Memo to Jonathan Edwards

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by darinhouston » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:35 pm

RND wrote:"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
I like your quote -- except, it forgot to say "rinse and repeat"... truth is likely then ridiculed again.

User avatar
RND
Posts: 651
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Victorville, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by RND » Sat Dec 13, 2008 2:00 am

darinhouston wrote:
RND wrote:"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
I like your quote -- except, it forgot to say "rinse and repeat"... truth is likely then ridiculed again.
Thanks. Arthur Schopenhauer was an atheist. His quote is proof that even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

You Are Israel
Sabbath Truth
Heavenly Sanctuary

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by Paidion » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:16 pm

Paidion do you suppose that Jonathan Edwards was invited to many get-togethers and socials? Doesn't seem like the jovial sort.
Well, apparently he scared many people out of hell, or scared the hell out of many people ... as the case may be.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Jill
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:16 pm

Post by Jill » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:30 pm

.
Last edited by Jill on Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by Paidion » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:31 pm

A panguine writes...
Panguine? That's a new word for me! Not some kind of "penguin" is it? I couldn't find the word in any dictionary.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Jill
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:16 pm

Post by Jill » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:34 pm

.
Last edited by Jill on Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
RND
Posts: 651
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Victorville, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by RND » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:02 pm

karenprtlnd wrote:
RND wrote- "Arthur Schopenhauer was an atheist. His quote is proof that even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while. "All truth passes through three stages. First is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is acceped as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860.
Arthur Schopenhauer is nothing to me.
That's great!
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

You Are Israel
Sabbath Truth
Heavenly Sanctuary

User avatar
RND
Posts: 651
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Victorville, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by RND » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:04 pm

Paidion wrote:
A panguine writes...
Panguine? That's a new word for me! Not some kind of "penguin" is it? I couldn't find the word in any dictionary.
I didn't even know they wrote. I thought they used Blackberry's! :D
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

You Are Israel
Sabbath Truth
Heavenly Sanctuary

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Memo to Jonathan Edwards

Post by mattrose » Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:47 pm

I read Edwards sermon today (part of preparing for my own next sermon). I had a number of thoughts:

1. It took me longer than expected to get to a line/paragraph that I truly was at odds with. I was actually quite surprised (I don't recall reading the sermon thoughtfully at any previous point in my life) that the language in the early part of the sermon was more about God holding people up from looming destruction. God's graciousness seemed to be working against some external/natural fate in the first paragraphs.

2. Just to add another positive (because a lot of negative is coming), I also appreciated Edward's attributes as a preacher. The sermon is bold (good quality, notwithstanding that enthusiasm may sometimes be misdirected). The sermon used a lot of powerful imagery (perhaps also a fault in another sense) that, I would imagine, captivated many of its hearers (and readers since). I think Edwards communicated his message very powerfully. It's just a question of whether it was a message God was pleased with.

3. Fairly early in the sermon, Edwards switches from the idea of God removing mercy to the idea of God actively raging against the sinner. And it seems to me he struggled with these 2 (in my opinion) different concepts for a little while before going all out for the latter concept.

4. It isn't really until he gets to the 'application' section (or just before that) that the sermon, in my opinion, gets really terrible. And here is where I will list the things that I consider to be very terrible about this sermon:

A. Edwards seems extremely reluctant to even mention God's love. Many times in the sermon He refers to the fact that God holds sinners in his hands, preventing them from experiencing wrath for the time being... but Edwards never really comments on WHY God does this. Actually, that's not quite correct. He repeatedly says it's due solely to God's 'pleasure' or 'arbitrary will.' Well... give me something more Mr. Edwards! WHY does God experience pleasure at keeping wicked people alive? Could it be b/c He loves them? Is it legit to call someone's will completely arbitrary? Doesn't something have to motivate a will to do something? What 'will' is it? I'd think it'd have to be a loving motivation. A will to save. But Edwards repeatedly avoids this (and I do mean REPEATEDLY). He seems strangely opposed to reflecting on God's goodness in the sermon.

B. A lot of the 2nd half of the sermon seems to pit God against God. God's wrath is eager to torment sinners, but God's restraint keep that wrath at bay. God seems schizophrenic. God is pictured both as a raging storm and a front that keeps it away from the area. He's pictured as both a dam blocking water and the water trying to break through it. He's pictured as an angry guy with an arrow, but also the one who stops the assassin from shooting. "How excellent his love and how terrible His wrath..." simultaneously! I am not quite sure what to make of this God other than that He sounds in need of therapy.

C. The sermon seems to ignore, in large part, the greatest revelation of God's character (Jesus Christ) and the greatest statement describing God's character (God is love). A few times, Edwards comments that God is 'dreadfully provoked' whereas 1 Cor. 13 says that love is not provoked. He says that once a sinner dies God's love for them is no more and only His wrath remains, whereas 1 Cor. 13 says love perseveres and never fails. Worse still, he says that God is willing and wanting to show His wrath on His enemies, whereas Jesus said to love our enemies. Almost every single biblical reference that Edwards uses is from the sometimes shadowy revelation of the Old Testament.

D. Edwards speaks of hell as eternal torment / everlasting misery, but about half the passages he cites lend themselves more to the idea of extinction. He simply doesn't comment on such issues.

E. Edwards makes an appeal for the congregation to wake up and, with a sense of urgency, come to God. But one wonders what motivation (other than flat out fear) would cause someone to come to a God who is so incredibly angry and hateful toward them until they do so? Wasn't it while we were sinners that God lovingly sent His son to die for us? Shouldn't the love of God be our primary motivation? At the very least, it should be the motivation that remains.

I know I'm not saying anything about the sermon that hasn't been said before. But I think the sermon has done A LOT of damage. And the fruit that is often attributed to it, I think, is more often rotten than not.

Post Reply

Return to “Views of Hell”