“Resolved, when I think of any theorem in divinity to be solved, immediately to do what I can toward solving it, if circumstances don’t hinder” (Resolution 11).
Here is the heart and mind of a man that desired God. Edwards was a man that spent his life thinking about God and the things that related to God. This resolution is required by a man that intends to love God with his mind and to keep his first two resolutions which I will list: “Resolved, that I will do whatsoever I think to be most to God’s glory and to my own good, profit, and pleasure, in the whole of my duration, without any consideration of the time, whether now or never so many myriads of ages hence” (Section of Resolution 1). “Resolved, to be continually endeavoring to find out some new invention and contrivance to promote the forementioned things” (Resolution 2).
When a person studies the Bible and/or theology, there are seeming contradictions and issues that arise. One can choose to ignore those, handle them simplistically, or dive to the depths of the issue. Edwards seemed to always want to dive to the depths of the issue. Yale University Press has put out four volumes of Edwards’ Miscellanies, from a through 1360, in which he wrestled with many issues. Some of his wrestling with issues or musing on paper extends for several pages. It is obvious that he took his theology seriously from his many writings and from his resolutions.
Some think that Edwards was guilty of novelty in his theology and even used too much philosophy. The older Southern Presbyterians Robert Dabney, James Thornwell, and John Girardeau certainly did. While they would defend him at points, they seemed to believe that he was innovative at too many points in his theology. I would like to present another view. I believe that Edwards was a man that started with God and His glory at all points. This made it harder for him to fit with any particular theology that might be more driven by other issues. Edwards strove to make all that he did flow from the glory of God and that primarily. He did this in his sermons, his theological writings, and his more philosophical writings as well. While he was an orthodox theologian, he did differ because of his thorough God-centeredness at all points. While his logic was precise, it seemed that he was more concerned that his theology flow from the glory of God and end in the glory of God than he was with holding to a traditional way of putting things. This caused many to look at him as a man with novel views.
Edwards ran into many problems that he had to work out from his radical God-centered view of things. He had more problems to solve than other theologians because he worked from a different paradigm. Systematic theology is very concerned about logical consistency within the doctrines that are held. That is a very good and noble goal. However, Edwards wanted consistency with the glory of God. It is not that he wasn’t concerned with logical consistency between the doctrines, but he was more concerned with the consistency that a doctrine had with the glory of God. This caused him to think through his doctrines from a different view than others did.
As an example, we can look at the difference Dabney had with Edwards’ ethics. Dabney thought that Edwards was a Utilitarian. On this Dabney is simply very wrong. In his writing on The Nature of True Virtue Edwards tried to use more of a philosophical language in setting out theological truths. I think this is what threw Dabney off in trying to read Edwards’s writings on ethics. Edwards used the phrase “Being in general” in that work and if Dabney or anyone does not get that definition right a great misunderstanding will occur. The term, as Edwards used it, simply meant God and all intelligent creatures. Dabney seemed to think that Edwards used it to say that man’s definition of good is simply to do that which leads to the greatest good for the most. Edwards meant that we must do what is for the glory of God out of love for God or we are not doing what is best for all men either.
Edwards drove himself to continually work on theology in order to work it out in a consistent manner with the glory of God. While others have misunderstood what he was doing, he is a great model for all of mankind to follow. Out of love for the glory of God we should pray and strive that all of our theology and practice flow from the glory of God and tend to the glory of God. That is what it means to love God while we do theology and Bible study. Imagine what it would be like to study theology and the Bible while breathing out desires and love for God. That is what Edwards did and that is what we should do too.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment