Christians, a Chosen Generation – Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)

Posted by Dan C. on

“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people;
that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” — 1 Peter 2:9

 

The apostle in the preceding verses speaks of the great difference between Christians and unbelievers, on account of their diverse and opposite relations to Jesus Christ. The former have Christ for their foundation, they come to him as a living stone, a stone chosen of God, and precious; and they also as living stones are built up a spiritual house. The Christian church is the temple of God, and particular believers are the stones of which that temple is built. The stones of Solomon’s temple, which were so curiously polished and well fitted for their places in that building, were a type of believers. And Christ is the foundation of this building, or the chief corner stone. On the contrary, to the latter, to unbelievers, Christ, instead of being a foundation on which they rest and depend, is a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense. Instead of being a foundation to support them and keep them from falling, he is an occasion of their stumbling and falling.And again, to believers Christ is a precious stone: “Unto you therefore which believe, he is precious.” But to unbelievers he is a stone that is disallowed, and rejected, and set at nought. They set light by him, as by the stones of the street. They make no account of him, and they disallow him. When they come to build, they cast this stone away as being of no use, not fit for a foundation, and not fit for a place in their building. In the eighth verse the apostle tells the Christians to whom he writes, that those unbelievers who thus reject Christ, and to whom he is a stone of stumbling, and rock of offense, were appointed to this. “And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient, whereunto also they were appointed.” It was appointed that they should stumble at the word that Christ should be an occasion not of their salvation, but of their deeper damnation. And then in our text, he puts the Christians in mind how far otherwise God had dealt with them, than with those reprobates. They were a chosen generation. God had rejected the others in his eternal counsels, but themselves he had chosen from eternity. They were a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people.

God does not utterly cast off the world of mankind. Though they are fallen and corrupted, and there is a curse brought upon the world, yet God entertained a design of appropriating a certain number to himself. Indeed all men and all creatures are his, as well since as before the fall. Whether they are elected or not, they are his. God does not lose his right to them by the fall, neither does he lose his power to dispose of them: they are still in his hands. Neither does he lose his end in creating them. God has made all things for himself, even the wicked for the day of evil. It possibly was Satan’s design, in endeavoring the fall of man, to cause that God should lose the creature that he had made, by getting him away from God into his own possession, and to frustrate God of his end in creating man. But this Satan has not obtained.

The above was excerpted from a longer sermon by Jonathan Edwards, available for reading online here.

 

18 responses to “Christians, a Chosen Generation – Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)”

  1. It, once again, is not the language of some pissed-off Calvinist, but of the apostles.

    This part:

    It possibly was Satan’s design, in endeavoring the fall of man, to cause that God should lose the creature that he had made, by getting him away from God into his own possession, and to frustrate God of his end in creating man.”

    I think goes toward explaining what Satan could possibly thought he was gonna get away with in tempting our Lord. Knowledge comes through doing the bad thing just as much as NOT doing the bad thing, but not doing it assures that the bad thing is not in you and part of you. Obedience and disobedience each bring knowledge of their own. Satan’s knowledge does not include doing the good thing, and so he does not recognize the greatest good when it happens, he has no knowledge of it, though he hates it. Even in doing the worst he could do, he only did what would bring God much more glory, hardly his goal.

    Like

    Reply

  2. We had this discussion in Bible study yesterday. It was hard for one lady to swallow…of course it took us to Romans 9-11. It’s hard for me to get too, His ways are not our ways, His thoughts are not our thoughts…

    I am humbled He allowed me to see Him as the precious corner stone.

    Like

    Reply

  3. Not Romans 9-11! Anything but that!!! 🙂

    I remember John Piper mentioning Romans 9 hitting him between the running lights and changing his mind and heart about certain doctrines.

    Like

    Reply

  4. As Piper was at Bethel he was studying for Writing “The Justification of God.” As he was doing this work he came under the conviction that he was to leave his professorship and become a pastor because a saying kept coming to him as he was looking through Romans 9,

    “I will be proclaimed and not analyzed.”

    Like

    Reply

  5. That’s all He wants us to do – proclaim Him and the Gospel of His Son – as written in His book. I often wonder if leaving things out of that gospel or re-defining it so it’s ‘palatable’ to our sensitivities falls under the ‘adding to’ or ‘taking away’ spoken of, or if it would qualify as ‘another’ gospel that Paul warned against.

    Like

    Reply

  6. “I often wonder if leaving things out of that gospel or re-defining it so it’s ‘palatable’ to our sensitivities falls under the ‘adding to’ or ‘taking away’ spoken of, or if it would qualify as ‘another’ gospel that Paul warned against.”

    I think so. We can’t understand mercy if we don’t see His wrath. We don’t understand His judgment if we can’t get a glimpse of His holiness.

    I see from Romans 9, “Who are to question me?” He is telling us to just shut-up, don’t try to get it ALL figured out. It can’t all be understood in our puny minds.

    Like

    Reply

  10. OK. There are a lot of words in Romans 9 and they say an awful lot. And though there is a partial truth in your observation, there is more there than that.

    An example would be when Catholics say that the Trinity is a mystery. They are certainly right in that none of us can even come close to getting it, however they still state clearly God in the trinity. Romans 9 has multiple propositional points and, though each bears a hint of your point, much more do they stand on their own within the flow of Romans, and the points they make are an inflammant to the idea that we are in charge of anything, especially our own salvation.

    This is either avoided or denied in most circles. Is it our responsibility to say it?

    Like

    Reply

  11. If we’re going to engage in a subject as difficult as Romans 9-11, I think we must have more than quick quips to express ourselves…which is what I did. 😳

    My point was to the argument did God create vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath…but it’s not fair…who are you to question God.

    At some point the truth of His divine election can not be understood by our puny minds. It doesn’t mean I won’t share it, but when do I share it? Some food can’t be digested yet. So we have to leave it in the mystery pile and wait until when we see Him. Our perspective is so limited.

    But, yes. We have a responsibility to teach ALL that has been revealed.

    Am I on topic now?

    Like

    Reply

  12. “My point was to the argument did God create vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath…but it’s not fair…who are you to question God”

    I see, point taken, and it is a good point.

    “At some point the truth of His divine election can not be understood by our puny minds.”

    I completely agree with this as well. I actually have my doubts that we will understand it in our heavenly home, because a core aspect of it is hie eternality, not just in the past but in the future. I think that it is safe presuming this from, for instance, Eph 1:3-6 because predestined basically means to establish boundaries on something that is not in front of you or doesn’t exist at all. How could such a thing be possible? It is, but acting on something which doesn’t yet exist is impossible to understand.

    “the mystery pile”

    that’s fabulous.

    “Am I on topic now?”

    Since the premise of my question regarding your point was off, it seems as though I am the one who is off topic.

    Like

    Reply

  15. I’ve enjoyed ‘listening’ to this discussion. I’ve had a chance to pop over a couple of times this afternoon. I take a lot of heat for talking about God’s wrath, and have failed miserably in conveying the thought that the meaning of his mercy is so much more precious in the context of His wrath and what I deserved.

    Then along came Paul Washer (and not too long ago at that), who told me that it wasn’t just from His wrath that I was spared but that God saved me from Himself! I had never heard it put that way before. After all, from whose wrath was I spared? God’s. What I thought I was beginning to understand about His great mercy was out of reach again! I suppose that takes the question “What were you saved FROM?” to it’s ultimate conclusion.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Jason Cancel reply