Logic on Fire

Jonathan Edwards and The Religious Affections
Selected Scriptures
2006.01.31
06SR Session Two

The 16th century Reformation resulted in the creation of numerous Protestant denominations and groups–as compared to the monolithic Catholic Church. Under the threat of persecution many of these groups headed to the New World in hopes of establishing a society and culture that would allow them the freedom to worship as they desired.

Perhaps the most influential of these groups were the Puritans. Like the Reformers, the Puritans believed in basic doctrines like sola scriptura–the authority of the Bible alone, and sola fide–justification by faith alone, and, as their very name suggests, they placed a heavy emphasis on moral purity.

But even though much of the motivation for crossing the Atlantic was religious, this inspiration didn’t last long. In fact, religious affection and zeal declined even as the first generation of settlers died. There were just so many opportunities that occupied their interests, be they business projects, real estate acquisition, or other commodities. In other words, the New World was full of broken cisterns.

Yet almost everyone still went to church. Especially in New England, most remained a part of the church not only because of tradition, but also because some of the colonial rights–like voting–were open only to church members (remember that a United States federal government system was not yet in existence). By the early years of the 1700s, the churches of New England were slowly filling up with unconverted members. Personal love for God was absent but people still filled the pews.

The presence of these unconverted church members eventually hit a crisis point. Since many of the churches at the time were practicing infant baptism, were the children of these unsaved members to be baptized?

Eventually the ministers of New England devised what became known as the Half-Way Covenant, perhaps promoted most by JE’s grandfather, Solomon Stoddard. The Half-Way covenant allowed church members who did not profess salvation could have their children baptized as long as they were not “scandalous livers.” It was called the Half-Way Covenant because of the two ordinances, they got one. At this point they were still prohibited from participating in the Lord’s Supper until they professed faith in Christ.

Though the motivation of the Half-Way Covenant was to keep people happy and coming to church that they might at least sit under good preaching, the Half-Way Covenant continued to increase the number of unsaved church members. Perhaps the majority of church attenders were not believers. Whether motivated by family tradition or societal privileges or something else, they were not motivated by genuine love for God. In fact, there was no guarantee that even ministers were converted.

They needed revival.

1. The Great Awakening

Like today, the churches of New England needed revival in the early 1700s.

Throughout history, in particular American history, there have been revivals. A revival is simply a “reawakening of religious fervor.” [Note also that in the 18th century the word "religious" did not refer to a works based system opposed to faith-based Christianity. Religion was synonymous with Christianity.] Revivals brought new zeal and enthusiasm for Christ on a broad scale.

The first of these American revivals, and probably the one by which all others are judged, is known as the Great Awakening. (There were actually two seasons of increased spiritual fervor, one from 1734-1735 and the other from 1740-1742). After such formality and lifelessness in the church God was pleased to pour out His Spirit and awaken new life in Christ and fresh love for God. Martyn Lloyd-Jones described it this way, “After the drought, came showers.” While many were sucking dust for so long, God was pleased to bring countless New Englanders back to Himself as the fountain of living waters (cf. Jeremiah 2:12-13).

However, along with legitimate spiritual awakenings there were also increasing numbers of counterfeit spiritual experiences. Perhaps no one had a greater understanding of this problem than Jonathan Edwards. In fact, John Piper makes the observation that Edwards was “not only God’s kindling for the Great Awakening, but also its most penetrating analyst and critic.” Elsewhere Piper states:

On the one hand he (Edwards) wanted to defend the genuine and necessary place of affections in religious experience. On the other hand, he was ruthlessly devoted to objective truth and wanted all emotion to be rooted in a true apprehension of reality. (God’s Passion for His Glory, p.93).

Initially Edwards defended many of the odd and unusual experiences against the critics. In fact, he published two works in defense of the awakening: A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God in 1937 and then in 1941 he preached and published The Distinguishing Marks of the Work of the Spirit of God. Both were written primarily to endorse the fact that God’s Spirit oftentimes makes an uncommon and unusual impact in a person. Critics of the Awakenings condemned many of these displays of affection suggesting that doctrine was being sacrificed for sake of experience. But Edwards argued that genuine spiritual life and an illuminated understanding of truth should result in persons being extraordinarily excited and enthusiastic.

However, as time went on counterfeit and excessive enthusiasm increased. Numbers in the church abandoned truth-driven affections and sought whatever experience might bring the next spiritual thrill. These excesses were not only permitted but pursued and encouraged by leaders in the church. Numerous preachers turned Christianity into an experience-seeking religion.

These errors were not new to the church. Some have doctrine with no affections and others have experience/emotion but no truth. People should get excited if they have spiritual life, yet enthusiasm itself does not guarantee the genuineness of faith.

Edwards saw both problems and did what he could to help. But by the early 1740s Edwards’ main criticism of the Great Awakening focused on much of the false enthusiasm that didn’t have any real sight of God or any real reliance on the Savior. It was form and emotional alone. Edwards, though a defender of fervent and zealous responses to God’s work, concluded that experience-driven religion wasn’t even Christian.

2. The Religious Affections

Though he defended much of the Great Awakening in his first two works on the subject, Edwards’ took a different approach in his third.

He began preaching a series titled The Religions Affections (hereafter RA in 1742 at the end of the second Great Awakening. These messages were then edited and published in 1746 containing Edwards’ seasoned, scriptural reflections almost eleven years after the first period of awakening.

He states clearly the intention of his book in the Preface:

There is no question whatsoever that is of greater importance to mankind, and that it more concerns every individual person to be well resolved in, than this: What are the distinguishing qualifications of those that are in favor with God, and entitled to His eternal rewards? Or, which comes to the same thing, What is the nature of true religion? (p.15)

In other words, the most important question for any and every individual person is, How can a person be right with God?

He quickly moves on, however, to explain that even though this is the most important question, and even though Scripture is full of answers, there is hardly a question more fiercely debated and disagreed upon—even among Christians!

Isn’t that true today? Everyone seems to have their own opinions about who is a Christian and who isn’t; what the characteristics of a Christian are and are not. Are there certain things that are necessarily Christian, and if so, what are they?

These are hotly disputed things. Conversations go round and round today about these basic, fundamental things. And these interchanges are not just between believers and unbelievers. We should expect that the world won’t get it. Lack of consensus among non-Christians is not surprising. But the disagreement Edwards addresses is among professing believers.

So his purpose in RA was to identify genuine believers and help to distinguish the characteristics of true Christians from the Bible.

But the very purpose provokes another problem. Edwards knew this. He knew that some would agree with much of what he would say while being irritated that he didn’t mention one of their pet prohibitions. Others would likely object to Edwards for not promoting their favorite Christian qualification.

But worse than that, some don’t want this judging at all. This is the criticism du jour. Preachers who attempt to distinguish or even those who just talk about distinctions are immediately branded as the worst kind of arrogant, the most malicious kind of proud, and the most dangerous kind of intolerant.

Those who distinguish and judge are often seen as making a claim to “know for sure” who is and who isn’t a Christian. This, of course, is arrogant.

But a couple things are important to note. First, JE never claimed omniscience. He never professed to know “for sure” who was and who wasn’t saved, what was a genuine religious affection in someone and what wasn’t. Multiple times he stated that there are fixed limits to what we can ascertain AND that the final judgment is God’s job.

Second, JE never claimed to invent standards or characteristics on his own, nor did he write about these things to gain control over other people. Just the opposite is true. He set out to find what God Himself had revealed about these questions from Scripture. Edwards was interested in simple faithfulness to God’s Word.

And you realize, if God has given us standards, if God has revealed guidelines for judging our own experiences and those of others, then it is actually more proud of someone to ignore those standards! If God says that—at least to some extent—we can know, then to say that we can’t know is truly arrogant. In this case we give ourselves more authority than God while making God into a liar.

So in order to be faithful to God we must know and practice His standards. This is not only an issue of faithfulness, but it is an issue of our spiritual safety and eternal joy. These are the motivations behind The Religious Affections.

Clearing away confusion on this issue is crucial:

It is by a mixture of counterfeit religion with true, not discerned and distinguished, that the devil has had his greatest advantage against the cause and kingdom of Christ…. (p.17)

That is no small phrase: the devil’s greatest advantage. So again, though Edwards wanted to defend everything that was a good and genuine work of God, he also desperately wanted to make sure that he protected against every evil and counterfeit.

It is a hard thing to be a hearty zealous friend of what has been good and glorious in the late extraordinary appearances, and to rejoice much in it; and at the same time to see the evil and pernicious tendency of what has been bad, and earnestly to oppose that. But yet I am humbly but fully persuaded, we shall never be in the way of truth, nor go on in a way acceptable to God and tending to the advancement of Christ’s kingdom, till we do so. (p.16)

When we do not distinguish between true and false Christianity, we do not please God and the kingdom of Christ is not advanced.

Why is this the case? Edwards lists three reasons why knowing and upholding God’s standards for believers is so critical:

1) Because unbelievers will be deceived to their eternal ruin.

If unbelievers think themselves to be safe and in God’s pleasure they will not seek His mercy though they have the greatest need for it. For all their religious activity they earn nothing but more wrath.

By this means the devil gratifies himself, by bringing it to pass that that should be offered to God by multitudes, under a notion of a pleasing and acceptable service to him, that is indeed above all things abominable to Him. By this means he deceives great multitudes about the state of their souls, making them think they are something when they are nothing; and so eternally undoes them; and not only so, but establishes many in a strong confidence of their eminent holiness, who are in God’s sight some of the vilest hypocrites. (p.19)

And if we in the church do not challenge the deception then we also bear guilt for our cowardice.

2) Because believers will be confused about what they’re supposed to do.

If the line between Christians and non-Christians is blurred, so will the path of obedience be obscured.

By this means he (Satan) many ways damps and wounds religion in the hearts of the saints, obscures and deforms it by corrupt mixtures, causes their religious affections woefully to degenerate, and sometimes for a considerable time to be like the manna that bred worms and stank. (p.19)

Even more,

…by what is seen of the terrible consequences of this counterfeit religion, when not distinguished from true religion, God’s people in general have their minds unhinged and unsettled in things of religion, and know not where to set their foot, or what to think or do, and many are brought into doubts, whether there be anything in religion…. (p.20)

3) Because the church is weakened by the lack of purity and distinctiveness.

When genuine is not made different from the counterfeit, there is no witness to the world. What will the world think when it sees worldly people in the church claiming to be godly people? They will not think much of God.

So it is essential to identify “the nature and signs of the gracious operations of God’s Spirit” as distinguished from counterfeits. This is for our own souls, for the sake of the church, and for the sake of showing off the glory of God.

3. Jonathan Edwards

Well, we will get into the specifics of these distinguishing marks of the Spirit as the week goes on. What I’d like to do with the remaining time is tell you why I think JE is someone worth listening to on this subject. What is it that qualifies him? And what can we learn about him and from his example that will help us today? So it is time for some biography and some observations.

Most people either love or hate JE. He doesn’t leave a lot of wiggle room. Some consider him to be one of the most important Christians in church history and probably the most distinguished theologian and thinker ever in America.

But this is definitely not everyone’s perspective. Most history books refer only to Edwards as the preacher of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” and he is caricatured as a fire-and-brimstone preacher; a melancholy, if not downright mean, man. One quote I came across said,

It is not surprising that Edwards’ main business in the world was to scare silly women and little children, blaspheming the God he professed to adore…. Nothing but a disturbed or diseased mind could have produced “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” (quoted in Lloyd-Jones)

Could that be accurate? Is it worthless for us to be studying this man? Can a man wearing a powdered wig like that really have anything for us to learn? Let’s take a look at JE.

As always, by way of footnote, we never want to study a man for his own sake. It is of no value to just get historical or biographical facts in our heads, however interesting they might be. But we are commanded to learn from our teachers, even to imitate their manner of life as they follow Christ (cf. Hebrews 13:7). As Edwards himself said:

Useful men are some of the greatest blessings of a people. To have many such is more for a people’s happiness than almost anything, unless it be God’s own gracious, spiritual presence amongst them; they are precious gifts of heaven.

So while we don’t want to study men instead of studying God and His Word, some men help us to understand Scripture better and love God more. They provide not only great instruction but they provide an example for us to imitate. And both the life and teaching of JE are valuable for us today. None of us will ever be just like Jonathan Edwards. If we think we can be, we will experience great discouragement. But we can learn from his example.

With the time left I’d like to tell you some about his life, give you some reasons why I love him, and then finish with three reasons why he is worth listening to and learning from.

The Life of Jonathan Edwards

Jonathan Edwards was born on October 5, 1703, in East Windsor, Connecticut. His parents were Timothy and Sarah Edwards, who already had four daughters, and were to have six more daughters after Jonathan. Since all 10 of his sisters grew close to six feet, people spoke of Timothy Edwards’ “sixty feet of daughters.”

Jonathan was educated at home, primarily by his father, who regularly involved Jonathan’s older sisters in the process. Evidently JE had much scholastic aptitude and ability as he entered The Collegiate School of Connecticut in New Haven, CN (later to be named Yale) in 1716 at the age of 12. From early childhood he had interest in nature and insects, while studying languages the sciences.

In his “Personal Narrative” Edwards described his conversion that took place sometime in the late spring of 1721:

The first instance that I remember of that sort of inward, sweet delight in God and divine things that I have lived much in since, was on reading those words [1 Timothy 1:17] “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory for ever and ever, Amen.” As I read those words, there came into my soul, and was as it were diffused through it, a sense of the glory of the Divine Being; a new sense, quite different from anything I had ever experienced before. Never any words of Scripture seemed to me as these words did. I thought with myself, how excellent a Being that was, and how happy I should be, if I might enjoy that God, and be rapt up in Him in heaven, and be as it were swallowed up in Him forever!

Having completed his BA in 1720 and then finished his master’s degree in May of 1722. He accepted a call in August, 1722 (19 years old) to preach for a new congregation in New York. It was during this time that he wrote his ‘Resolutions.’ He was pastor there only from August to April of the next year when the new congregation decided to join back with the one they split from.

After visiting his parents in East Windsor and doing some other travels, he returned to (now called) Yale College as a tutor in the summer of 1724.

He had only been at Yale for two years when he was called in 1726 to be the assistant pastor in Northampton, MA, alongside his maternal grandfather, Solomon Stoddard. It was generally assumed that JE would ultimately take over for the aging Stoddard.

Within six months he married Sarah Pierpont. Sarah Edwards is worth not only her own post, but perhaps her own blog. You can read Marriage to a Difficult Man by Elizabeth Dodd, or for a brief look you can read or listen to Noel Piper’s biographical sketch in A God Entranced Vision of All Things. She enabled him to do all that work while taking care of the eleven children. She was an uncommon woman, and Edwards described their relationship as “an uncommon union.”

They had 11 children, and you can imagine that life at the Edwards house was always busy. Remember, there were no refrigerators, let alone supermarkets. Everything they ate–save cheese and chocolates which were purchased in Boston–they grew or raised or prepared from scratch. Some of their clothes were purchased in the city, but most apparel was likewise made at home.

And they always had visitors. We can be thankful for the Edwards’ hospitality because it was through some of their guests that we have a good amount of biographical insight. In a day when there were few if any hotels, the pastor’s house was commonly assumed to be a safe and inviting place to find lodging. Not only these visitors, but it was also common for young pastor to get some live in training. There are numerous instances of these guests as well.

In just under two years, Stoddard died and Edwards became the sole pastor. He preached every week, multiple times. The church in Northampton was arguably the most influential congregation in New England outside of Boston. This was partly due to its size: some 200 families, partly due to Solomon Stoddard’s popularity and influence, and certainly due to Edward’s own increasing esteem.

He preached and studied and wrote and prayed and counseled; all the things a pastor does. As mentioned already, he saw at least two great seasons of awakening in Northampton. He was often asked to preach in other towns as well and was one of the Great Awakenings most recognized and instrumental figures.

His third pastorate was a bit different, located in a frontier village called Stockbridge. After spending over 23 years in Northampton, he was only in Stockbridge from 1751 until 1758. There he ministered to a small group of white settlers and a large group of Indians. During these years he wrote some of his most weighty works, such as The Freedom of the Will, and On Original Sin.

In September of 1757 his son-in-law, Aaron Burr (married to JE’s daughter Esther) died. Reverend Aaron Burr (to be distinguished from his grandson by the same name who shot the man on the $20 bill) had been the president of a new school, The College of New Jersey (later to be called Princeton). So the trustees of the school invited Edwards to be the president. He reluctantly accepted the position and left his family in Stockbridge while he went ahead to prepare things in New Jersey.

But he was only there from February 16 to March 22, dying from a complication of a new smallpox vaccine. When the news of his death reached Sarah in Stockbridge, she was suffering with rheumatism so much so that she could hardly hold a pen. Even so, she wrote this letter to Esther:

What shall I say? A holy and good God has covered us with a dark cloud. O that we may kiss the rod, and lay our hands on our mouths! The Lord has done it. He has made me adore His goodness, that we had him so long. But my God lives; and He has my heart. O what a legacy my husband, and your father has left us! We are all given to God; and there I am, and love to be.

Why I Treasure Jonathan Edwards

Having already given the most pathetic bio of Jonathan Edwards ever, I needed a good (okay, just any) excuse to talk a bit more about his life. So though there are more biographical details to come in the final message of this series, for now I’ll mention just a few of the reasons why I treasure Mr. Edwards.

I treasure JE because he was a preacher. Something about that resonates with me.

I treasure JE because he was a writer. As soon as he was old enough his dad had him reading and studying with a pen in his hand. He was always writing, not just to copy down the ideas of others but to express his own thoughts. In fact, in the basement of one of the Libraries at Yale there are over 60,000 handwritten pages by Edwards. Even when writing was inconvenient he developed a system to record his thoughts. For example, it was almost impossible to write well on horseback, especially in the cold winter months. He had a practice of pinning small pieces of cloth to his coat and charging his mind to remember what sequence of thoughts went with each piece of cloth. When he got home he would go into his study and take the pinned pieces off one at a time, writing down everything he could remember.

I treasure JE because he loved solitude and study. He loved his alone-time with God. There were days when he spent 13 hours in reading, meditation, writing, and prayer. Some evenings he would even skip dinner if he was in a study “zone.” He considered this solitude necessary not just for a pastor, but for a Christian:

Some are greatly affected when in company but have nothing that bears any manner of proportion to it in secret, in close meditation, secret prayer, and conversing with God, when alone and separated from all the world. A true Christian doubtless delights in religious fellowship and Christian conversation, and finds much to affect his heart in it, but he also delights at times to retire from all mankind to converse with God…. True religion disposes persons to be much alone in solitary places for holy meditation and prayer…. The most eminent divine favors that the saints obtained, that we read of in Scripture, were in their retirement.

I treasure Edwards because he was an outliner; he was serious; he was a Calvinist.

I treasure Edwards because he loved his wife and kids. This is so obvious, especially in some of his letters to them. He faithfully shepherded and lead his family in spiritual matters.

I treasure Edwards because he loved the church; he was a church-man. Even when he accepted the call to Princeton it was only because he received counsel to do so. This man, with his intellectual abilities and writing arsenal, chose to spend himself for the sake of the church.

I treasure Edwards because he was willing to sacrifice and give up his own comforts for what he believed in. He did not compromise the truth. More on that in a later post.

Lastly, and perhaps significant to no one but myself, he loved storms.

Scarcely anything, among all the works of nature, was so sweet to me as thunder and lightening….(I) used to take the opportunity at such times, to fix myself in order to view the clouds, and see the lightnings play, and hear the majestic and awful voice of God’s thunder, which oftentimes was exceedingly entertaining, leading me to sweet contemplations of my great and glorious God.

Edwards had intelligence, insight, and imagination like few other Americans. He was analytical like nobody’s business and disciplined to see every study through to its end. He was voracious in his learning and relentless in the work of his office. (These are things that don’t happen by watching more television or playing more video games.) He was honest and modest, and perhaps more than any of these things, he was a spiritual man in love with God.

Three Reasons to Listen to Edwards on the Affections

As we prepare to discuss religious affections in the rest of the series, why should we care what Edwards had to say?

1) Edwards had an intimate knowledge of Scripture.

Early in his Christian life he resolved:

to study the Scriptures so steadily, constantly and frequently, as that I may find, and plainly perceive myself to grow in the knowledge of the same. (Resolution #28)

And it seems Edwards made good on #28. He regularly spent 13 hours a day reading, studying, praying over, and writing about Scripture. He occasionally missed meals because he was in a study “zone” and didn’t want to lose his momentum.

His Blank Bible is one of the clearest examples of this commitment. There is some disagreement in the sources I looked at, but he took a Bible and cut every page out himself, took a blank piece of paper and inserted it between every page. Then he drew a line down the middle of each page on both sides and sewed it back together so that he could take notes on every passage of the Bible. He had notes everywhere. He had firsthand acquaintance with the Bible, not just indirect contact through what other people wrote.

Almost every one of his sermons was an exposition of some passage of Scripture. His books are jam-packed with Scripture citations. And The Religious Affections, which he first preached as sermons, are replete with references to, and commentary on, Scripture.

He was a man who believed in sola Scriptura. With all of his brain-power, he submitted himself to the authority of the Bible. More than that, he loved and longed for God’s Word (cf. 1 Peter 2:1-3).

I seemed often to see so much light exhibited by every sentence, and such refreshing food communicated, that I could not get alone in reading; often dwelling long on one sentence to see the wonders contained in it, and yet almost every sentence seemed to be full of wonders.

So Ian Murray said of him:

The key to an understanding of Jonathan Edwards is that he was a man who put faithfulness to the Word of God before every other consideration. (p.471)

He was a man richly indwelt by God’s Word (cf. Colossians 3:16). We should listen to Edwards because he knew, loved, and submitted to Scripture. Maybe that is why God used JE to bring such a great awakening of affection for Himself.

2) Edwards had a vivid awareness of his pastoral responsibility.

It is not always the case that pastors take their responsibility seriously, but JE was marked by this awareness of his accountability to God. It is too easy for pastors to play the Christian game today, but Hebrews 13:17 haunts us with divine accountability.

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.

Edwards understood that he would give an answer to God. He had read of all the prophets in the OT who had come to God’s people with no care but themselves; false prophets who led the people astray. And the Puritan’s most feared enemy was self-deception or hypocrisy in matters of religion. So conversion or claiming conversion was not something taken lightly in those days, and especially Puritan pastors aimed to expose the soul. Edwards refused to be negligent on his watch.

We see his soul-carefulness even in the very last sermon he preached to his congregation in Northampton. His sermon was on the text in 2 Corinthians 1:14:

just as you did partially acknowledge us, that on the day of our Lord Jesus you will boast of us as we will boast of you.

In that sermon he labored to make plain that ministers and their people must meet one another before Christ on the day of judgment, and both parties would give an account. He argued that pastors in particular are sent by Christ on His business. The pastor does not work from his own prerogative. And the major work of ministers was to:

…meet with their people, in public and private, in order to enlighten them concerning the state of their souls; to open and apply the rules of God’s Word to them, in order to their searching the own hearts, and discerning their state.

And he greatly feared that:

…nothing is more common than for men to be mistaken concerning their own state. Many that are abominable to God, and children of His wrath, think highly of themselves, as His precious saints and dear children. Yea, there is reason to think that often some that are most bold in their confidence of their safe and happy state, and think themselves not only true saints, but the most eminent saints in the congregation, are in a peculiar manner a smoke in God’s nostrils.

He addressed different groups of hearers that they might examine themselves to see if they were in the faith.

[to professors]: I have endeavored, according to my best ability, to search the Word of God, with regard to the distinguishing notes of true piety, those by which persons might best discover their state, and most surely and clearly judge of themselves.

[to the Christless]: Your consciences bear me witness that while I had opportunity, I have not ceased to warn you, and set before you your danger. I have studied to represent the misery and necessity of your circumstances in the clearest manner possible.

[to young people]: I have…earnestly warned you against frolicking….

So JE is worth listening to because he was not playing games. He was aware of God-given pastoral responsibility and that drove him to get knowledge and wisdom and to be as faithful as he could in the discharge of his task.

3) Edwards was a passionate, personal God-lover.

When Edwards gives us instruction on affections and love for God it is not from something he knew by distanced observation. Not only did he see that Scripture requires affections and that his main preaching work was to stir up those affections for God, love for God consumed his own heart. He was enflamed and engulfed in personal affections.

His was not the life of some cold academician, dutifully going about business as usual. Just the opposite. He was a white-hot delighter in God. There is more to come from his teaching on affections but here is just one of his descriptions of his experience of affections:

Once, as I rode out into the woods for my health, in 1737, having alighted from my horse in a retired place, as my manner commonly has been, to walk for divine contemplation and prayer, I had a view, that for me was extraordinary, of the glory of the Son of God, as Mediator between God and man, and his wonderful, great, full, pure and sweet grace and love, and meek and gentle condescension. This grace that appeared so calm and sweet, appeared also great above the heavens. The person of Christ appeared ineffably excellent, with an excellency great enough to swallow up all thought and conception -which continued, as near as I can judge, about an hour; which kept me the greater part of the time in a flood of tears, and weeping aloud. I felt an ardency of soul to be, what I know not otherwise how to express, emptied and annihilated; to lie in the dust; and to be full of Christ alone; to love him with a holy and pure love; to trust in him; to live upon him; to serve and follow him; and to be perfectly sanctified and made pure, with a divine and heavenly purity. I have several other times had views very much of the same nature, and which have had the same effects.

There was a sweet marriage in Edwards between reason and affection, thought and feeling, head and heart, study and worship. That is (sadly) very rare. It was “logic on fire” as the Puritans called it.

And it was this personal, internal affection that motivated his public, external work. He understood that his own convictions and the depth and strength of his inner life was invariably related to his pastoral usefulness. He was not a boring, dull preacher. His aim was not only to teach, but to raise the affections of his hearers. So Edwards sought to put truth on fire, to enthuse, to stimulate, and to enliven. All his life was lived to point the way to God.

The love of God was his doctrinal concern (from his study of Scripture), it was his pastoral concern (as he took his responsibility seriously), and it was his personal concern (because he loved God with all his heart). Perhaps we can learn something from him about our own affections.