Edwardsean Theology, Part 1: The Inclinations of Man

I must admit that Puritan Theology has never been one of my particularly strong subjects, much less examinations of Edwardsean Theology. In this post, I do not intend to discuss the entirety of Edward’s ministry and theology, but rather begin a discussion on his particular views in Theology. Edward’s has been accused of being an Enlightenment Lockean rationalist, a Newtonian scientific philosopher, a Neoplatonic pantheist, or even a Medieval mystic. Many concede that Edward’s probably relied on philosophical processes a bit to heavily, but I would argue that this did not earn him the label of “an Enlightenment Lockean rationalist” or any other. He was indeed orthodox, and strongly Calvinistic. Edward’s followed Puritan Theologian William Ames in his understanding of the imagio dei in Man. According to Ames, Man consisted of two components; those natural abilities and those spiritual principles. In the Fall, it was only those spiritual principles of man that were destroyed. Edward’s dichotomy taught that while the spiritual principles of man were utterly lost, his natural abilities still remained intact. The question then, for Edward’s, lie in the inclinations of the two parts: which prevails? Adam’s situation then, is indeed quite the conundrum since both parts were still intact. He was created with the inclination not to sin; why was it that he sinned? Edward’s attempt to answer this question has raised flags and furrowed many brows. If Adam was indeed created in holiness (though unconfirmed) what was it that inclined him to sin? After Adam, the answer was simple; because of Adam’s sin, all after him were inclined to sin. Edward’s attempt to explain Adam’s situation is unwarranted and has produced great confusion. Edward’s explanation was that Adam failed to call upon God’s efficient grace and thus fell from his state of unconfirmed holiness. Therefore, while Adam’s inclinations were naturally toward God and good, he acted contrary to them and chose evil. What a paradox! Edward’s insistent on explaining what perhaps should have been left alone draws into question the nature of fallen man. Edward’s seems to have left the door open, ever so slightly to the idea/concept that there may be a portion of Man’s being that is not completely unable. How does Edward’s justify his said adherence to Total Depravity? Next week, we shall discuss the Edward’s view on depravity, and perhaps segway into some of his view on free will and his famous work Careful and Strict Inquiry into the Modern Prevailing Notions of that Freedom of Will which is supposed to be Essential to Moral Agency.

Entry 1

Well, summer school is almost over and I have carved out a few moments to write a quick post. I decided to write this first post about different things on my blog, and my tentative posting schedule. My desire is to, for the time being, post once a week on Monday’s. My hope is that this schedule will allow for me to have meaningful posts as well as ample time for meaningful discussion in the comments. Concerning the nature of this blog, it will attempt to be theological in orientation. I am appealing to the theological blogging community to aid in my personal study and understanding of Scripture. I look forward to future comments and discussion, and the edification that I trust will occur. The name of my blog was an attempt to play off of “Peter, Paul, and Mary” (since my first name is Peter and my middle is Paul). “Graphe” is Greek for a written document, used at times in Scripture to refer to Scripture itself (2 Tim 3:16). Therefore, my blog is about “me, myself, and the study of Scripture.” The Latin phrase under the title is also of importance. If you allow your cursor to rest over the picture, the English translation of the Latin phrase will appear. “What is not biblical is not theological” will be a mantra for me in my attempt to remain grounded in God’s Word, His self-revelation to mankind. Theology must find its basis in the Word, lest it degenerate into philosophical conjecture and ungrounded human hypotheses. I respect both Biblical and Systematic Theology, and understand that both must be founded on a solid exegesis and a solid exegetical method. Items in the sidebar are self-explanatory. Buy a mac, listen to good preaching, go to seminary, read lots on Calvin and by Calvin, drink Starbucks, be a Cubs fan, get a Pit bull and read the NIV. Sheww! Moving on... At the bottom is the infamous quote of the great reformer Martin Luther during his trial at the Diet of Worms. His famous words have inspired many (including myself) and still signify the great devotion to the Word that the reformers exemplified. Every Christian of every era must take this stand; there must be a conviction so strongly felt that such words, when said, strike a cord with other Christians, and harden the hearts and minds of the unregenerate. I end this post by again appealing to the blogging community for your aid. It is with great hesitation that I have begun a blog. Placing my thoughts and reflections on the Internet was not an appealing notion. One of my professors stated that, “There are no ‘Lone Ranger’ Christians.” It is with this in mind that I humbly submit myself to the criticism of friends and other fellows, endeavoring to more fully understand the revelation of our God.

Here I am blog world

It seems as though blogging is the next big craze and I am a bit late getting on board. I have tried to hold out as long as possible, but with the prompting of some friends I have started my own blog. This entry was only necessary for me to set up my template and other options, so hopfully I can get those done in a reasonable time so that meaningful posts can begin.