Journal: Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
Volume: SBJT 14:4 (Winter 2010)
Article: More Than Metaphors: Jonathan Edwards And The Beauty Of Nature
Author: Stephen J. Nichols

SBJT 14:4 (Winter 2010) p. 48

More Than Metaphors: Jonathan Edwards And The Beauty Of Nature

Stephen J. Nichols

God is not negligent of the world he made.

– Jonathan Edwards

“Tis evident,” Edwards writes in Miscellany 1304 during his tenure at Stockbridge, “That God is not negligent of the world that he has made. He has made it for his use and, therefore, doubtless he uses it, which implies that he takes care of it and orders it and governs it, that it may be directed to the ends for which he has made it.”1 It is equally evident that Edwards, following the lead of his God, also was not negligent of the world that God made. Doubtless, Edwards used the world God made.

Jonathan Edwards also took care of it. Edwards also ordered it and governed it—in the way that a vice-regent could, that is. Finally, Edwards did all of this in the direction for which this world was created, the glory of the Creator-Redeemer, the glory of the Triune God.

This article explores Edwards’s use of the beauty of nature in a variety of his writings from sermons to the “Miscellanies.” While Edwards’s ultimate, or as he would put it, “chief,” use of nature was the glory of the triune God, his “subordinate ends” are multiplex. These subordinate ends of Edwards’s use of nature squarely place him in a theological context that views the world as God-given and as revelational. Creation, or nature, is as Calvin put it, “the theater of God’s glory.” This emphasis in the Reformed tradition especially served Edwards well as he sought to give expression to the glory of God in his ministry at Northampton and at Stockbridge.

Looking at nature in Edwards’s writings and locating Edwards in the Reformed tradition on general or natural revelation, however, are the “subordinate ends” of this paper. The chief end of the paper is to bring the trajectory of Edwards’s thought forward to those who are looking for a theological rationale for ecological engagement and for an “aesthetic apologetic”—for

SBJT 14:4 (Winter 2010) p. 49

those who think that beauty is a compelling argument for the presence of God. These seem to be two trendy topics, environmental or ecological engagement and a revival of aesthetics. And, as is usually the case with trendy topics, we can be sometimes governed and at the least influenced by more cultural concerns than theological ones. We can be driven to talk about good things, like creation care and beauty, by bad motives and bad thinking. Such is the case in the topics of ecology and aesthetics.

As a corrective to these culture-driven influences we can find help by escaping our...