Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 172:685 (Jan 2015)
Article: Periodical Reviews
Author: Jefferson P. Webster

BSac 172:685 (January-March 2015) p. 108

Periodical Reviews

By The Faculty and Library Staff of Dallas Theological Seminary

Jefferson P. Webster

Editor

“On the Orthodoxy of Jonathan Edwards,” Oliver Crisp, Scottish Journal of Theology 67 (2014): 304-22.

Crisp, professor of systematic theology at Fuller Theological Seminary, questions the orthodoxy of Jonathan Edwards’s view of God. He explains the problem as the “Edwardsian Dilemma.” In short, “either Edwards must admit that his theology implies that God is not metaphysically simple, or he must embrace pantheism. Neither of these two options would have been particularly palatable for a theologian of his pedigree, since puritans were nothing if not classical and traditional in the theistic conception of God that they espoused” (p. 308, italics his). Crisp’s argument unfolds in three parts. “In the first, I show that, on one plausible interpretation of his work, Edwards cannot consistently hold that God is absolutely metaphysically simple in a traditional sense. Then, in a second part, I argue that given a slightly different construal of Edwardsianism, pantheism obtains. In a third part I offer an analysis of which alternative is less damaging for the integrity (and orthodoxy) of Edwards’ thought” (ibid.).

Three major terms set up Crisp’s description of the dilemma: simplicity, occasionalism, and panentheism. Divine simplicity is the view that “God is essentially non-composite,” that he is not made up of parts (p. 309). Crisp writes, “Edwards clearly endorses this doctrine” (p. 310). Occasionalism is “the doctrine according to which God is the sole causal agent in the world, creatures being merely the occasions of God’s action” (p. 311). Crisp writes, “Evidence that Edwards held to a doctrine of occasionalism is not hard to come by. He explicitly endorses the doctrine in his treatise on Freedom of the Will” (p. 312). Panentheism is the view that “God and creation are not distinct entities as the classical theist thinks. Instead (so it is often reported) God is to the world as the soul is to the body. The world is contained ‘within’ God, but God is not exhausted by the world; he is greater than the world” (p. 313). Crisp concludes, “The fact that [Edwards] is a panentheist should be evident” (p. 314). As support for this assertion, Crisp cites several “unguarded” comments by Edwards (p. 313), as well as some statements from Concerning the End for Which God Created the World (pp. 313-14). He quotes Edwards: “In the creature’s knowing, esteeming, loving, rejoicing in, and praising God, the glory of God is both exhibited and acknowledged; his fullness is received and returned. . . . So

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe