It’s important to keep in mind that Edwards wrote this almost exactly one hundred years before Darwin’s On the Origin of the Species was published.

1336. There are these things that seem to show that there was NO CREATION BEFORE THE MOSAIC CREATION.

1. Those that suppose that there was a creation before the Mosaic creation, generally suppose the Mosaic creation to respect only this globe of the earth, and that the heavenly bodies in general were created before, concerning which I would observe:

(1) That this don’t well agree with the account Moses gives of the fourth day’s work of the creation he gives an account of. The accounts we have of the creation of the heavenly bodies, here and elsewhere from time to time in the Old Testament, with reference to Moses’ account, are so expressed that it would be most unreasonable to understand their mention they make of the creation of sun, moon and stars of any other than a proper making, creation and formation, and not merely a scattering away of fogs and mists that were over the face of the earth, so that they might have been seen here on the face of the earth, if there had been any inhabitants here to see them.

(2) Nor does it well agree with his account of the creation of the light on the first day. For if the Mosaic creation was only of this earth, then we must suppose the sun was created before, and so the light would have existed before.

(3) If any should suppose that the Mosaic creation, though it extended beyond this earth, yet it respected only the solar system, I think there is no manner of reason to suppose any other than that, as the whole visible universe, the many suns or fixed stars that belong to it, are all one frame, so that they were created together, not first one and then two, or first ten and then ten more, so gradually increasing the number till they came gradually to be so many millions. As if we find a stately building erected, it would be unreasonable to suppose any other than that it was built together, and not first one stick of timber hewed and then, after a long time, another.

2. They that suppose there was any creation before the Mosaic creation, suppose the angels to have been created before, in opposition to which I would observe:

(1) That place in Nehemiah 9:6, “Thou, even thou, art Lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.” Here I think it most reasonable to suppose that Nehemiah has reference to the very same creation that God speaks of in Exodus 20:11, “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is.” The descriptions are the same. The things spoken of as created are plainly the same. The creation Nehemiah speaks of includes the angels. They are included in the host of heaven that he mentions, as part of the creation he speaks of, as is plain by what he says further of the host of heaven at the end of the verse, “and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.” The angels are evidently that host of heaven that worships God.

(2) Christ’s eternity is largely set forth by his existing before the creation of this lower world, and all the parts of it, Proverbs 8:22–30, which would [not] be proper and significant if many created beings had existed long before these things, as well as he.

(3) God expresses his own eternity by that, that he was before the day, and that he then existed alone, existing before any other being that men erroneously worship as God. From whence we may conclude that no created ANGELS, who of old and most ages of the world have been worshipped as gods, had any existence before the day. And from Isaiah 43:13, with the three foregoing verses: from this place it is probable that the angels were created the first day with the light. See Pfaffius, Theologiæ Dogmaticæ et Moralis, pp. 190–91.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 23, The “Miscellanies:” 1153-1360, ed. Douglas A. Sweeney (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 340-342.

bb. RESURRECTION.

How has the resurrection of Christ any influence on the bodies of believers and on their resurrection, by virtue of the union that is betwixt them? How shall we give a rational account of it? In order to answer this question, we must first show how can the bodies partake of this union, which are really no more than a stock or a stone. Indeed everything about a man besides the rational soul is no more than a house, ship or coach, but only this: the rational soul has power to affect the one and not the other, and the one and not the other has power to affect the rational soul. And how is it possible that a stock or stone should partake of the union to Christ?

To this I answer, that although the body be in itself no more than a stock, yet because God made the human soul with a design that it should be united to a body, therefore he has made it inseparable from its nature, eternally inseparable (that is, by any but God), that it should strongly incline to a union to the body. So that this inclination to the body is part of the nature of the soul, which is just the same thing as if the body were part of the soul; so that with the soul it becomes partaker of the union with Christ in common with the rest of the soul. That is to say, to speak plainly and intelligibly: that part of the souls nature, its inclination to the body as well as other parts of its nature, is united to Jesus Christ; which is the same thing as to say the body is united to him, and is most familiarly so expressed. If God had created the soul with the same inclination to some stone in the mountains as it has to the body, that stone, together with the soul, would be united to Christ. Thus we have shown how the body partakes of the union with Christ. So much for that.

Now it is by virtue of this inclination of soul to body, that the resurrection of the body becomes absolutely necessary in order to complete happiness. For how is it possible that the soul should be completely happy in the denial of an inclination that Almighty God, in the creation, has made inseparable from it? But then, you’ll say, at that rate the separated souls of saints are not completely happy. I answer: they have a certain hope, a certain knowledge of the resurrection, that completely satisfies this inclination during the separation; so that they are so far completely happy before the resurrection, that they are without any uneasiness.

But to return to the question first proposed: suppose it be granted that the body partakes of the union with Christ; what rational account can be given how, by virtue of that, the resurrection of Christ’s body influences the dead bodies of saints, though they are united? I answer, by virtue of the union between Christ and believers, it follows that believers must be partakers of all Christ’s glorification. That is, they are so united that he, having them as parts of him, necessarily wills it (don’t misconstrue necessity), John 17:22–24.

Thus it is that souls espoused to Christ must reign over the world, because Christ reigns over the world. This is frequently promised. They must sit down in his throne because he is set down on his Father’s throne, Revelation 3:21. Because Christ has power over all the nations, and rules [them] with a rod of iron, and breaks them in pieces as a potter’s vessel, so Christ says, Revelation 2:26–27, that they also shall have power over me nations, and “shall rule them with a rod of iron,” and break them in pieces as a potter’s vessel, too. Because Christ is God’s Son and heir of all God’s estate, believers must be sons and heirs of all God’s estate too, Romans 8:17. Because Jesus Christ is possessor of heaven earth and sea, sun moon and stars, so believers must be possessors of heaven earth and sea, sun moon and stars too (Revelation 21:7; 2 Corinthians 6:10; ), and, as I could mention, in fifty other things. So, because Christ rose from the dead, which was a great part of his glorification, so shall saints rise from the dead too, which is a great part of their glorification.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 13, The “Miscellanies:” Entry Nos. a–z, aa–zz, 1–500, ed. Thomas A. Schafer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 178-179.

121. INCARNATION.

Christ took the nature of a creature, not only because the creature’s great love to him desired familiar communion with him, more familiar than his infinite distance would allow, but also because his great love to us caused him to desire familiar communion with us. So he came down to us, and united himself to our nature.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 13, The “Miscellanies:” Entry Nos. a–z, aa–zz, 1–500, ed. Thomas A. Schafer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 285.

ff. UNION WITH CHRIST.

By virtue of the believer’s union with Christ, he doth really possess all things. That we know plainly from Scripture. But it may be asked, how [doth] he possess all things? What is he the better for it? How is a true Christian so much richer than other men? To answer this, I’ll tell you what I mean by “possessing all things.” I mean that God three in one, all that he is, and all that he has, and all that he does, all that he has made or done—the whole universe, bodies and spirits, earth and heaven, angels, men and devils, sun moon [and] stars, land and sea, fish and fowls, all the silver and gold, kings and potentates as well as mean men—are as much the Christian’s as the money in his pocket, the clothes he wears, or the house he dwells in, or the victuals he eats; yea more properly his, more advantageously more his, than if he [could] command all those things mentioned to be just in all respects as he pleased at any time, by virtue of the union with Christ; because Christ, who certainly doth thus possess all things, is entirely his: so that he possesses it all, more than a wife the share of the best and dearest husband, more than the hand possesses what the head doth; it is all his.

The universe is [his], only he has not the trouble of managing of it; but Christ, to whom it is no trouble, manages it for him a thousand times as much to his advantage as he could himself if he had the managing of all. Every atom in the universe is managed by Christ so as to be most to the advantage of the Christian, every particle of air or every ray of the sun; so that he in the other world, when he comes to see it, shall sit and enjoy all this vast inheritance with surprising, amazing joy. And how is it possible for a man to possess anything more than so as shall be most to his advantage? And then besides this, the Christian shall have everything managed just according to his will; for his will shall so be lost in the will of God, that he had rather have it according to God’s will than any way in the world. And who would desire to possess all things more than to have all things managed just according to his will? And then besides, he himself shall so use them as to be most to his own advantage in his thoughts and meditations, etc.

Now how is it possible for anyone to possess anything more than to have it managed as much as possible according to his will, as much as possible for his own advantage, and for him himself to use it [as] much as possible according to his advantage? But it is certain, so much shall the true Christian possess all things; ’tis not a probable scheme, but absolutely certain. For we know that all things will be managed so as shall be most agreeable to his will. That can’t be denied, nor that it shall be most for his advantage, and that he himself shall use [it] most to his own advantage. This is the kingdom Christ so often promised—they shall be kings with a witness at this rate! This is the sitting in Christ’s throne and inheriting all things promised to the victors in the Revelation and the like in many other places.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 13, The “Miscellanies:” Entry Nos. a–z, aa–zz, 1–500, ed. Thomas A. Schafer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 183-185.

489. FAITH OR SPIRITUAL KNOWLEDGE.

Preamble to the Discourse on Faith, or Spiritual Knowledge. There are these two ways, in which the mind may be said to be sensible that anything is good or excellent: (1) When the mind judges that anything is good or excellent, as by the agreement of mankind is called good or excellent, viz. that which is most to general advantage, and that between which and reward there is a suitableness, or that which is agreeable to the law of the country or law of God. ‘Tis a being merely convinced in judgment that a thing is, according to the meaning of the word, “good,” as the word is generally applied. (2) The mind is sensible of good in another sense, when it is so sensible of the beauty and amiableness of the thing, that ’tis sensible of pleasure and delight in the presence of the idea of it. This kind of sensibleness of good carries in it an act of the will, or inclination, or spirit of the mind, as well as the understanding.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 13, The “Miscellanies:” Entry Nos. a–z, aa–zz, 1–500, ed. Thomas A. Schafer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 533.

This week’s selection is from roughly the middle of the Miscellany corpus and is entitled “Humiliation.”  For modern readers, the Edwardsian idea of humiliation may seem rather strange.  Edwards, and earlier Puritans, did not always mean being utterly embarrassed, or slandered, or made to look like a great fool as the word is commonly used today.  Humiliation, rather, was typically spoken of in reference to Gospel humiliation, or the bringing low of a person to the point of repentance and preparation for forgiveness or conversion.  Certainly this may involve some form of embarrassment, but the point in Gospel humilation is to humble the person before God so much so that they came to an understanding of  God’s holiness and majesty and their own unworthiness.  This in hope of the repentance of the person and the turning in faith toward the Triune God.

This definition of humilation is discussed in a roundabout way by Edwards in “Miscellany 735.”  Here Edwards primarily focuses on a common theme in his writings, this being what man is capable of or not in his natural, or unconverted, state.  Edwards affirms that man is capable of seeing the truth and certainty of religion in his natural state, using the example of those unconverted persons who stand before the judgment seat of God upon death and thereby know and see the truth fully, even though such understanding may not convince them of the beauty and loveliness of God and his grace.  Even though they are capable of this, says Edwards, natural man does not “ordinarily” (seemingly allowing for extraordinary cases) come to this understanding before conversion.

The difference, for those post-conversion and those unconverted who are convinced after death, is the illumination of the mind by the presence of God.  For those converted while alive, this illumination is that “divine and supernatural light” which is “immediately imparted to the soul by God” upon reaching that point of Gospel humiliation.  For those who die in a natural state, says Edwards, they are convinced “by the sight of the greatness and majesty of God, which will convince of the infinite greatness of the guilt of sin that is committed against God, and so its proportion to the eternal punishment, and also will convince and assure of other truths that had before been taught concerning God, as his infinite power, his wisdom, his justice, his truth, his holiness, his immutability.”  So Edwards, in fact, presents both senses of humiliation, the Gospel sense and the shame/embarrassment sense.  For those who are converted, they have reached the point of humiliation, repented and turned toward God in faith, and have had their minds and understanding illumined to the truth, certainty, beauty, glory of the Christian religion.  For those who die in a natural state, their understanding are also illumined and they are able to see the truth and certainty of Christianity, but this to their shame and condemnation.

Though brief, this entry is one of the more thoroughly Edwardsian entries that I have come across in employing so many of the theological categories and themes that would define Edwards as a theologian and pastor.  Here is “Miscellany 735″ in full:

735. Humiliation.

‘Tis true that natural men are capable of being convinced of the justice of God in their own damnation, because they will be convinced of it at the day of judgment; and so they are capable of being convinced of the certain truth of the same great things of religion, that natural men will be convinced of at that day. But yet it don’t follow that it ordinarily is so, till saving conversion. The conviction of both will be given at the day of judgment the same way, viz. (1) by strengthening the faculty of understanding, and clear setting forth the reasons and arguments that evince the justice of God in the damnation of sinners, and other great truths of religion; and (2) by the sight of the greatness and majesty of God, which will convince of the infinite greatness of the guilt of sin that is committed against God, and so its proportion to the eternal punishment, and also will convince and assure of other truths that had before been taught concerning God, as his infinite power, his wisdom, his justice, his truth, his holiness, his immutability. For a sight of the greatness of God, with arguments deduced from it, will make ‘em know these things, and many others, though it won’t make ‘em see the beauty and loveliness of these things in God. So that a natural man is capable, while such, to see the truth and certainty of these things, as well as of the justice of God in his own eternal damnation; but it don’t follow that such do ordinarily see them in this world, before conversion. No more can we argue that it is ordinary for them to see God’s justice in their own damnation before conversion.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 18, The “Miscellanies:” 501-832, ed. Ava Chamberlain (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 360.

Repentance is often spoken [of] as the special condition of remission of sins. But yet ’tis evident by the Scripture that remission of sins is by faith in Jesus Christ, and that this is the special condition of remission of sins, by which we become entitled to this great privilege; [as appears] by Acts 10:43, “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” Thus Peter reveals the condition of the remission of sins to Cornelius, the first fruits of the Gentiles, when he came on this very errand to show him the way of reconciliation, by which it is evident that faith and repentance are not to be looked upon as properly two distinct things in this case, but that evangelical repentance is a certain exercise of faith in Jesus Christ.

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Volume 20, The “Miscellanies:” 833-1152, ed. Amy Plantinga Pauw (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 201-202.