents to Christ as a Savior loves Christ under that notion, viz. of a Savior. For the heart sincerely to consent to the way of salvation by Christ cannot be distinguished from loving the way of salvation by Christ.

            He also considers the matter of true faith by considering it as a duty owed by human beings to God.  This may sound odd, but it must be understood as true. While we are saved by grace, such grace comes to us unmerited and yet only through the faith (Ephesians 2:8-9).  Edwards considers the content of the duty of faith in light  of the commands and the description of true faith:

Faith is a duty which God requires of it. We are commanded to believe, and unbelief is a sin forbidden of God. Faith is a duty required in the first table of the law, and in the first commandment; and therefore it will follow that it is comprehended in that great commandment, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” [Matthew 22:37]. And so it will follow that love is the most essential thing in a true faith. That love is the very life and soul of a true faith is especially evident from this place [Galatians 5:6] of the apostle Paul, viz. that faith works by love, and James 2:26 compared together:6 “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” The working, acting nature of anything is the life of it. What makes men call anything alive is because they observe an active nature in it. This working, acting nature in man is the spirit which he has in him. Therefore as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without a working nature is dead also.

Edwards then looks at Galataians 5:6, “faith working by love”:

It is further manifest from this place [Galatians 5:6] of the Apostle, wherein he speaks of faith as working by love, that all Christian exercises of heart, and works of life, are from love. For we are abundantly taught in the New Testament that all Christian holiness is begun with faith in Jesus Christ. All Christian obedience is in Scripture called the obedience of faith. Romans 16:26, “Is made known to all nations for the obedience of faith.” The obedience here spoken of is doubtless the same with that mentioned in the preceding chapter, ver. Romans 15:18, “For I will not dare to speak of those things, which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed.” And the Apostle tells us that the life he now lived in the flesh, he lived by the faith of the Son of God, Galatians 2:20. And we are often told that Christians live by faith, which carries in it as much as that all graces and holy exercises and works of their spiritual life are by faith. But how does faith work these things? Why, in this place in Galatians it works whatsoever it does work, and that is by love. Hence the truth of the doctrine follows, and that it is indeed so that all which is saving and distinguishing in Christianity does radically consist and is summarily comprehended in love.

 

 

[1] Again, all references to Edwards’ work come from the wonderful Edwards Center at Yale: http:edwards.yale.edu

 

[2] For a background on presuppositional apologetics, see, http://www.frame-poythress.org/presuppositional-apologetics/

Probably the best aggregator for examples of presuppositional apologetics can be found here: http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/

[3] To be fair, much postmodernism attacks the idea of anything being rational.

Charity and Its Fruits.1 “Charity, or Love, the Sum of All Virtue”

05 Tuesday Nov 2013

Posted by in 1 Corinthians, Biblical Counseling, Jonathan Edwards, Love, Pneumatology, Preaching

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Edwards series of sermons on love (published as “Charity and Her Fruits). The sermons as published by Yale may be found here in volume of 8 of the collected works of Jonathan Edwards, Ethical Writings: www.edwards.yale.edu

Charity, or Love,  the Sum of All Virtue

The text:

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. I CORINTHIANS13:1–3.

 Edwards begins his sermon with the observation that love is of greater value than any other virtue mentioned in the New Testament:

IN these words may be observed

1. Something spoken of as of special importance, and as peculiarly essential in Christians, which the Apostle here calls charity. Charity we find abundantly insisted on in the New Testament by Christ and his apostles. And indeed there is no virtue so much insisted on by them.

Having raised his topic, Edwards immediately dispenses with a potential problem in the text. The word English word “charity” had far too narrow a significance for Edwards’ congregants in 1738. They must not think of giving alms or having kind thoughts about another person. Rather, when they read the word they must think of a broader idea, “that disposition or affection whereby one is dear to another”.

Edwards then makes  second observation about the text, any action—even “the most excellent things that ever belong to natural men—are of no true importance if not stemming from love.

Based upon his observations, Edwards draws out the doctrine which he will explain in the sermon:

All that virtue which is saving, and distinguishing of true Christians from others, is summed up in Christian or divine love.

Now the word “love” can be used in a variety of ways to describe a variety of things. Therefore, Edwards begins explanation by setting out the nature of true Christian love:

I. I would speak of the nature of a truly Christian love.

A. That all true Christian love is one and the same in its principle.

When love springs from my desire to some-thing, then the love will vary because of my heart and will vary with the thing loved.  A truly Christian love cannot be so. This is a strange idea, because we naturally experience a different love toward friends than toward someone we have never met. And that is Edwards’ point for his hearers. The love which the Bible commends and commands has a different source and nature than our common affections.  Edwards makes three points to demonstrate that Christian love is unique in its source and purpose:

First, such love is an operation of the Holy Spirit in and on the human heart:

It is all from the same Spirit influencing the heart. It is from the breathings of the same Spirit that the Christian’s love arises, both towards God and men. The Spirit of God is a spirit of love. And therefore when the Spirit of God enters into the soul, love enters. God is love, and he who has God dwelling in him by his Spirit will have love dwelling in him. The nature of the Holy Spirit is love; and it is by communicating himself, or his own nature, that the hearts of the saints are filled with love or charity.

This must be understood: The love which a Christian is called upon to possess, exhibit, expend does not originate with the individual human being. True Christian love is God’s work in the Christian’s life.

The difficulty which Christians often experience in their love toward neighbor lies in a failure to understand this point.  They look upon the requirement to love neighbor—and even their enemies—and think, I can’t make myself do that. Of course not. The love which a Christian must expend is a love which comes from God. Therefore, the Christian’s trouble lies in their Godward relationship: They are not receiving love from the Spirit’s work and thus have no true love to expend.

If I send my child to the market to buy something, I give him money to spend. God does not merely command love, but God also supplies the love.

Edwards proves this point with the following Scripture references:

Hence the saints are said to be “partakers of the divine nature” [2 Peter 1:4]. And Christians’ love is called the love of the Spirit. Romans 15:30, “Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit.” And having bowels of love and mercy seems to signify the same thing with having the fellowship of the Spirit in Philippians 2:1, “If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies.” It is the Spirit which infuses love to God.8 Romans 5:5, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost.” And it is by the indwelling of this Spirit that the soul dwells in love to men. 1 John 4:12–13, “If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.”9 And ch. 1 John 3:23–24, “And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.”

Second, the love which the Christian shows to God is the same love which the Christian shows to neighbor:

The Spirit of God in the work of conversion renews the heart by giving it a divine temper. Ephesians 4:23, “And be renewed in the spirit of your mind.” And it is the same divine temper which is wrought in the heart that flows out in love both to God and men.

Third, true love proceeds from motive to glorify God. Things in nature, particularly human beings, are loved with reference to God. The Christian is love neighbor because of God. Not as a fearful, if I don’t love I’ll get in trouble. Rather, the Christian must love neighbor because God is excellent, beautiful, holy:

When God and men are loved with a truly Christian love, they are both loved from the same motives. When God is loved aright he is loved for his excellency, the beauty of his nature, especially the holiness of his nature. And it is from the same motive that the saints are loved; they are loved for holiness’ sake. And all things which are loved with a truly holy love are loved from some respect to God. Love to God is the foundation of a gracious love to men. Men are loved either because they are in some respect like God, either they have the nature or spiritual image of God; or because of their relation to God as his children, as his creatures, as those who are beloved of God, or those to whom divine mercy is offered, or in some other way from regard to God.

Why then do Christians have such difficulty with the love described herein by Edwards? A great deal of the fault lies with their guides, their pastors and teachers. The love which the Christian must exhibit flows from a sight of the surpassing glory and beauty of God in Jesus Christ. Love does not proceed by merely haranguing people to “love”.

It is possible to manipulate and guilt people into particular actions. But all such manipulated behaviors will fall short of what Paul commends in 1 Corinthians 13. Indeed, Paul’s point is that such actions are inadequate because they do not proceed from true Christian love: such actions are “nothing”.

If true Christian love proceeds from the operation of the Holy Spirit and proceeds on the basis of exalting in the beauty and excellencies of God, then love can only be rightly motivated by a sight of Christ (2 Corinthians 3:18). 

Jonathan Edwards, The Preacher Part II

29 Tuesday Oct 2013

Posted by in 1 Corinthians, Church History, Jonathan Edwards, Meditation, Preaching, Reading, Study

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

(The previous post in this series may be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/jonathan-edwards-the-preacher-part-1/)

One brutal fault of many preachers is the idea that “plain” and “clear” mean slobberingly dull. In the end, you have been coated words which have no form, no beauty. Perhaps you are fond of the dog that licked you, but you still want to wash your hand.

T. David Gordon’s wonderful book Why Johnny Can’t Preach begins with the sorry (and true) statement,

I’ve always feared to state publicly that, in my opinion, less than 30 percent of those who are ordained to the Christian ministry can preach even a mediocre sermon (11).

He goes on to quote a godly, experienced elder at a fine, orthodox congregation, speaking concerning the current pastor of his church:

David, of course he can’t preach; but I’ve served on pulpit committees off and on for thirty years, and nobody can preach. We look for men who are gifted in other areas, and who are orthodox, but we accept from the outset of the search that we are not likely to find a person who can preach (21).

Gordon does an apt job of diagnosing the cause of such dull-witted monologues which are called sermon (the preachers have more grown up on imagery rather than literature, “because television, in contrast to poetry is essentially trivial”; “What kinds of ministers does such a culture produce? Ministers who are not at home with what is significant; ministers whose attention span is less than that of a four-year-old in the 1940’s” (58-59)) and suggesting a cure (perhaps they could learn to read something beyond Go Dog Go). [1]

Trunball notes that Edwards’ work was precisely the opposite in source and effect:

Edwards had a disciplined mind and a ready pen. His force of intellect, his philosophical grasp of ideas, his knowledge of theology, and his acquaintance with the best English writers, enabled him to write vigorously. Whatever may be thought of the imprecatory sermons, they, together with the pastoral message, were productive of action. That is the primary test of good literature. It was not some emotional disturbance in religious meetings which gave rise to those upsurgings of moral life and commitment. The reading quality of the written word was pregnant with deeps of feeling, wells of truth undefiled, and a running stream of living faith.

The sermons as literature have rhythm and balance, well-defined propositions, and marked climaxes. Novel arrangements, word-pairs, impressiveness of phrase affect us. The logical unity of thought and argument with a definite structure give the sentences a place as good literature.

Like his Puritan predecessors Edwards sought to find the pleasant word: not to delight the mind alone, but to work upon the heart. That was the goal of his preaching.

Jonathan Edwards the Preacher, 75. Such a sermon does not come from nowhere. Trunball methodically points out that Edwards first statured himself in the Scripture – he read, studied, thought, and then thought again concerning the Scripture:

Bible reading and mediation is the foundation of spiritual development for the preacher. Edwards aimed to be an interpreter of the divine Word.  We are not surprised at his keen interest in Bible study. The fruits of those early years of study were reaped throughout his ministry. A man of one book, he made captive all branches of knowledge and thus effectively expounded the eternal to the times in which he lived (Trunball, 77).

Such intensive study gave the force and power of Edwards’ originality: “Originality in man, then, is not the power of making a communication of truth, but of apprehending one” (William Greenbough Thayer Shedd, Homiletics and Pastoral Theology, 37; the true origin lies in God; originality in human beings lies in exegeting that which God has first created, be it nature or Scripture). In addition to his study of Scripture, Edwards intently studied the best of English literature and philosophy and science.  His mind was brimming with words and beauty and ideas which he brought to bear upon the Scripture.

Such intensive education, study and thought must lie behind the sermon—even if it does not show expressly in the sermon.  The sermon must not be a parade of the preacher’s learning (which, as Gordon notes, is likely to be pathetic, anyway), but that doesn’t mean that such learning does not go into the preparation:

But that does not mean that pulpits will be marked by a lack of knowledge and education. The minister may, and in fact must, privately make use of the general arts and of philosophy aas well as employ a wide variety of reading while he is preparing a sermon. But in public exposition these should be hidden from the congregation, not ostentatiously paraded before them. As the Latin proverb says, Artis etiam celare artem –it is the point of art to conceal art.

William Perkins, The Art of Prophesying, 71. [2]

The sermon must contain truth, but it must be digestible, or no one will ever carry it to heart. Just because a sermon must concern truth, does not mean a sermon must neglect the presentation:

Other faults of style result from too exclusive attention to the fact that the sermon is concerned with truth… a sermon requires to be understood, to be interesting, to come to grips with life and its problems, to be moving.

On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, by John A. Broadus, new and revised edition, by Jesse Burton Weatherspoon, ThD, D.D., 1944, p. 239.

The vicious mediocrity of most pulpits (even the music of “killer bands” is dull; it is a bad parody of better bands; repetitive, derivative, uncreative, and registering in a single idiom) is waging an outright war against the Gospel.  When the Gospel cannot be heard, it cannot have effect. 

Yes, but say some of the dullards, Paul would not preach with eloquence! And they cite to 1 Corinthians 2:1,

2 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. (ESV).

I will end with the rejoinder of Dr. Martyn:

He tells the Corinthians that ‘his speech was contemptible.’ That simply meant that he did not affect the rhetorical manner of the Greek rhetoricians; it did not mean that he could not be eloquent. What it did mean was that his eloquence was always spontaneous and inevitable—never contrived, never produced, never done to order. It became inevitable because of the grandeur of the Truth and the conception that had opened itself before his mind. When eloquence is so produced, I say that it is one of the best handmaidens of true preaching. The history of preaching demonstrates this again and again abundantly.

Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preachers and Preaching, 251.

William Perkins from the National Portrait Gallery:

NPG D23054; William Perkins by Renold or Reginold Elstrack (Elstracke), published by Compton Holland, after Unknown artist

 

[1] “Nine Ways to Become a Boring Writer”, Matt Anderson:

Read everything your peers write.  There is no better way to sound exactly like everyone else around you than by immersing yourself in their words.  Forget about the fact that you have  conversations with normal people every day, and convince yourself that to be a relevant writer you must be as familiar as possible with what they are writing about.

Spend all your free time consuming “pop culture.”  The logic works the same as the above:  forget about the fact that you’re already immersed in the culture around you, and that saying anything that might sound strange to it demands above all critical distance from it.  You need your words to be relevant, and liberally sprinkling pop culture references throughout will do the trick nicely while ensuring that your words will be forgotten as soon as the show/movie/song is.

– See more at: http://mereorthodoxy.com/ten-surefire-ways-to-become-a-more-boring-writer/#sthash.vBVNjOES.dpuf