Philip Freneau and Jonathan Edwards had very contrary biblical allusions, although both men were avid believers in God and Christ. Freneau, the author of “On the Religion of Nature” had a softer, less demanding interpretation of God who he believed worked in unison with Mother Nature while Edwards, the orator of “Sinners In The Hands of an Angry God” depicts God as a merciless force who could rip away your life at any moment and send you to the depths of Hell solely for the reason that he has decided it is your time. There are many aspects of these works that contradict the other concerning the allusion of The Bible and God himself. Both men had defendable theories, but those that were indicated most important and disputable included the urgency …show more content…
Freneau describes that religion is supposed to be discovered through nature, it is not hidden or coded, but merely patiently waiting to be found. On the contrary, Edwards goes on for quite some time to reinforce the urgency of salvation. The certainty that God can take you out of this world at any moment and the severity of his punishments are repeated multiple times. Edwards continues to say that the only reason any being is alive at this moment is only because God is holding on to them. God is preventing all the breathing masses from slipping down the slope of death in which all will inevitably slip down because without Him, no mere human possesses the strength to stand on that slope. All the while, “natural men are held in the hand of God, over the pit of hell” ("Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” 213). In a nutshell, Edwards is trying to show that one must be saved by God now, and no later than now, because at any moment God can tear a life away and then it will be too late, the person will have already been sentenced to eternal Hell even before death because of the simple fact that God is angry with all who have not yet been …show more content…
Edwards believed that if you attended church, the house of God, and have not been saved yet you were provoking him by being in his “solemn worship” and being a wicked sinner without forgiveness at the same time ("Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" 215). Edwards believes that a priest is necessary in the worship of God, and that once saved, if you didn’t attend church you are once again insulting God. Freneau explains in his poem that God’s religion is all around you, in every blade of grass and ray of sunshine. Freneau believed that someone could still worship God and not attend church or listen to a preacher. Freneau believed that God communicates through nature, so he felt that if you know God exists and you have accepted him there is no need to enter the house of God only to speak with Him when communication is possible elsewhere. According to Freneau, God makes his message clear without the speaking of a preacher. He states that, “The universally extends / And leads to no mysterious ends,” (“On the Religion of Nature” 7-12) in which he portrays that there are no confusing or misleading dead ends in God’s obvious intended path for you, which is to use his gifts of nature for
Foreboding and dreadful describe the tone of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”. Edwards makes the tone very clear by saying “The God that holds you over the pit of Hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire” (154). He tries to convey the wrath of god that will come upon them if they do not devoted themselves to Christ by saying “Thus all you that never passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit of God upon souls, all you that were never born again, and made new creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and before altogether unexperienced light and life, are in the hands of an angry God.” (154).
Edwards immediately begins with a harsh, almost cruel, tone with the use of abrasive diction. His first moments of preaching the sermon had the use of words such as, “over the pit of hell;..deserved the fiery pit… wrath in hell… devil is waiting for them,” (1). Edwards
Jonathan Edward's sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," was an example of a persuasive speech in which Edwards used scare tactics to persuade his audience. Jonathan Edwards' purpose was simply to convey a message to the people of the church with intentions of changing their moral and religious views. Edwards often appealed to reason and logic and highly emotional "fire and brimstone" techniques to convey his point.
... and taught that mankind is not immortal but weak and in need of God’s sovereignty. Edwards wrote "the God that holds you over the pit of hell…” meaning God has the power to strike man down at any time. He stressed that mankind is small and God is much bigger. He thought that mankind must be submissive to God in order to please God.
...d unholy people. The fear and horror created by Edwards' sermon convinces the audience into doing anything for salvation from the fiery pits of hell. Although the rhetoric that Edwards and Henry use are different, they both satisfy the authors' purposes.
John Edwards viewed God’s relation to people to be judgmental and merciful to those who he chose needed mercy. Edward preaches that if you are chosen by God and given his mercy then you will be accepted in Heaven and states this in his writings by saying, “And now you have an extraordinary opportunity, a day wherein Christ has thrown the door of mercy wide open, and stands in calling and crying with a loud voice to poor sinners…”. Whereas Anne Bradsworth wrote in a
Friedrich Nietzsche certainly serves as a model for the single best critic of religion. At the other end of this spectrum, Jonathan Edwards emerges as his archrival in terms of religious discourse. Nietzsche argues that Christianity’s stance toward all that is sensual is that grounded in hostility, out to tame all that rests on nature, or is natural, akin to Nietzsche’s position in the world and his views. Taking this into account, Edwards’s views on Christianity should be observed in context targeted at those who agree with his idea, that G-d is great and beyond the capacity of human reason.
Starting in his younger years, Edwards struggled with accepting the Calvinist sovereignty of God. Various circumstances throughout Edward’s own personal life led to him later believing in the sovereignty of God. Jonathan Edwards is known greatly as a key figure in what has come to be called the First Great Awakening of the 1730s and 1740s. Fleeing from his grandfather’s original perspective by not continuing his practice of open communion, there was a struggle to maintain that relationship. Edward’s believed that physical objects are only collections of sensible ideas, which gives good reasoning for his strong religious belief system.
Jonathan Edwards was a man who could petrify any eighteenth century Puritan. He was born in East Windsor, Connecticut and was raised in a household with strict religious beliefs. In 1727 he began his preaching career as an assistant to his grandfather, Solomon Stoddard, the pastor at the church at Northampton, Massachusetts. When his grandfather died two years later, Edwards became the pastor of the Church at Northampton and began preaching all over New England. He then emerged as one of the leaders of the Great Awakening with his determination to return to the orthodoxy of the Puritan faith. That is when he adopted his “fire and brimstone” emotional style of sermon. Although people often ran out of the church in hysterics, most stayed in the church captivated by his speeches. He had always purposely chose to address his congregation with a sermon, using all of the elements of an oratory. In Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, Jonathan Edwards displays all elements of an oratory by appealing to emotions, including expressive and rhythmic language, addressing the needs and concerns of his audience, and inspiring others to take action.
...fighting his feelings about not seeing Jesus. He feels that he is lying to God and himself by getting up and being saved even though he cannot see Jesus. Even though the reader knows that he truly is being saved from sin. He is doing something good for himself. Therefore, we can see that he truly does not understand the meaning of God. He is a child on the verge of adulthood. He has every right to be confused and misinterpret religion because he is learning. Religion is metaphorical and imaginative; it is what you believe it to be.
In the story “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” the author Jonathan Edwards uses
In contrast, Edwards theme has to do with God's ability to strike you down, yet had such
One of the most prominent themes is the idea that the devil is responsible for sin. The imagery and symbols found throughout the essay build upon this theme. When Edwards says: “You are ten thousand times more abominable in His eyes than the most hateful serpent is in ours” (26), he wants the audience to understand that by sinning, you are doing the devils work. Another theme that is present in the sermon is God’s power and grace, which Edward uses to give the audience one glimpse of hope at the end of the sermon. By stating that “you have an extraordinary opportunity…Christ has thrown the door of mercy wide open” (33), he gives the audience more reason to convert back to God.
He was completely oblivious to the true loving nature of God stated in John 3:16-17 “That God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son for us and whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” (Bible Hub, 1 John 3:16-17) He used a monotone when he gave his sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” but he preached as if he was angry with the people as well. Edwards insisted that God was so angry that they were closer than they could have imagined from being thrown into the pits of Hell. The sermon may have been successful to some people, for those who imagined God dangling people over the fires of hell in no doubt ran to the altar to seek repentance. However, some may have even lost their faith altogether because they felt they stood no chance in the eye in such a wrathful God.
Answering these questions is the purpose of this essay. I begin by arguing that the Bible cannot be adequately understood independent of its historical context. I concede later that historical context alone however is insufficient, for the Bible is a living-breathing document as relevant to us today as it was the day it was scribed. I conclude we need both testimonies of God at work to fully appreciate how the Bible speaks to us.