Jonathan Edwards may not be the easiest author around, but he is surely worth spending time with. Because of the complexity of his thoughts reflected in his writings, I found myself going back to him over and over again, each time reading a paragraph more than once, or twice or even thrice. It was a fabulous exercise stretching my mind and twisting my tongue (heard it from a wise chap that Puritan writings must be read aloud to be appreciated) and afterwards retire, exhausted, many times, defeated by and definitely profited from such great mind as Edwards’. Yesterday, I went back again to his essay on the Trinity to find that Edwards still has much to teach me even though I have heard him on this many occasions before. The depth of his theological reflections only goes on to show the grandeur and majesty of his God. I love Edwards, I love to go to him to learn and learn and learn and learn; oh, the mind that is closest to God has special insights into the unfathomable wonder of godly mysteries!

“God is infinitely happy in the enjoyment of himself, in perfectly beholding and infinitely loving, and rejoicing in, his own essence and perfection”, Edwards began his treatise on the Trinity. Perhaps that phrase requires more justification today than during when it was first written. Some may protest that God cannot be like a self-indulgence fellow enjoying all day long in the clouds. I won’t explain that now, someone else has already did it, and I cannot do better than him. Please read here.

To put it simply, Edwards was basically saying, God finds happiness in himself, he is very happy with himself, he loves himself very much, all the time. And in order for that to be true, God must be thinking of himself at every moment (i.e. all the time). But God’s thought of himself, his idea of himself, must necessarily be complete and perfect, or else, God may be rejoicing in another thing other than himself – an imperfect idea of God is not exactly God.  God’s idea of himself must therefore be the “exact image and representation of himself” and that image is always there for him to delight in. That perfect image of God is the object of his delight. As such, it was as if another distinct entity has arisen. Now “there is God” and there is the object of his delight, “the idea of God”. Edwards argued that “the representation of the Divine nature and essence is the Divine nature and essence again… [and] hereby there is another person begotten… [who is] the same God, the very same Divine nature.”

Dave Chang helped me to see that it is rather difficult to envisage how God’s idea of himself can become a real and distinct person. Dave pointed out that, as I also discovered Edwards did later on, precisely because God is almighty and spiritual, his conception of himself may not be as limited as when I, a finite and physical being, mentally imagine my own self. Perhaps it is here that we must, in the words of Gregory of Nyssa when he attempted to explain the Trinity more than a millennium before Edwards, “seek from the Lord the reason which is the advocate of our faith”. Edwards did not pretend he knew fully what is the Trinity, he did not make trivial of the mysterious Godhead even as he attempted to find an explanation to it. God still dwells in thick darkness. His place is still in unapproachable light.

What Edwards has helped us to do was to understand in greater clarity what the Bible says about the Son of God. Firstly, Jesus Christ was presented in the Bible as the “image of God” (2 Cor 4:4, Col 1:15, Heb 1:3). We can almost imagine that that “idea of God” is the image of himself which he sees all the time, just as when I look into the mirror and see my own face. Secondly, Jesus Christ was called “the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24 and Luke 11:49 specifically and elsewhere especially in Proverbs), i.e. God’s good and perfect knowledge, which is really what Edwards was proposing; Jesus, God the Son, was “God’s perfect and eternal idea”.

Definitely I cannot explain Edwards’ thoughts better than he did. I think few actually could. For this reason alone, I wish that many Christians will go back to Edwards himself for those deep theological reflections which have sparked fires of revivals, purged falsehoods from religious affections, calmed countless souls by giving hope and reason for the our faith. I wish many Christians will go back to that man himself, scaling the mountains he has painstakingly planted, which is a laborious task, to see the grandeur of his God and be overwhelmed by that glorious sight.

Next post, on the Holy Spirit - but wait till I have digested Edwards first.