Jonathan Edwards Collection: Edwards, Jonathan - Rational Biblical Theology: Chapt 13 Edwards Preaching of the Bible

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Jonathan Edwards Collection: Edwards, Jonathan - Rational Biblical Theology: Chapt 13 Edwards Preaching of the Bible



TOPIC: Edwards, Jonathan - Rational Biblical Theology (Other Topics in this Collection)
SUBJECT: Chapt 13 Edwards Preaching of the Bible

Other Subjects in this Topic:

Chapter XIII

Edwards’ Preaching of the Bible



Jonathan Edwards was, in my opinion, the greatest preacher, from the standpoint of content of his messages, who has appeared in history since apostolic times. From the standpoint of delivery, he possibly was one of the most mediocre the Church has ever known. He had none of the grand eloquence of George Whitefield or that powerful or sonorous voice. Apparently there were no real gestures, just a solemn reading of the manuscript most of the time, much to the chagrin of his senior pastor, Solomon Stoddard.

I have not read all of the sermons of John Calvin, and I have read only a sampling of Augustine, some of Whitefield and of the great Spurgeon as well as other notable preachers of the past and present. There have been great sermons among them, and those preachers were mighty communicators of the Word of God in its purity and power. But from the standpoint of deep and solid exegesis, clear and profound articulation of doctrine, searching, thorough, and fervent evangelistic application, I have never found Edwards’ equal. I may be the only person beside himself who has ever read every sermon which he actually preached. I certainly know no other preacher as well as I know Edwards. Being familiar with his overall theology, fascinated by his doctrine, and his beauty of life may, of course, lend a kind of enhancement to my evaluation of his sermons. However I come by it, my verdict is that this is a preacher extraordinary of the Word of God.

A man who has specialized in the rhetoric and style of Jonathan Edwards found “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” his best production from a literary viewpoint. On one occasion, a scholar perusing Edwards’ sermons read a passage to me which especially impressed him. I didn’t tell him that it was a text from the Psalms which Edwards had cited without quotation marks! Edwards’ reputation may be enhanced by his intimate familiarity with and constant interweaving of the sacred text in its most eloquent translation, the King James Version.

Edwards followed the same way of preaching throughout his life. It was preaching in the simple Puritan style. John Cotton, before his Puritan conversion, was celebrated for his oratory and homiletical flourishes. After that he became as simple and transparent as the plain glass windows of the meeting house. As Perry Miller wrote, the Puritan sermon read like a lawyer’s brief. The students who had come to expect exceptional preaching in the high manner from the famous pulpiteer were so disgusted when they heard his new manner of address that they expressed it by pulling their caps down over their foreheads as they slumped in their pews. Edwards was used to that preaching pattern in his father’s church, and so were the congregations he addressed. One of Edwards’ major homiletical features was that he preached with intensity - “the intensity of an inchworm.” *1*

All of Jonathan Edwards’ sermons begin with a contextual introduction. I can not remember ever reading a topical introduction and, of course, never an anecdotal one. *2* Once along with an invitation to address a certain college chapel I was advised not to begin my sermon with a joke. It would have been the joke of the year to ask a Puritan such as Edwards not to begin his sermon with a joke. For Edwards, the Word of God needs no catchy introduction. I can’t remember his ever telling a joke in the pulpit, though he could be subtly humorous or ironic. He preached moving sermons on the weeping of Jesus but notes that we have no record of Jesus ever laughing.

Frequently people ask whether Edwards didn’t go over his people’s heads. I think they wished he did. Though his thought was profound, he was never obscure. His people understood him all too well. He was so clear and convincing, that in the final controversy which led to his dismissal, his people simply refused to listen to or read him.

Though not as often as his minister father, Edwards did have to complain of people sleeping during his sermons. When he preached the funeral message for Col. John Stoddard, he pointed out many excellencies of that saint. Edwards asked: “Who ever saw him irreverently . . . laying down his head to sleep . . . in time of divine service?” *3*

Edwards’ sermons were solid. I tried an experiment once with a sermon he preached during the first Awakening in Northampton. I read it to a class in a theological seminary. This typical sermon that awakened New England farmers two centuries earlier had contemporary seminarians “crying uncle” half way through.



1. An Historical Sketch of Preaching.

Christian preaching has known two styles: Origen’s and Augustine’s. Origen’s seems to have grown naturally from the nature of Scripture itself. Augustine’s more rhetorical model was imposed on Scripture. Origen’s sole goal seems to have been to elucidate and motivate. His was the homiletic of the plain glass window designed not to draw any attention to but away from itself aglow with the purity of the entering light. The stained glass window was used to enhance - if possible - the entering light’s many splendored beauty.

Origen would exegete the sacred text to make it all the clearer to the non-scholarly hearer. Having once understood its meaning, the reader/hearer could then easily see its meaning for him. This was the direct route from God to God’s people.

Augustine had the same purpose but aimed more indirectly to reach the goal even more effectively. This was not only Augustine the rhetorician at work but Augustine the convert. Had he not himself confessed that when unconverted, he listened to Bishop Ambrose because “how beautifully” he spoke? Only later did Augustine realize “how truly” Ambrose spoke. Had Ambrose’s rhetoric repelled, would the skeptical young scholar have ever listened to learn how truly he spoke?

Therefore in Augustine’s view it was: first, delectare (delight); second docere (teach); third flectere (move). The last, (flectere), was first in mind but last on tongue. The first (delectare) was last in mind but first on tongue. In between, what was for Origen (and for Augustine, too) the all-in-all, docere, to teach lucidly the pure truth (Luther’s reine Lehre).

When we come to the Reformation we find that Calvin was an Origenist in his style: the running commentary/application. An exciting delectare beginning such as, “we take up where we left off” ending with a grand climax, “Time is up. I will conclude at this point.”

T. H. L. Parker in The Oracles of God *4* breaks down the Calvin preaching structure into the following pattern:



1. Prayer.

2. Recapitulation on previous sermon.

3. (a) Exegesis and exposition of first member.

(b) Application of this, and exhortation to obedience or duty.

4. (a) Exegesis and exposition of second member.

(b) Application of this, and exhortation to obedience or duty.

5. Bidding to prayer, which contains a summary of the sermon.



Compare, for example, the sermon on Luk_2:1-14 in The Deity of Christ and Other Sermons, edited by Leroy Nixon. *5* For all its simplicity Calvin’s method was the two-voice way of preaching. Calvin himself uses this expression, although in a different application, namely to the inviting and the warning voice of the preacher.



Il faut que nous ayons double voix . . . une voux douce pour exhorter ceux qui se rendrout dociles, et pour les guider au droit chemin: et . . . une autre voix pour crier contre les loups et les larrons afin de les chasser du troupeau. *6*



Thus the minister must ever be wooing the sheep and shooing the wolves.

However, there is another sense in which, according to Calvin’s thought, the preacher speaks with a “double voix.” God has spoken in his Word and He speaks again through his preachers. So, when the man in the pulpit is heard, God is heard, too: not one but two voices are heard.



In his [Calvin’s] Homily 42 on 1 Sam. he stresses the authority of prophets and pastors in the Christian Church, declaring that they are “the very mouth of God.” And in his Commentary on Joh_3:2 he declares that we are not to listen to any persons except those by whose mouth God speaks. *7*



We note, in passing, that all this was true for Calvin because the Bible is the Word of God. In the Scriptures God spoke. He “dictated” their contents to men whom Calvin called “amanuenses.” Calvin exercised thorough freedom in critical analysis in order to ascertain the true Word of God in distinction from accretions or corruptions or emendations. The true Bible text was nothing less than the speech of God before which Calvin bowed in reverence. For him the Bible was inspired verbatim. *8*

Because of their high and sacred calling, ministers are designated by every conceivable honorific. They are the “angels of God.” *9* Divinely instituted (1Ti_1:8), they are the “instruments” of God. God speaks through his ministers and when the people hear them they are face to face with the deity Himself.



We may then conclude from these words, that the glory of God so shines in His Word, that we ought to be so much affected by it, whenever He speaks by His servants, as though He were nigh to us, face to face. *10*



The preacher is the “trumpet of God.” Speaking personally he says:



Has the Lord wished that I should be here in the pulpit to be received by men as their superior? Indeed no. But to be the Lord’s trumpet to summon His to Himself that they may obey Him. In other respects I am one of the flock like the rest. *11*



Indeed, Calvin, as we have seen, calls the preacher the “mouth of God.” Wallace summarizes the matter well:



The Word of God is not distinguished from the words of the Prophet (Hag_1:12, CR 44:94). He is not separated from the minister (1Co_3:7; CR 49:351). God Himself who is the author is conjoined with the instrument, and the Spirit’s influence with man’s labour (1Co_9:1, CR 49:438). So close is this identity that the preacher can actually be called a minister of the Spirit and his work spoken of in the most exalted terms (1Co_3:7; CR 49:350). Indeed it may legitimately be said that it is the preacher who effects what is really effected by God. *12*



Likewise Mülhaupt remarks:



Erhat sich nicht gescheut, diese Einheit von Gott und des Verkündigung des Predigts deutlich Auszusprechen: all die, die unterrichten können in Wahrheit feierlich bekennen, Jesus Christus spreche durch sie. *13*



When we compare Edwards the preacher with Calvin we note similarities. For one thing there is no more fundamental difference between Calvin’s sermons and his Institutes than between Edwards’ sermons and his major theological works. They are almost interchangeable in both cases.

More importantly, each man believed in the inspiration of the Bible and preached it - all of it - as such. Neither Calvinist shrank from preaching the whole counsel of God including predestination and reprobation. The sermon on 2Ti_1:8-9 is a good illustration of Calvin’s usage of the predestination theme. *14* After developing this doctrine in the early part of the sermon he presses for action and the doing of duty saying, “It is wisdom in us to do what God appointeth, and never ask why.” *15* Concerning those who say that election should not be preached, Calvin insisted that “such men never tasted of God’s goodness.” Continuing this sermon in the afternoon, he affirmed that “St. Paul speaketh so largely upon this subject, in his epistle to the Ephesians, that it cannot be but the enemies of God’s predestination are stupid and ignorant, and that the devil hath plucked out their eyes.” *16* After much comfort to the elect he concludes the sermon urging his hearers not to be willingly blind but believing. *17*

But there are differences. Calvin was direct and brief. Edwards was direct but not brief. *18* Calvin himself had answered the Lutheran Westphal’s charge of “babbling” by insisting that he himself stuck to the point and practiced a “cautious brevity.” Everyone knows that Edwards was very repetitious because in his extended applications he kept alluding to points earlier developed in the exposition. This is not really repetition but necessary reminder. All of that specificity which went into the Spider Letter went into the “Spider over the fire” sermon.

Probably the most surprising and unexpected difference between the two preachers was in delivery of the sermons. While Edwards preached his sermons verbatim from a written text, until obliged, mainly by pressure of time, to do otherwise, John Calvin never, so far as our records go, wrote a single sermon. Indeed he opposed others writing as well. In a letter to the Duke of Somerset: “I say this to Your Highness because there is little of living preaching in your kingdom, sermons there being mostly read or recited.” *19* The reason we have some two thousand sermons extant is owing to Denis Raguenier (or, Raguenau) who wrote them as they came from Calvin’s mouth from 1549 until Raguenier died in 1560. Calvin never intended them to be published. Choice as these impromptu sermons were, Doumergue tells us that Calvin spoke from his pulpit sometimes every day for months and sometimes twice a day for weeks. *20* Crackers outside and sleepers inside could call forth comments but not derail his unwritten thoughts.

If Calvin was a classic example of the Origen way of preaching, Edwards was as classic in the Augustinian style. If Calvin’s method was the cunning commentary, Edwards probed more deeply the soul and heart of text and hearer. For him first came a contextual introduction but with this difference: like an eagle Edwards circled over the context until he found his point and then descended deeply to snatch his homiletic prey and hold it up to the full view of all. For the next hour or more, Jonathan Edwards’ only interest was to dissect the text, to analyze it, to feed his hungry people with it.

We will see how he did this more clearly after a glance at the general Puritan pattern with which he worked. In spite of Calvin’s example, the Puritan Calvinists reverted to the classic Augustinian model of preaching mediated by Hyperius and other continental Calvinists. Hyperius in 1553 provided this pattern:



Exordium

Proposition

Confirmation

Confutation

Conclusion (perhaps an exhortation)



But William Perkins’ exposition of the biblical model seems to have been their immediate model, based on 2Ti_3:16. Richard Bernard (1621), Richard Baxter (1655) and William Chappel (1656) as well as the Westminster Directory (1650) followed essentially the same order based on 2Ti_3:16 as did the New England Puritans, John Cotton, Solomon Stoddard and Timothy Edwards.

More important than the style of Puritan preaching was its content. The doctrinal message of New England as of Puritan Old England from the founding of Pilgrim Plymouth in 1620 to the end of the eighteenth century was predominantly Calvinistic. For the first hundred years it possessed a Calvinistic homogeneity, which though not perfect, was different from what obtained elsewhere. In the Middle Colonies, for example, the theological pattern ranged from the homogeneous Dutch and Scottish Calvinism in parts of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania through a latitudinarianism of some Anglican areas, through Lutheran and Roman Arminianism *21* in parts of Pennsylvania and Maryland, to a rather indefinable pietism of the Quakers and Moravians of Pennsylvania.

There is much evidence for New England’s more Calvinistic complexion. First, Pastor John Robinson, the spiritual father of the Pilgrims, was an ardent Calvinist. He bested the Dutch Arminian Episcopius in debates. *22* In spite of his distrust of creeds, he appears to have been convinced that the new light, which he assured his people would break forth from the Word of God, would be a Calvinistic light.

Second, virtually all of the other early migrants to America were Puritans, and Puritans were distinctly Calvinistic. It was their Calvinism against William Laud’s Arminianism that caused their emigration. The background of New England was reformed. Also the standard continental Calvinistic dogmaticians were widely used, especially Johannes Wollebius (Compendium Theologiae) *23* while William Ames’ Medulla Theologiae *24* was a text-book.

Third, the characteristic writings of the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries were clearly Calvinistic. To mention only a few: Bradford’s History of Plymouth Colony in New England Memorial; *25* Morton, in New England Memorial; *26* Cotton Mather’s first American church history Magnalia Christi *27* as well as his Ratio Disciplinae Fratrum Nov. Anglorum *28* in which he writes:



[T]here is no need of reporting what is the Faith professed by the churches of New England; for everyone knows, that they perfectly adhere to the CONFESSION OF FAITH, published by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, and afterwards renewed by the Synod at the Savoy. *29*



Harvard’s Vice President, Samuel Willard, lectured monthly in Boston on Westminster’s Shorter Catechism, which lectures were later published in the first systematic theology printed in the Colonies. *30*

To be sure, anti-Calvinistic works appeared, such as William Pynchon’s Meritorious Price of our Redemption (1650); but it was the General Court of Massachusetts that ordered John Norton’s reply, A Discussion of that Great Point of Divinity, the Sufferings of Christ, (1653), which was Calvinistic.

In the fourth place, not only did its official synods remain loyal to Calvinism, but the tenor of its theological writers displays the same loyalty. Its maintenance of infant baptism, integral to the Calvinistic covenant conception, is evident. Perry Miller contended that the federal doctrine meant to minimize the aspect of inherited pollution, *31* but Shelton Smith rightly denies this. *32* Smith also observes that “prior to 1750, New England Puritans maintained their doctrine of original sin with practical unanimity.” *33* The same may be said, at least generally and nominally, of all the tenets of Calvinism.

Fifth, the general synods frequently affirmed and never denied the doctrines of the Reformed Faith. The Cambridge Synod of 1662 was particularly important. While it approved the Half-way covenant, (which some think may be incompatible with Calvinistic orthodoxy) and adopted Congregationalism (which is not the characteristic Calvinistic polity) it endorsed the Westminster standards as its own, thereby indicating its adherence to explicit Calvinism.

A sixth indication is seen in the preaching of early New England. Babette Levy finds the following doctrines, every one of them compatible with Calvinism, and some distinctively so: preaching the whole counsel of God; preaching of the law as preparation for the gospel; Christ and the covenant of grace; Christ as God-man, and his three mediatorial offices; Christ as bearing the wrath of God for his people; dependence on Christ for efficacious grace; justification by faith and reconciliation; inability to know beforehand who is elect; the death of some as a vindication of the justice of God; uncertainty about the fate of children dying in infancy; heaven and hell as definite localities; God conceived of in classic Augustinian terms and with little anthropomorphism. *34*

Seventh, popular Calvinistic education is seen in the use of the Westminster Catechisms and the New England Primer, and later, McGuffey’s Readers.



2. An Historical Survey of Edwards’ Preaching



(1) Early Preaching

Edwards began preaching in 1721 while a graduate student. We have virtually all of his early sermons preceding his main preaching ministry at Northampton. These sermons were clearly and fully written out. All show a surprising maturity in the young preacher. Also, the doctrines which characterized his whole ministry were plainly present, even the “seeking” doctrine.



(2) Revival Periods

We have a special interest in Edwards’ preaching during awakenings, those bright, but relatively brief, outpourings of the Holy Spirit in conviction and conversion. The limited time of the awakenings is well documented:



To every revival there is a time limit. It has its day, then it ceases to be. Luther set the limit to a revival at thirty years; Isaac Taylor at fifty years. Fitchette, in his Wesley and his Century, restricts it to a generation. “Time,” he says, “is a remorseless critic of religious movements. Its arresting force is visible in the spiritual realm. A great revival is usually linked to a single commanding figure . . . and the revival ends with the individual life; sometimes indeed before it. It is a wave that spends itself within some little definite area of time. Barely does it outrun the span of a generation. A great revivalist, like a great statesman, easily becomes a spent force.” *35*



This seems to be true of New England and Jonathan Edwards. While many others participated in the revival in their own and in Edwards’ church, he was the central figure. When he passed his crisis the indigenous New England awakening appears to have passed its crisis. After 1744 there was little awakening in Northampton and there was little elsewhere.

A point not always observed by those who notice the periodicity of revivals is that there are smaller wheels of revival within larger wheels, smaller intervals within greater ones. In Edwards’ revivals in Northampton this is apparent. The general span of the revivals was roughly from 1734 to 1744.

The peaks of this period were at the end of 1734 through the early months of 1735 and 1740-41. Between these great peaks of revival were the smaller ones coming in 1736, 1738, and again in 1742. When we project the history of the Northampton church backwards through the ministry of Stoddard and forward through the ministry of Edwards’ successor, we find the same basic pattern, all on a smaller scale.

The preaching of Edwards during the period of awakening differed only in emphasis from his earlier and his interim preaching. The doctrines were the same. He always preached Evangelical Calvinistic principles. Burns states that evangelical doctrines are present in all revivals:



It is a significant fact also, and we point this out without disparagement of those who do not hold this doctrine, that neither Unitarianism, nor Deism, nor any other system which rejects the Cross, knows anything of revivals. *36*



Edwards inferred that not only generally evangelical principles but particularistic Calvinistic principles were essential to all true revivals. As W. Cooper wrote in his preface to Jonathan Edwards’ Distinguishing Marks, “it is certain, these fruits do not grow on Arminian ground.” *37*

The emphasis, during the awakening periods fell, of course, on awakening sermons. In 1734 and 1735 we have a total of 35 dated sermons, including the eight on “Justification by Faith.” Of these, no less than 29 are awakening or evangelistic sermons. Of the six that would not be so considered, most were occasional sermons (ordinations, funerals, etc.). In 1740 and 1742 we have 34 dated sermons. Twenty-one are awakening sermons and thirteen were not, with the latter, again, largely occasional sermons. During the two great revival periods, therefore, of 69 dated sermons, 50 are evangelistic. That is, nearly three-fourths of the dated sermons of this period were awakening sermons.

It is to some of these evangelistic sermons that we confine our attention in this chapter. We will arrange them, rather arbitrarily, under five headings related to this theme. These are: first, sermons dealing with the peril of the unconverted and the necessity of conviction; second, sermons dealing with the mercy and gracious salvation of God; third, sermons dealing with divine regeneration and conversion; fourth, sermons dealing with man’s responsibility and opportunity; and fifth, sermons dealing with the marks or evidences of true conversion.

The sermons dealing with the peril of the unconverted is the second largest group of awakening sermons, yielding in number only to those dealing with the responsibility and opportunity of men. This group represents the awakening sermon proper - awakening sermons among the awakening sermons. It is the pointing out of the dreadful peril of men that was most immediately designed to arouse them.

The most famous of the imprecatory sermons of this period or any period, indeed the most famous of all Edwards’ sermons, the most famous American sermon and one of the most famous sermons of all time was the one commonly called “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” Trumbull in his History of Connecticut says that the congregation was “secure, loose and vain, greeting ministers with an air of indifference and manner lacking in common decency.” *38* We all know the Enfield congregation did not feel the same after that sermon.

In the context Edwards finds the vengeance of God threatened against Israel because in spite of all God’s wonderful work among them they remained void of counsel. The text, Deu_32:25, implies that this vengeance causes sinners to be always exposed to sudden destruction. Indeed, they are liable to fall of themselves alone. The only reason that they do not now fall is that God’s appointed time has not yet come. Hence the doctrine: “There is nothing that keeps wicked men at any moment out of hell but the mere pleasure of God.” The teaching part of the sermon consists of ten proofs of the doctrine. First, there is no want of power in God nor, second, any want of ill-desert in men. Therefore “the sword of divine justice is every moment brandished over their heads. . . .” Third, they are already under sentence (Joh_3:18) and, fourth, are now the objects of that same anger that is expressed in the torments of hell.



The wrath of God burns against them; their damnation does not slumber; the pit is prepared, the fire is made ready; the furnace is now hot, ready to receive them; the flames do now rage and glow. The glittering sword is whet, and held over them, and the pit hath opened its mouth under them. *39*



Fifth, the devil stands ready to devour them and sixth, even now principles reign that would flame out into hell-fire and turn souls into a fiery oven if God did not restrain. It is no ground of assurance that there is no visible means of death at hand for the “unconverted men walk over the pit of hell on a rotten covering” and, in the eighth place, care does not in the least secure them nor, ninth, do the greatest pains, even in the use of the means of grace save. Solemnly he concludes the array of arguments noting that God has made no promises to any except the children of the covenant, who are not known.



In short, they have no refuge, nothing to take hold of; all that preserves them every moment is the mere arbitrary will, the uncovenanted, unobliged forbearance of an incensed God. **



In the application he turns to the congregation telling them that what was said in the doctrine was true of all including them. There is nothing between you and hell but the air. “Your wickedness makes you as it were heavy as lead.” And the more you continue in it the greater God’s wrath, which is like a dammed up river, becomes. “Justice bends the arrow at your heart,” he continues, employing every conceivable kind of metaphor to convey imminent and terrible danger.



The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect, over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours. *41*



The sermon concludes with an appeal to consider the awfulness of this wrath of God; this “exquisite horrible misery” of which the preacher has given but a “faint representation.” “[T]his is the dismal case of every soul in this congregation that has not been born again,” however moral and sober and religious they may otherwise be. “How many is it likely will remember this discourse in hell.” Perhaps “before tomorrow morning.” This is the abrupt and unalleviated ending found in one edition of the sermon.

Part of the explanation of the impact of this overpowering sermon on the Enfield congregation, and on everyone who has read it since and been moved to fear, sobriety, or indignation by it, is the vast array of sensational metaphors. Images such as the archer with the drawn bow, the loathsome spider held over the fire, pent-up waters and unleashed lions appear sadistically designed to terrify.

Edwards himself is often given the blame or the praise for the use of such telling figures. Actually every one of them, except the spider over the fire, is taken directly from holy writ. This fact, as De Witt says in contrasting Edwards with Dante, is what makes modern man indignant with the former but not with the latter. Dante’s rhetoric seems as terrible as Edwards’, but men take Dante as poetry and Edwards as fact. Men read Dante and remain the same. They read Edwards and become enraged, dismayed, or converted.

The earlier sermon on Mat_16:26 is a kind of cosmic picture of the same truth. “We live in a world that has wo denounced against it.” In this text Christ declares the coming ruin of the world. Though the elect will be spared, they are few, and the world as such will be destroyed, just as a city is said to fall though a few individuals escape. Since the fall of mankind, God has left the world largely in the devil’s possession. The tokens of this dread fact are evident: first, so much of the world in all ages has been left in ignorance; second, the number of the godly is so small; third, religion flourishes for such a short time while unbelief often prevails for millennia; fourth, injustice and vice usually prevail in the world; fifth, awful temporal judgments come on the earth; and sixth, the final destruction of the world by fire is decreed. Edwards then brings the theme to bear ominously on his congregation as he shows that sin is the cause of the world’s having this “wo” denounced against it and that of all sins, unbelief is the worst. Those regions which have had the gospel will be most severely condemned. “Christ came into the world for the salvation and happiness of the elect but [also?] for the more dreadful condemnation of reprobates. Joh_9:39.” *42*

Joh_3:36, with the two sermons devoted to it, develops the last point: the wrath of God against unbelief. “Unless we believe on Christ we shall never see life;” “he that don’t believe on the Lord Jesus Christ the wrath of God abides on him.” *43* This must be so because the law of God has been violated, his honor has been laid in the dust by sin, and if he pardoned without Christ he would dishonor the Son by making Him a “needless savior.” God will slay you, Edwards told his congregation, with a greater death because your sins are not circumstantial as the heathens’ and papists’. You have had “instruction.” The last two pages of the sermon are devoted to describing the miseries of men outside of Christ.

The second sermon shows that hell is not merely the absence of God’s loving favor but the presence of His awful, abiding wrath. This wrath must abide, because sinners do not come to Christ to be delivered from original and accumulated guilt and thereby aggravate it the more. God is angry with sinners when they maltreat His saints; how much more when they despise His Son. Edwards reminds his hearers that an insect can kill them but they will stand against God. The futility of their tears without faith is brought home by the observation that the devil would be far more importunate than they if he had the opportunity to escape the divine furnace.

The other side of the sin of not believing in Christ is the sin of believing in oneself. “The law which natural men trust in to justify them will only condemn them.” *44* This is a rather brief and outlinish presentation of the doctrine that Edwards basically unfolds in his Treatise on Grace and sermon-treatise, Justification by Faith. The sins of men are infinite and their “virtues” are of no value because they are not sincere, not perfect, not complete and not invariable. Two-thirds of the sermon is devoted to warning his people that unbelievers are often as fatally pleased with their “prayers” and works as they are with their gay clothing.

A more frightening sermon than the famous “Sinners” sermon was preached earlier in the same year (1741), and remains still unpublished. While the Deuteronomy sermon represents the sinner as at the mercy of an enraged God and therefore in imminent danger, Rom_9:22 reveals that it is God’s intention to pour out his full wrath on the reprobates: “That it is one design that God has upon his heart to show how terrible his wrath is.” *45* There was always a ray of hope of escape in the former sermon; this is all darkness. The proposition is based on the words of Paul: “what if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction. . . .” In the introduction, Edwards shows his own inner tension about this subject. There are things in the Bible, he says, that are above our comprehension. God simply does not explain them but only tests our faith and humility. In answer to the question, “Why does God find fault?” no answer is given. There is only the silencing reminder that God is sovereign and like the potter can make what he wishes of his own clay. He wishes to reveal His wrath in some of it (as well as show how wonderful His grace is in some). It is God’s purpose to make His declarative glory complete - that is, to reveal all His attributes. The revelation of His wrath throws light on other attributes. His majesty and His goodness, for example, are seen in His awful wrath. This must be seen because God is not content merely to tell it. He will also display it. His wrath also shows the sacredness of His authority and the dreadfulness of disregarding it.

By contrast, the wrath of God shows the preciousness of His favor. When blessed saints see God’s wrath on sinners that will double the sweetness of their joy. Indeed, the awfulness of hell is not incredible since it is a revelation of the wrath of God. Nor is the figure of fire merely hyperbolic, for the same reason. No image can fully express the inconceivable wrath of God, though the Bible uses many pictures that give the idea of extreme misery and it vividly sets forth hells torments in order to try and express the finally inexpressible. That hell is the wrath of God also explains why it must be eternal. Only in that way could it begin to express infinite fury which cannot be expressed intensively. If God is going to reveal His wrath we ought to strive to be sensible of it. This is best done by considering the wrath endured by Christ. Love and wrath go together; we cannot have due sense of either without the other. If we will not make ourselves sensible of it in this world we will be made sensible of it in the next.

As a pathetic footnote to this theme comes the August 1741 sermon on 1Co_11:32 : “’Tis a dreadful thing but yet a common thing for persons to go to hell.” *46* Hell is a more common affliction than the fever. More people lose their souls than their estates. It is common among men of all ages and nations, of all sexes and conditions; among the visible people of God, ministers and people; among those in the same house and family. A minor accident makes news but not this infinite disaster. Yet if we knew of only one in this congregation who had gone to hell how it would awaken us.

In the last month of the same year came the sermon on Joh_3:8 : “God is sovereign in the work of conversion” based on Christ’s words to Nicodemus that the “wind bloweth where it listeth.” The congregation was first given a careful definition of sovereignty as consisting in God’s ability to do what in his wisdom He sees meet to do. He is under no obligation to man to bestow conversion, neither at any particular time nor in any particular manner. The members of the Godhead may be obliged by voluntary covenant to one another but to no creature. Nothing in strict justice, holiness, truth or consistency obligates Him. This sovereignty not only exists but it is exercised by the choice of some individuals of all sorts and at all times of their lives and under a variety of circumstances, to conversion.

The sermon on Joh_3:7, “’Tis no wonder that Christ said that we must be born again” *47* and the sermon on Joh_3:10-11, “There is such a thing as conversion” *48* as well as that on 1Th_5:23, “In true conversion men’s bodies are in some respect changed as well as their souls” *49* are important preachments on conversion, but we will consider more particularly the exquisite treatment of Joh_6:45, “There never was any man that came to understand what manner of man Christ was but his heart was infallibly drawn to Him.” The above sermons show that God works in conversion; this one pulls the veil aside to show how He works.

In the context of this verse Christ had been pointing out that the Jews did not believe on Him because they were not taught of God. From this Edwards raises the doctrine: If men once saw Christ, all their corruption would not keep them from Him. What hell could not conquer this vision brings down from its proud throne. Nor can any of their objections stand against it. Their carnal mind rejects the evidence, cites the greatness of their sins, intrudes the power of their lusts and stresses the offense of the cross, but all to no effect. Nor can Satan hold them. He finds his prey taken from his teeth. Why is all this so? Because in this discovery God Himself is exerting Himself. This light that now shines is not only about God but is God Himself. This new principle establishes itself in the abode of their very heart. It is not only the nature of the discovery that accounts for its irresistible power, but what is discovered. Christ is so alluring, His love and His sufferings so attractive as to overcome all reticence. Edwards apparently felt that much application was unnecessary.

Not only does Edwards not shy away from divine sovereignty in his most evangelistic preaching, but he once affirmed that his sermons which stressed that doctrine were most blessed in conversion. Still there is a distinct emphasis in this awakening period on sermons directed to the responsibility and opportunity of men and the use of the means of grace by sinners. To show the close correlation rather than disjunction of these two ideas, we note the application of the sovereignty sermon on John 3:8. *50* Having developed the doctrine of sovereignty Edwards gives an application longer than the doctrinal development itself. It deals entirely with what men were to do in such a situation. First, they should not quarrel with God who has the right to be sovereign. Second, under the circumstances there is no reason for not having charity to others because they have not sought so long as you. Third, there should be no envy of those who have obtained. Fourth, men should use means “not as thinking that there is any merit or natural efficacy in the means but only as an appointed way of waiting on a sovereign God.” Fifth, there is encouragement, for God may choose to save even very great sinners. And, sixth, the convert should be thankful. At this point he injects a caution for those who may be tempted to think there is no use to use the means. If you are careless about the use of means, says Edwards, you have no ground to hope for salvation at all. Sovereignty does not deny that those most careful are most likely to obtain salvation. Nor does it deny that those most careless are likely to receive worse destruction. Seventh, what folly in those who commit sin intending to repent of it afterward, when the power of repentance is not with them but God. Finally, those who delay repenting are warned. The sermon ends with an exhortation for people not to trust anything that they do.

The famous series of sermons on “Justification by Faith,” *51* while freighted with heavy controversy, minute analysis, fine distinction, prolonged doctrinal development, preached against the advice of many friends, and given a chilly reception by some, was nonetheless the occasion of the first great Edwardsian revival among the farmers of Northampton. It may seem beyond the omnipotence of God to use such a series of sermons to such a group of people by such a staid preacher to effect even one conversion much less to revive a community. Nevertheless, it happened. It may not be too difficult to understand just how God accomplished the effect by such apparently uncongenial means. The sermons have more doctrinal than homiletical significance and we shall not attempt even briefly to outline the contents. Only one thing will we indicate - and that has been aptly done by Joseph Tracy - what in the nature of these sermons was really congenial to an awakening. “Edwards made men see in Justification by Faith that ‘God had not appointed any thing for men to do before coming to Christ by faith. . . .’” *52* Edwards opened the door to Christ and he opened it wide and no Arminian could shut it. The people came in.

Other sermons in this period dealing with the responsibility and opportunity of men fall into two groups. The first group urge men to seek the kingdom of God and the second warns those who are not doing so. Edwards urges sinners to seek the kingdom by looking to Jesus, *53* and by obstinate, violent persistence. *54* Those who do not seek are advised that the way to life is straight and narrow and only few find it. *55* Some even of those who do seek do not find it. *56* Those to whom the kingdom has come nigh in revival and who yet have not sought are in an especially perilous state. *57*

“We that live under the gospel are called upon to look unto Jesus.” *58* We should “feast the eyes of our mind with His glory.” Temporal joys have no glory by comparison. Clothes, building, and all besides Christ is futile and unworthy.

Sermons on Mat_11:12 are most instructive. *59* After extracting his doctrine from Christ’s words, Edwards proceeds briefly to point out the characteristics of seekers of the kingdom before entering his lengthy application. Seekers must consider at the outset the difficulties before them. They must leave their own country and friends and they dare not be as easily discouraged as the Israelites in the desert when they heard of the giants in the land of promise. Seekers must lay out all their strength and bear many wounds of battle, but not give up though unsuccessful in many assaults and never certain about the ultimate outcome. They must resolve to conquer or die.

In the application, they are exhorted to make the effort, however difficult. The kingdom is worth it. Edwards encourages them this far: “there is good reason to think God will help you” if you do make this kind of effort. At this point an inquiry is considered: “How shall I be violent? Give up my business?” No, but you must thoroughly reform your life and live in a way of complete obedience, denying the most besetting sins. Goliath must be killed before Philistia can be taken. Agag must die before the Amalekites can be defeated. There must be a complete and permanent break with all sins. You must strive against your lusts, the devil, your temptations. At the same time, wrestle with God in prayer for without His help all your striving will be of no avail. God may be pleased to resist you for awhile, as Christ did with the woman of Phoenicia and with Jacob, but this may be to test your faith. You must continue to strive, patiently, resolutely, urgently. Read your Bible and especially, attend the Lord’s Supper. *60* “Seek heaven in this way and then ’tis probable you will obtain.” Those who have been striving for a long time he asks: how have you been seeking? have you been violent? have you an “Aachan” in your heart? do you doubt? have you neglected something? have you slain the giant? Do as David: slay Goliath first and the rest will be easy.

It is an insistence of Edwards, frequently repeated and often used as a basis of evangelistic appeal, that only relatively few will find salvation. We have earlier observed that he used this fact as one proof that this was a world which has “wo” denounced against it. In the two sermons on Mat_7:13-14 he brings the fewness of the saved into central focus and exhorts his congregation to be among the few.

Calvin, too, had warned his generation that many people seem to be willing to be saved only in a crowd. Augustine had held the same conviction about the relatively small number of the elect. Edwards however, is almost the last very eminent Calvinist who has held this view. The vast majority of the last two centuries, Charles Hodge and B.B. Warfield among them, hold a more optimistic doctrine. With Edwards, however, this is a strongly held and constantly preached doctrine. Before and after these Matthew sermons Edwards stressed the point. In his sermon “Natural Men in a Dreadful Condition” (Act_16:29-30), *61* for example, he says: “It is but a peradventure, whether God will ever give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” *62* Edwards continues by arguing that:



Another thing which shows the danger there is that they shall never be converted, is that there are but few comparatively who are ever converted. But few of those, who have been natural persons in time past, have been converted. Most of them have died unconverted. So it has been in all ages, and hence we have reason to think that but few of them, who are unconverted now will ever be converted; that most of them will die unconverted and will go to hell. *63*



While the doctrine that few are saved has been held by others besides Edwards hardly any preacher has stressed as he did, the notion that many even of those who seek the kingdom will not find it. On the surface of it, there may seem to be an inconsistency in Edwards at this point. Calvinists generally believe that since the natural man does not seek God, the first evidence of a man’s regeneration is his seeking God. Seeking, in other words, is proof that a person has already found. That Edwards is really no different in his thinking from the generality of Calvinists, although some of his expressions could be misleading, becomes clear when we consider, for example the sermon on Rom_11:7, “There are multitudes of men that seek salvation that never obtain what they seek for.” The first part of the doctrinal section of this sermon shows the nature of futile seeking. The seekers who do not obtain what they seek are, first, those who think of heaven and have only casual concern about it. Second, some “wish” that they were godly, but have an anemic desire to be holy. Third, they implement their wish to the extent of doing some things. They do not do all their duty, nor any of their duty thoroughly. Nor are they completely neglectful of their duty. Fourth, their intentions are better than their performances. The time for implementation of them never quite arrives. Fifth, they have some hope for the future when they will cry more importunately, when their lusts subside, and when death is not so remote. The reason such seeking is vain is shown in the next section.

The well known sermon “Pressing into the Kingdom” (Luk_16:16) *64* belongs to this awakening period and certainly contains much teaching on this subject. Counsels Edwards:



[H]e that is diligent and painful in all duty, probably will not be so long before he finds the sensibleness of his heart and earnestness of his spirit greatly increased.” *65*



[I]f you sit still, you die; if you go backward, behold you shall surely die; if you go forward, you may live. And though God has not bound Himself by any thing that a person does while destitute of faith, and out of Christ, yet there is great probability, that in a way of hearkening to His counsel, you will live. . . . *66*



Often mentioned in the application of other sermons, the peculiar danger of those who have been unrenewed in the midst of revival is the theme of at least two sermons in this period. Luk_10:11 carries the doctrine: “Those who have the kingdom of God brought nigh them and have rejected it would do well to remember and thoroughly consider that the kingdom of God has been nigh unto them.” The doctrine of Act_8:21 is, “When the Spirit of God has been remarkably poured out in His converting and saving influences on a people ’tis an awful thing to dwell among them and yet to have no part or lot in the matter.”

While Edwards was defining the marks of true conversion in Religious Affections and counselling the awakened about it constantly, he apparently did not preach on the subject a great deal. He seems to have been preaching to the unawakened much more than to the awakened. He was persuading people to be converted more than giving them the tests of conversion. This was done occasionally and incidentally. Only four sermons at this time would seem to be primarily relevant. They are: Mat_2:10, “When those that have been earnestly seeking Christ come to find Him they have reason to rejoice with exceeding great joy;” Mar_14:3, a sweet sermon on the devotion of Mary of Bethany; Act_10:4, “To be much in deeds of charity is a way to have spiritual discoveries;” and Joh_10:11.

The Cornelius sermon (Act_10:4-6) deserves to be placed by the side of the “Divine and supernatural light.” Because the Roman centurion was busy in prayer and alms, these came to God as a “memorial” and God granted him a vision leading to clearer knowledge of Christ and a filling with the Holy Spirit. Hence the doctrine: “To be much in deeds of charity is the way to have spiritual discoveries.” *67* It is important to be diligent in the second table of the law, alms in this case, as well as the first, prayer in this case. Christians should not only give, but give liberally. Some of their giving is so niggardly that it is a memorial to their contempt rather than their generosity. Much of the doctrinal part of the sermon is spent showing that God promises to such giving a revelation of Himself. Edwards illustrates this from biblical history. In the application, he challenges his people to give as Cornelius did and see if the Lord does not pour out His Spirit. In addition to wide appeal to Scripture in support of his thesis Edwards makes a reference to Francke’s work in the German orphanages which God has wonderfully blessed for thirty years. Such philanthropy will mark the latter days. The sermon closes with an appeal to give the Lord carnal things and He will exchange them for spiritual things.

There are some seventy-five sermons not counting the series, later published as Charity And Its Fruits, written during the years 1736-1739. Of this number we regard twenty-three as essentially awakening or revivalistic sermons. Some thirty-seven of them are non-revivalistic. Two important series belong to this period: sermons on the parable of the ten virgins and “Charity and Its Fruits” on 1Co_13:1-13. The former series has something of an awakening character, but both concentrate on earnest Christian self-examination.

Four main subjects make up the burden of the preaching during these years. The fact of, lamentation for, and causes of the departure of the reviving Holy Spirit are developed at length. *68* Second, the importance and nature of self-examination is finely set forth in the two series above mentioned. Luk_24:32 is an individual sermon on this subject: “’Tis a common [thing] with the saints that their hearts do burn within them while divine things are represented to them.” Edwards also speaks frequently to the unrevived, unconverted and especially of their peril heightened because of their resistance to the former workings of the Spirit. *69* A great deal more attention is paid, in the fourth place, to the revived. Their obligations are stressed in many sermons of the period. *70* Further, the Christian’s comfort is the concern of many sermons. *71*

2Sa_20:19 throws searching light on Northampton’s besetting sin - party strife. Revival had subdued the feuding spirit, but now as the Holy Spirit withdrew, this unholy spirit came back. The text comes from a period of civil strife in ancient Israel and records the words of the wise woman to one of the hottest heads among David’s forces - Joab. Leading the army in pursuit of the fleeing rebel, Sheba, Joab followed him to the city of Abel where he had taken refuge. Joab was prepared to level the town, but the wise woman called to him and assured him that she would have the head of the rebel Sheba thrown over the wall. She did and Joab left, sparing the town.

From this episode, Edwards draws this lesson. “When a spirit of strife has been prevailing among a visible people of God, and they have been divided into parties a person may well rejoice, if he can say he is one who has been peaceable and faithful among them.” Edwards shows the importance of the right spirit as well as the right cause. Joab’s cause was right but his spirit was evil. Such persons “oppose others for their contention, yet their manner of opposing them is contentious.” “They oppose contention in a contentious manner.” The way to extinguish fire is not to oppose fire to fire, but to throw water. The noble-spirited person is not moved by self-concern, but with love for God’s people. Not acting in vengeance, he avoids backbiting and rejects “evil surmisings.” After showing why such a person may well rejoice, Edwards turns to his congregation reminding them that their “old iniquity” had broken out again but that some remained faithful and peaceable in Israel.

Detailing the sins of the majority, he then faces the objection that he was making too much of all this. But that, in the light of God’s great goodness, was impossible. Despairing of the feuding town the preacher appeals directly to the faithful and peaceable urging them to put out the fires, not to associate with the contentious, but to pray for them.

How Edwards preached when there was no revival going on may not be so interesting, but may be more significant. We have a clearer picture of the preacher when left to himself undetermined by exceptional circumstances. We see how he followed up and prepared for the revivals to come.