Brief Hot Take on Jonathan Edwards

Here’s my short, hot take on Jonathan Edwards. (Not that anyone asked my opinion.)

I just finished reading John Piper’s book on “The Supremacy of God in Preaching.” Good book with some good encouragement for my soul from a seasoned veteran pastor. In this revised work, Piper spends a great deal discussing his love, appreciation, and influence of Jonathan Edwards. Recently, Piper’s caught some heat in defending Edwards’ views on slavery (and his own substandard explanation of the system of slavery in the NT).

And here’s where my hot take comes in…

To be honest, what Piper said and what Edwards did doesn’t bother me one bit. Can I agree with those who question and rebut Edwards’ supposed theological greatness because he was pro-slavery? Yup. If your theology is “so sound” as to be considered great, but your anthropology is “so unsound” as to be pro-chattel slavery, then said theology isn’t as great or holistically sound as purported. However, does that impact what I can glean from him or Piper, who was influenced by him? Nope, and especially not regarding the subject of preaching. For me, this simply means I won’t take counsel from Edwards regarding areas where he clearly missed the mark. The same, I hope, is true for anyone who follows my life and teachings and sees where I’ve missed the mark. Please don’t follow my example or teaching in any of those areas.

To quote Jason Meyer,

“If [Edwards] could succumb to such obvious, woeful oppression and injustice and theological hypocrisy, then we should be spurred on to greater levels of self-examination.”

Someone asked me, “Would I argue for listening to that pastor or theologian with someone who is more directly impacted by their errant teachings? Would I try to argue for gleaning from Edwards with someone who had actually been enslaved? Would I argue for gleaning from Ravi Zacharias with one of his victims or even with someone who has been a sexual abuse victim?”

This is a tricky question because we all encourage others to read or subscribe to a flawed leader’s teachings in one way or another. There is no perfect person. We’re all selfish, adulterous, murderous, hateful, etc. Thus, everyone has skeletons of some kind in their closet. So my answer is, “it depends.”

For example, suppose I agreed doctrinally with the flawed leader. In that case, I may point someone to that leader if the purpose was worth it and with the disclaimer of what I am aware of that I disagree with. However, this doesn’t mean I would intentionally suggest an abuser to someone who’s been abused or recommend a racist to someone who’s experienced racism, and so on. Even still, different people deal with their experienced offenses and mistreatments differently. Some may not discount what they can learn from those flawed leaders who committed similar sins. Having said all this, none of it invalidates my private, personal use of the flawed leader’s insight if it’s biblically accurate, nor to share them with others who would receive it.

Moses was a murderer. David was an adulterer and planned the murder of his friend to cover up his sin. Paul was a co-conspirator to murder and persecuted Christians. Peter publicly denied Jesus three times. Yet, God still used each of these men to provide us with His truth and wisdom. Right is right, truth is truth, even when someone in the wrong declares it.

Ok, I’m stepping off my soapbox now (or milk crate, I guess).