This is our fourth meeting.
Because we have a lot
to do this morning
we'll review the previous 3 weeks quite quickly.
So far, we've learned about the life of Jonathan Edwards,
discussed what he wrote in the preface to Religious Affections,
and talked about Part I of the book.
Jonathan Edwards lived
from 1703 until 1758.
Who are some people who also lived while he was living?
George Whitefield
Charles & John Wesley
David Hume
Why did Edwards write The Religious Affections?
To address the question:
"How do we discern between that which is good,
and that which is evil?"
He said this was especially important
because Satan's main strategy
is to try to mix error with truth within the church.
I mentioned 3 errors within the church today:
Anti-intellectualism -- denying the importance of truth.
Antinomianism -- denying the importance of God's law.
Egalitarianism -- denying differences among people.
Last week,
We learned that the term
the affections refers to the mind yearning,
just as the will refers to the mind choosing,
and the understanding refers to the mind learning.
They are important
because they are essential to true belief.
The Scripture talks of true believe
involving the fervent devotion of the entire soul,
that is, the mind yearning.
We're ready now to go on to Part Two of the Religious Affections.
Its title is:
Showing What Are No Certain Signs
that Religious Affections
are Truly Gracious,
or that They are Not
Edwards begins this part like this:
If anyone,
on the reading of what has been just now said,
is ready to acquit himself, and say,
"I am not one of those who have no religious affections;
I am often greatly moved with the consideration of the great things of religion:"
let him not content himself with this,
that he has religious affections:
for as we observed before,
as we ought not to reject and condemn all affections,
as though true religion did not
at all
consist in affection.
So on the other hand,
we ought not to approve of all,
as though everyone that was religiously affected had true grace,
and was therein the subject of the saving influences of the Spirit of God;
and that therefore the right way is to distinguish among religious affections,
between one sort and another.
Therefore let us now endeavor to do this;
and in order to do it, I would do two things.
I. I would mention some things,
which are no signs one way or the other,
either that affections are such as true religion consists in,
or that they are otherwise;
that we may be guarded against judging of affections by false signs.
II. I would observe some things,
wherein those affections which are spiritual and gracious,
differ from those which are not so, and may be distinguished and known.
The first of these things
is what he does in Part Two.
He discusses 12 things
that are
not
signs
whether a person's religious affections are godly.
That is,
a truly regenerate person
may exhibit these signs,
or he may not.
And a truly unregenerate person
may also exhibit these signs,
or he may not.
We're going to try to look at 6 of those this week,
and 6 next week.
As I told you last week,
in the class today,
you all are going to do some work.
I've got a sheet of paper for each of these 6 non-signs.
I've asked six folks to serve
as group leaders --
fellows, please stand up.
Please get together with someone who has been given
one of the sheets.
As a group,
I want you to come up with a convincing argument
why the non-sign you have is a non-sign,
that is,
why it is neither a sign of religious affections being godly,
nor a sign of religious affections being ungodly.
Here's a hint about one way to do this:
Find an example from Scripture
of a believer exhibiting the sign,
and an example from Scripture
of an unbeliever exhibiting the sign.
If it is the case that both a believer
and a non-believer
can exhibit the sign,
then it can't really be a sign.
If someone in your group has a copy of Religious Affections,
you may use that, too.
You'll have about 10 minutes to do this,
then I'll give each group leader
time to explain his group's answers.
[ groups worked, then presented results,
all of which were quite good.
I added some of what is
below ]
Non-sign number 1,
in Edwards' words:
It is no sign one way or the other,
that religious affections are very great, or raised very high.
For short, let's call this simply,
Intensity.
[ group presented results ]
At the time Edwards wrote the book,
quite a few people were claiming that
intensity was a negative sign --
If some one had intensive religious yearnings,
It was a certain sign that Satan was at work.
So he begins by showing that this isn't the case.
He does this by giving quite a few examples of
believers showing intensive religious affections.
Let's take only one: Paul.
Look at Romans 9:1-5
I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, {2} that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. {3} For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, {4} who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, {5} whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.
Clearly this shows intense religious affections,
intensive yearnings of the mind.
Clearly, also, Paul was regenerate,
so intensity cannot be
a sign of unregeneration.
To show that it cannot be a certain sign of regeneration,
consider the Israelites during the exodus.
Edwards puts it like this:
... the children of Israel were greatly affected with God's mercy to them, when they had seen how wonderfully he wrought for them at the Red Sea, where they sang God's praise; though they soon forgot his works. So they were greatly affected again at mount Sinai, when they saw the marvelous manifestations God made of himself there; and seemed mightily engaged in their minds, and with great forwardness made answer, when God proposed his holy covenant to them, saying, All that the Lord hath spoken will we do, and be obedient. But how soon was there an end to all this mighty forwardness and engagedness of affection! How quickly were they turned aside after other gods, rejoicing and shouting around their golden calf!
Edwards describes the second non-sign like this:
It is no sign that affections
have the nature of true religion,
or that they have not,
that they have great effects on the body.
We'll call this:
Bodily Affects
[ group presented results ]
Giving examples of unregenerate people
having bodily affects is simple,
so seeing that this is not a sign of regeneration is also simple.
Examples of bodily affects
on the regenerate abound in the Scripture,
so we also see that this is not a sign of unregeneration.
Here're two examples from Edwards:
The prophet Habakkuk
speaks of his body's being overborne
by a sense of the majesty of God,
Hab. 3:16, "When I heard,
my belly trembled:
my lips quivered at the voice ..."
So the Psalmist speaks
expressly of his flesh trembling,
Psa. 119:120, "My flesh trembleth for fear of thee."
Concerning the possibility that
the Scripture references are all figurative only,
Edwards wrote this:
Before I leave this head, I would farther observe, that it is plain the Scripture often makes use of bodily effects, to express the strength of holy and spiritual affections; such as trembling (Psa. 119:120; Ezra 9:4; Isa. 66:2, 5; Hab. 3:16), groaning (Rom. 8:26), being sick (Song 2:5, and 5:8), crying out (Psa. 84:2), panting (Psa. 38:10, and 43:1, and 119:131), and fainting (Psa. 84:2, and 119:81). Now if it be supposed, that these are only figurative expressions, to represent the degree of affection: yet I hope all will allow, that they are fit and suitable figures to represent the high degree of those spiritual affections, which the Spirit of God makes use of them to represent; which I do not see how they would be, if those spiritual affections, let them be in never to high a degree, have no tendency to any such things; but that on the contrary, they are the proper effects and sad tokens of false affections, and the delusion of the devil. I cannot think, God would commonly make use of things which are very alien from spiritual affections, and are shrewd marks of the hand of Satan, and smell strong of the bottomless pit, as beautiful figures, to represent the high degree of holy and heavenly affections.
The third non-sign Edwards describes like this:
It is no sign that affections are truly gracious affections,
or that they are not,
that they cause those who have them
to be fluent,
fervent,
and abundant,
in talking of the things of religion.
I'll call this
Verbosity.
[ group presented results ]
In Edwards day,
many people were likely to denounce as unregenerate
any one who spoke freely and often about religious matters.
There were also people
who saw verbosity in religious things as a sure sign of regeneration.
We can see that verbosity is not a sign either way
by seeing the Scripture both
commands us to speak to others about the things of God,
and warns us about those who lips praise God,
but whose deeds show hatred for God.
Though the Scripture be full of rules, both how we should judge of our own state, and also how we should be conducted in our opinion of others; yet we have nowhere any rule, by which to judge ourselves or others to be in a good estate, from any such effect: for this is but the religion of the mouth and of the tongue, and what is in the Scripture represented by the leaves of a tree, which -- though the tree ought not to be without them -- yet are nowhere given as an evidence of the goodness of the tree.
Edwards description of the fourth non-sign is this:
It is no sign that affections are gracious,
or that they are otherwise,
that persons did not make them themselves,
or excite them of their own contrivance
and by their own strength.
I'll call this:
Origin outside self.
[ group presented results ]
That true believers can have
affections that originate from outside themselves is
clear in the Scripture.
Edwards cites Ephesians 1:18-19 as one example:
I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, {19} and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. ...
So, origin outside self can't be a sign of unregeneration.
How about it being a sign of regeneration?
Edwards writes this:
There are other spirits who have influence on the minds of men, besides the Holy Ghost. We are directed not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits, whether they be of God. There are many false spirits, exceeding busy with men, who often transform themselves into angels of light, and do in many wonderful ways, with great subtlety and power, mimic the operations of the Spirit of God. And there are many of Satan's operations which are very distinguishable from the voluntary exercises of men's own minds. They are so, in those dreadful and horrid suggestions, and blasphemous injections with which he follows many persons; and in vain and fruitless frights and terrors, which he is the author of. And the power of Satan may be as immediate, and as evident in false comforts and joys, as in terrors and horrid suggestions; and oftentimes is so in fact.
The fifth non-sign that Edwards discusses
is described by him this way:
It is no sign that religious affections are truly holy and spiritual,
or that they are not,
that they come with texts of Scripture,
remarkably brought to the mind.
My short-hand for this is
Scripture quotations.
[ group presented results ]
No one argues that Scripture coming to mind
is a sure sign of unregeneration,
so we'll not worry about that side.
As for Scripture quotations being a sure sign of regeneration,
Edwards writes the following:
What evidence is there that the devil cannot bring texts of Scripture to the mind, and misapply them to deceive persons? There seems to be nothing in this which exceeds the power of Satan. It is no work of such mighty power, to bring sounds or letters to persons' minds, that we have any reason to suppose nothing short of omnipotence can be sufficient for it. If Satan has power to bring any words or sounds at all to persons' minds, he may have power to bring words contained in the Bible. There is no higher sort of power required in men, to make the sounds which express the words of a text of Scripture, than to make the sounds which express the words of an idle story or song. And so the same power in Satan, which is sufficient to renew one of those kinds of sounds in the mind, is sufficient to renew the other: the different signification, which depends wholly on custom, alters not the case, as to ability to make or revive the sounds or letters.
We know the devil's instruments, corrupt and heretical teachers, can and do pervert the Scripture, to their own and others' damnation, 2 Pet. 3:16. We see they have the free use of Scripture, in every part of it: there is no text so precious and sacred, but they are permitted to abuse it, to the eternal ruin of multitudes of souls; and there are no weapons they make use of with which they do more execution. And there is no manner of reason to determine, that the devil is not permitted thus to use the Scripture, as well as his instruments. For when the latter do it, they do it as his instruments and servants, and through his instigation and influence: and doubtless he does the same he instigates others to do; the devil's servants do but follow their master, and do the same work that he does himself.
The sixth non-sign is the last one we'll discuss today.
Edwards introduces it like this:
It is no evidence that religious affections are saving,
or that they are otherwise,
that there is an appearance of love in them.
Let's call this one
Appearance of love.
[ group presented results ]
Just like the fifth non-sign,
to use Edwards words,
THERE are no professing Christians who pretend
that this is an argument against
the truth and saving nature of religious affections.
But, on the other hand, there are some who suppose
it is a good evidence that affections are
from the sanctifying and saving influences of the Holy Ghost.
But the Scripture makes plain that this is not true.
Edwards gives Matthew 24:12-13 as an example:
"And because lawlessness is increased, most people's love will grow cold. {13} "But the one who endures to the end, he shall be saved."
About this passage, Edwards writes:.
Which latter words plainly show,
that those spoken of before,
whose love shall not endure to the end,
but wax cold,
should not be saved.
Persons may seem
to have love to God and Christ,
yea, to have very strong
and violent affections of this nature,
and yet have no grace.
Next week we'll look at the final six non-signs.
If you have a copy of the book,
please read the rest of Part II.
I'll close with a selection from the "Miscellanies"
#598, on The Scriptures.
Listen to this closely,
because it touches on many things,
including apologetics.
Much of the Scriptures
is apt to seem insipid to us now,
as though there were no great matter of instruction in it,
because the points of instruction most plainly contained in it,
are old to us
and what we have been taught from our infancy.
They have been most plainly taught in the world
these many hundred years,
so that doctrines seem self-evident
and so plain to us now,
that there seems to have been no need
of a particular revelation of such things,
especially of insisting upon them so much.
But how exceedingly different would it have seemed
if we had lived in those times
when the revelation was given,
when the things were
in a great measure new,
at least as to that distinctness
and expressiveness of their revelation?
It is so now with some of those
that seem to us very plain points
of what is now called natural religion.
If we had an idea
of the state of the world
when God gave the revelation,
they would appear glorious instructions,
bringing great light into the world,
and most worthy of God.
We are ready to despise
that which we are so used to,
which is so common and old to us,
as the children of Israel despised manna.