Jonathan Edwards at 300

Jonathan Edwards is 300 years old on October 5 2003. He is dead. And yet he speaks, writes Josh Moody.

His works - ever a source of inspiration and fascination for Reformed evangelicals - have recently gained a much wider following. And his influence continues to grow with each passing anniversary.

Many claim his mantle. Some Christians still have not heard of him (we are not talking about triple-jumping here!). What did he say that matters today? Here are some, at least, of the kind of things that he might say to contemporary Christians.

1. Revival is biblical

The doctrine of revival has fallen on hard times. Some do not believe the Bible talks about revival at all. Read Edwards's History Of the Work of Redemption! We might not agree with all the history there, but the doctrine of revival that it contains is pretty persuasive. Some have swallowed a doctrine of conversion that is only semi-supernaturalist. We need to regain the view of regeneration (not simply moral reformation, or reformation of beliefs, but being 'born again') as central to our practice of evangelism. Read Edwards's Narrative of Surprising Conversions. A few contemporary evangelical ministries claim more conversions in a week! Yet there is a depth here - and a supernatural fire! - that is simply biblical. Try Edwards's Divine And Supernatural Light for a work on regeneration that will blow your mind!

2. True experience of God is heart experience

We are suspicious of emotionalism. Rightly so, for there are charlatans who abuse emotions to gain control over their audience's wills. Yet a Christianity devoid of emotion is not Christian. God wants more of us than our feelings. But he does want our feelings. If we're not excited about God, it may be because we don't think we're allowed to be! God intends us to be joyful! It is this doctrine of the 'heart' that is the key. Edwards understood this. He 'parsed' out the psychology of spiritual experience acutely. The heart, for Edwards, was not simply the emotions. Nor was it simply the will. Nor was it simply the mind. The heart was the central place of 'us', of our will/feeling/thinking. This, for Edwards, was a far more biblical way of looking at the human engagement with the divine person. Read Edwards's Religious Affections.

3. Analyse new Christian movements by their 'fruits'

The Pentecostal and charismatic remain controversial. They cannot all be tarred with the same brush. There are meetings which seem to function like Hindu temples with bells announcing the sudden emergent 'presence of God'. There are religious personalities who claim to be able to make you healthy and wealthy if you have enough faith. And then there are charismatics and Pentecostals who, like the noble Bereans (Acts 17.11), search the Scriptures and try to live by them. We need a fine-tuned diagnostic tool. Edwards provides it. It is the 'fruits'. This is not the only thing to be said about diagnosing new religious movements. We must also, of course, analyse doctrine. But when - as is so frequent today - everyone wants to be an evangelical, or will sign whatever, we need also to employ the critical acumen of discernment by 'fruits', or the effects of a movement, or the holiness of an individual. We can't get into it all here - read Distinguishing Marks or, again, Religious Affections.

4. Modernism's plight flows from its man-centredness

When Enlightenment rationalist Descartes put 'I' at the centre of human knowledge with his famous 'I think therefore I am' axiom, he inadvertently unleashed centuries of epistemological confusion. Edwards's epistemology (= how we know things) was rooted in a God-centredness so thorough that it radically affected even his understanding of material existence. At the level of a good sermon this appeared in his God Glorified In Man's Dependence, where he said that 'there is an absolute and universal dependence on God', that this is for 'all [our] good' and that 'God is hereby exalted and glorified'. At the level of a philosophical treatise this appears in his Freedom Of The Will, where the opponents of God's sovereignty are thoroughly routed!

5. Secondary issues can have primary importance

Edwards's removal from the pastorate at Northampton had several different causes. He was morally blameless though he may have been unwise. One of the causes was a disagreement over what most of us would term a relatively minor doctrinal quibble: 'The Communion Controversy'. Basically, Edwards's predecessor (Stoddard) had let unconverted members of the town become full communicant members of the church because their parents had been upstanding Christians in the community. Stoddard deemed Communion a 'converting ordinance'; he hoped thereby the children would be converted. Edwards initially agreed with this view, it seems, but later changed his mind, and wrote a treatise to that effect. Should he have let sleeping dogs lie? Does the doctrine of Communion really matter? Sometimes secondary issues have primary importance. What Edwards was battling about was the nature of the gospel and of the church itself. If Communion is the Christian meal then unconverted people should not take it. In our day, with general doctrinal apathy, it may well be that essential doctrinal issues are hidden until the drift of culture comes up against the tip of the iceberg of an apparently relatively minor doctrinal issue. I can think of a few examples like that. You probably can too.

6. Effective leadership must be biblically intelligent

Edwards's Notes, not intended for publication, breathe a spirit of firmly orthodox but confident and wide-ranging intellectual inquiry. Oh, that we would have more of that today! For Edwards, while intelligent, was not a specialised intellectual. He did not teach at a seminary (at least not until just before his death). He was a local pastor. He was a Christian leader with name recognition. He was also intelligent, and thinking. It is crucial for the health of the evangelical movement for us to bequeath to future generations the need for a profound marriage between intelligence, orthodox biblical commitment, and active evangelical passion! Edwards's contemporaries remarked that of all the scholars they knew Edwards read his Bible most. He drew inspiration from the Bible; it was not a shackles to his intellectual development but a spring board or a seed.

7. Human leaders all fail

As great a man as Edwards was, he was still just a man. And he made mistakes. His argument with his congregation over the 'Communion Controversy' was clearly principled. It may not have been perfectly handled by him. What's more, it seems that the Edwards family commonly had at least one slave. A recently discovered scrap of paper outlines Edwards's attitude to slavery. He appears equivocal. He says that the Old Testament does not denounce slavery but endorses it. He says that the New Testament does not reverse this judgement. It is true that the few notes on this scrap of paper also tell us that Edwards roundly condemned African slavery. And, in fact, white servants at the time were treated much like slaves, being unable to marry or own property without permission. It is the unwilling and permanent nature of African slavery that Edwards condemns. Yet at the end, for Edwards, scholars judge he felt we 'should simply make the best of imperfect social arrangements' (George Marsden, Edwards, page 258). I think we could have hoped for better from Edwards than that. Nonetheless, very few during Edwards's lifetime condemned slavery at all. And Edwards's immediate successors, Samuel Hopkins and Jonathan Edwards, Jr., were outspoken critics of slavery. What's more, by 1741 Edwards himself had already admitted nine Africans to full communicant status in the church. But it seems that he did not sufficiently clearly see the implications of the gospel for this very important social reform.

8. Family & effective ministry are not irreconcilable

Edwards's schedule was demanding. He worked long and hard. And yet his marriage was clearly sweet. And his family life was healthy. Jonathan and Sarah Edwards had many children. Some have traced the Edwards lineage down to the present day and found an unusually high percentage of Christian leaders, pastors, senators, etc., in the fold. Part of Edwards's inheritance is domestic. On October 5 this year in our church I am due to interview a linear descendant of Edwards who himself came to Christ quite recently. We hear so much these days of pastors and Christian leaders sacrificing their families on the altar of ministry. And some then wonder whether a full orbed commitment to the gospel is really compatible with a healthy family life. Edwards, for one, stands as a testimony that it is. His last words to his wife are among the most beautiful and loving imaginable. Tell her, he said - for she was not present - that our 'uncommon union ... has been of such a nature, as I trust is spiritual, and therefore will continue for ever'. For a pious woman who reflects on Jesus's teaching that marriage is for this life only few words could have been more comforting.

What would he say to contemporary Christians?