Miscellany 514. Christian Religion

Without divine revelation, ’tis impossible the world should ever have come to any tolerable knowledge of future rewards and punishments. I believe the world, without revelation, never would have come to any determination that there was any future rewards and punishments, but would have remained midnight darkness about it. But if they could have found out that there was to be any such thing, they would have been forever ignorant, whether they were eternal or temporal, and of what kind they were; the nature, kind, and degree, and circumstances of the happiness of heaven; what it was they were to enjoy, and with what qualifications. These things would forever have been as much unknown, as how that part of the universe is formed that is beyond the starry heavens. Indeed, what the Scripture reveals of the future happiness of the righteous, is exceeding rational, and excellently fit and congruous: that those that are holy shall hereafter be made perfectly holy, that they shall enjoy a happiness that is holy and spiritual, that they shall see God, and be in his presence, and everlastingly enjoy his love. But the world never would have found this.

Interesting points by Edwards. Keep in mind, however, that he’s got some loaded words here and that some of his words have taken on different meaning relative to our current context. Some of the interesting words/phrases which I would like more definition on are the following:

Rewards and punishments…

happiness of heaven…

perfectly holy…

2 Responses to “Edwards on Revelation (and sounding like Barth, or vice versa)”

1. J.R. Diener says:

   March 9, 2010 at 2:01 pm

   “that those that are holy shall hereafter be made perfectly holy, that they shall enjoy a happiness that is holy and spiritual, that they shall see God”

   This sentence really made me wonder how Edwards viewed the concept “holiness”. I was hoping you would comment on it but then I got to the end of your post where you said you’d like to see further definition as well.
2. Phil says:

   March 10, 2010 at 11:28 pm

   Ya, that’s a good point Josh. I’m not quite sure how he is using “holiness” but I was wondering the same thing…