# Religious Affections



## Leslie (Dec 12, 2008)

I've been reading Signs of the Spirit by Sam Storms, which is a kind of Cliff's Notes on Religious Affections by Jonathan Edwards. Reportedly (per Challies) it's a reasonably accurate take on the substance of Edwards. Edwards himself is too daunting for me at this point. I'd like to hear the opinions of PB members on either one or the other or both of these books.


----------



## GTMOPC (Dec 12, 2008)

I haven't read Storms book. I have read 1/4 of Edwards book. So I won't comment on the comparison of the two.

I can say that what Edwards has said so far in my reading has greatly enriched my life and adding to my learning in a way I don't think any other author could.

Concerning Sam Storms. I personally enjoy reading his work. He is according to confessional standards outside of reformed orthodoxy since he has embraced a continuationist view of the spiritual gifts. I sympathize with his view, though I don't endorse or necessarily condone it. Aside from that matter I think he gives a fair shake to Edwards work. He, in my opinion, know Edwards, his work, and his theology. Personally I think I would read the book in question with anticipation. I'll bet it's a good book. I would only caution you to take note of his continuationist viewpoint.


----------



## turmeric (Dec 12, 2008)

I've read about 1/2 of Edwards as well, and it has some gems. Well worth reading! If Storms used Edwards' book as an outline, I'm sure it's a good read.


----------



## Timothy William (Dec 13, 2008)

I read the first part of Religious Affections, and was greatly blessed by it, but I never finished the book. I then came across the audio book online, as a series of 10 90-minute sermons, and listened to the whole book; this could be an option if reading all of Religious Affections is too daunting. OTOH listening takes longer than reading, so if time is the issue rather than difficulty then that may not work.


----------



## Leslie (Dec 13, 2008)

The Storms book is a series of long quotes from Edwards with Storms' summary of what was written between the quotes. Perhaps the Cliff's Notes analogy was not quite accurate. It's almost a rewrite. Storms' continualist position is quite irrelevant to the book. Once I'm finished with Storms it should be much easier to wade through Edwards. This was his intent with writing the book, not to replace Edwards but to provide a way to ease the faint-hearted into tackling Religious Affections.

It is troubling to read that the marks of genuine regeneration are so much outside the experience of myself and of nearly every other [believer??] that I know. The scriptures themselves appeal to baser human motivation such as self-preservation (the ass knows his master's crib) and ambition (what shall it profit a man) to draw unbelievers to God. So they are drawn on that basis, does the Almighty then turn around and reject them because they are not primarily enthralled with His excellencies? Is having a sense of personal depravity, repentance, and trust in the atonement insufficient? Must one also be besotted with love for God?


----------



## turmeric (Dec 13, 2008)

Leslie,
Remember the story of Rahab. Although she acknowleged YHVH and recognized His power and the inevitability of the Israelites' conquest, I doubt she loved His exellencies as such. She wanted to save her skin. But, the others of Jericho didn't even believe the Israelites or their God were a problem! Also, Rahab obeyed the spies in the matter of the scarlet cord, showing her faith. I think that if we do not find ourselve coming to love God's excellencies more and more, we should be concerned. I think the point Edwards is making is that a person who shows no love or interest in God, regardless of his apparent wonderful conversion story, does not evidence salvation.


----------



## py3ak (Dec 13, 2008)

I read the _Religious Affections_ quite a long time ago, and it has been a significant amount of time since I've read anything by Edwards; perhaps my opinion would vary if I revisited Edwards. I believe I have profited from what I've read; but in spite of that I think that William Guthrie's _Christian's Great Interest_, Walter Marshall's _Gospel Mystery of Sanctification_, Bunyan's _Work of Jesus Christ as an Advocate, Explained_ and Richard Sibbes' writings are better sources than Edwards.


----------



## Scott1 (Dec 13, 2008)

Leslie said:


> The Storms book is a series of long quotes from Edwards with Storms' summary of what was written between the quotes. Perhaps the Cliff's Notes analogy was not quite accurate. It's almost a rewrite. Storms' continualist position is quite irrelevant to the book. Once I'm finished with Storms it should be much easier to wade through Edwards. This was his intent with writing the book, not to replace Edwards but to provide a way to ease the faint-hearted into tackling Religious Affections.
> 
> It is troubling to read that the marks of genuine regeneration are so much outside the experience of myself and of nearly every other [believer??] that I know. The scriptures themselves appeal to baser human motivation such as self-preservation (the ass knows his master's crib) and ambition (what shall it profit a man) to draw unbelievers to God. So they are drawn on that basis, does the Almighty then turn around and reject them because they are not primarily enthralled with His excellencies? *Is having a sense of personal depravity, repentance, and trust in the atonement insufficient? Must one also be besotted with love for God?*



God will give you both. 

Ask Him for faith to believe, and to give you desire to seek Him in all things in this life, absolutely everything. Confess that you often do not want to, ask His forgiveness, and ask Him for grace to do what you cannot do.




> Hebrews 10
> 
> 22Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
> 
> 23Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised);



Soli Deo Gloria. Coram Deo.


----------



## lynnie (Dec 13, 2008)

For what it is worth, Sam Logan, former president of WTS, said Religious Affections is the greatest book ever written by a human being. ( well, apart from the canon of course). If you ever heeard Sam teach, that opinion would carry a great deal of weight.


----------



## CarlosOliveira (Dec 13, 2008)

py3ak said:


> I read the _Religious Affections_ quite a long time ago, and it has been a significant amount of time since I've read anything by Edwards; perhaps my opinion would vary if I revisited Edwards. I believe I have profited from what I've read; but in spite of that I think that William Guthrie's _Christian's Great Interest_, Walter Marshall's _Gospel Mystery of Sanctification_, Bunyan's _Work of Jesus Christ as an Advocate, Explained_ and Richard Sibbes' writings are better sources than Edwards.


----------



## GTMOPC (Dec 13, 2008)

lynnie said:


> For what it is worth, Sam Logan, former president of WTS, said Religious Affections is the greatest book ever written by a human being. ( well, apart from the canon of course). If you ever heeard Sam teach, that opinion would carry a great deal of weight.



I was planning on hearing Sam Storms preach this past summer but there was a tropical storm the same week. I was afraid he'd canceled so I didn't go. (Guess I could've called to confirm!) Wish I could have heard him.

-----Added 12/13/2008 at 10:31:54 EST-----



lynnie said:


> For what it is worth, Sam Logan, former president of WTS, said Religious Affections is the greatest book ever written by a human being. ( well, apart from the canon of course). If you ever heeard Sam teach, that opinion would carry a great deal of weight.



I was planning on hearing Sam Storms preach this past summer but there was a tropical storm the same week. I was afraid he'd canceled so I didn't go. (Guess I could've called to confirm!) Wish I could have heard him.

Just notices you were talking about Sam LOGAN, not Storms!!! Ooops!


----------



## mvdm (Dec 13, 2008)

Presently, I am nearing completion of Religious Affections for the 3rd time. As before, I'm doing it as a book study with other brothers, where we read assigned sections each week and then meet to study and share the insights together. I have gleaned more treasures each time through. It is probably the best systematic application of scripture for discerning true from false religion. 

I've also read Sam Storms book, but did not find it useful having already gone through the original. 

As I said to the men when we started Affections, this book will strip you down to nothing, leave you no room to turn or escape, and may even make you doubt your salvation-----until you see that Edwards has beautifully pointed you to resting and rejoicing in the work of our glorious Christ ALONE.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough.


----------



## jwithnell (Dec 14, 2008)

I have revisited Affections several times since early in my walk with Christ and have always found it extremely useful. Reading Mr. Edwards is challenging academically, but also constitutes incredibly rich devotional reading. In other words, it's not _just_ a mind exercise, but an act of worship. I tend to pick up Mr. Edwards when I need an attitude adjustment.


----------



## moral necessity (Dec 14, 2008)

Leslie said:


> It is troubling to read that the marks of genuine regeneration are so much outside the experience of myself and of nearly every other [believer??] that I know. The scriptures themselves appeal to baser human motivation such as self-preservation (the ass knows his master's crib) and ambition (what shall it profit a man) to draw unbelievers to God. So they are drawn on that basis, does the Almighty then turn around and reject them because they are not primarily enthralled with His excellencies? Is having a sense of personal depravity, repentance, and trust in the atonement insufficient? Must one also be besotted with love for God?



Well, I agree with your evaluation. It is troubling, until we realize that we are both wholly neither one nor the other entirely at this time. We truly have his Spirit, and so we have the seeds of what Edwards speaks of. Yet, we are also still flesh, and so we still have our old sinful nature as well. So, we must be cautious when reading such things, because Edwards is not at all saying that we see only this goodness and holiness within us, apart from anything else. Rather, he is saying that, within our sinfulness, we see something new, namely this new goodness and holiness that he speaks of. And so, we should be encouraged, because, if we have such desires for holiness to any degree, they only come to us from regeneration. And, such are marks of "Religious Affections". As believers, we are like a water faucet, that used to only run cold water through it. Yet, after regeneration, we now run hot water through the same faucet, as well as the cold. Both happen now, whereas before, only cold water ran. And so, Edwards is only pointing out what the hot water looks like. He is not at all saying that the cold water is absent.


----------



## Leslie (Dec 14, 2008)

Where is the disconnect? Do any of you helpful PB members have this kind of walk with God? Do any of you even know someone who has this kind of walk with God? I know of one old saint in Ethiopia, but no one else. Are the churches full of people like Edwards but it just doesn't show on the surface? It appears to me that religious affection to any extent, even just as far as spontaneous prayer and love of the scripture, is an exceedingly rare commodity. Love of God for Himself goes way beyond that. Revelation pictures large numbers of redeemed on the other side. How can that be?


----------



## Galatians220 (Dec 14, 2008)

"We love Him because He first loved us." When we know from what we were delivered when we were regenerated, we are humbled. We begin to feel a sense of kinship to our Redeemer and we feel strong "family ties." We love Him first for what He has done for us, and then for Himself. We want to do what pleases Him and to avoid what displeases Him.

We know that we have been regenerated, that we have passed from death to life, when we love our brothers and sisters in Christ. I see that often on the PB: although there have been rancorous moments, the vast majority of disagreements or would-be horrendous conflicts are settled between members themselves by posts that show that the Holy Spirit is at work; He who deplores and sorrows over conflicts between God's children has made an outpouring of grace, mercy and love between two or more, and settled whatever arose. We sometimes realize that in order to do God's will, and because we love Him, we must cede ground to someone else. This is absolutely beautiful, and it happens over and over again. This could only happen between people who love God.

We know that we love God when we gravitate towards the pure, the noble, the lovely, etc. and away from that which is of the opposite nature, in every area of our lives. We don't watch TV shows that depict brutality, hatred of God and His creatures (those made in His image and likeness), vulgarity, obscenity, etc. because we hate what our Father hates. (Just one example for the sake of brevity.)

As we are progressively sanctified, we experience more and more of this. Stephen Charnock, in his "Existence and Attributes of God," says that even the degree of comfort we are given in our regenerate state is decreed by God in His sovereignty. We can backslide, of course; we can grieve the Spirit, but He who has begun a good work in us will be faithful to complete it. We realize more and more that to stray from Him is only to hurt ourselves, to cause ourselves more pain than we would otherwise have had and to, in some fashion, denigrate the effect of the sacrifice that our Lord Jesus Christ made for us, personally on the cross. Why would we do that? We don't want to do it, but... We are still in the flesh. Praise God, though: there is healing and deliverance (new mercies every morning, every hour of every day!) for us! *He never tires of lifting us up, as long as it's to become closer to Him!* 

We must never lose our sense of gratitude to Him for what He has done for us, but if we do, what must we then do? Pray to get it back!

So often I fail; I am a wretched and miserable sinner. But I praise Him that I am not what I was before He saved me... The numbers of redeemed in Revelation are simply those who were regenerated, whose names were written in the Lamb's book of life, and who are destined to live with Him forever and ever.

I could go on and on, but I've said enough here...

Margaret


----------



## Leslie (Dec 15, 2008)

turmeric said:


> Leslie,
> Remember the story of Rahab. Although she acknowleged YHVH and recognized His power and the inevitability of the Israelites' conquest, I doubt she loved His exellencies as such. She wanted to save her skin. But, the others of Jericho didn't even believe the Israelites or their God were a problem! Also, Rahab obeyed the spies in the matter of the scarlet cord, showing her faith. I think that if we do not find ourselve coming to love God's excellencies more and more, we should be concerned. I think the point Edwards is making is that a person who shows no love or interest in God, regardless of his apparent wonderful conversion story, does not evidence salvation.



If I understand you correctly, you are saying that where one is on the scale of affection for God doesn't matter as much as the direction one is heading. Rahab started out at ground zero in the knowledge of God. It would take her some time in the Israelite community before coming into a full relationship.

Perhaps there are people in our culture who start out with a substanitial negative in regard to the knowledge of God--they have been taught to conceive of Him as a bully, intent on making life miserable, needing to be placated. Their initial approach to God would necessarily involve hating Him less, long before there was even a glimmer of love, of embracing His sovereignty as good and desirable. 

Perhaps Storms/Edwards are describing end-stage godliness whereas those of us with spiritually-negative, theologically-decadent belief systems to over come are still in spiritual nursery school. The initial, non-saving "conversion" might be simply a new understanding that maybe God isn't a bully after all. We may or may not make it to the point of even approaching what Edwards is describing. However, moving in that direction is desirable.

Does this make sense or not?


----------



## Scott1 (Dec 15, 2008)

Mr Edwards is known for saying "all of the Christian life is about seeking God."

When God changes us inside, we are truly free to love him and we will, over time move toward reflecting that nature He has changed forever in us.

This is, in essence, the "right heart" requires for us in obeying Him. Since He has miraculously changed us, according to the good pleasure of His will, our motives can indeed be "right" in his sight. Our "good works" can now be acceptable in His sight, because they flow from a right heart, with right motive- love of Him. The unreedemed person is not able to do this.


----------



## FenderPriest (Dec 15, 2008)

The Religious Affections is one of my favorite books. I finished it this year, and it's on my "once a year" list for the next couple years just so I can glean a good bit for it early in life. His work in this book has been one of the top 10 most helpful and influential peices of work (from sentences and paragraphs to complete works and multi-volumes) that I've ever read.

As for Storms material, I haven't read it. I really like Storms, and am myself a continuationist, so I'd find agreement with him in areas that some would not. Anyhow, he did a helpful interview about the book here: Conversations with Scholars: Sam Storms on Jonathan Edwards. This may help place the book from Storms perspective. He himself says that he wants this book to be merely an introduction, and not a substitute. I think I may pick it up to read through in a few years when I may not be able to give the appropriate amount of time to Edwards' Religious Affections as I would like.


----------



## Leslie (Dec 18, 2008)

FenderPriest said:


> The Religious Affections is one of my favorite books. I finished it this year, and it's on my "once a year" list for the next couple years just so I can glean a good bit for it early in life. His work in this book has been one of the top 10 most helpful and influential peices of work (from sentences and paragraphs to complete works and multi-volumes) that I've ever read.
> 
> As for Storms material, I haven't read it. I really like Storms, and am myself a continuationist, so I'd find agreement with him in areas that some would not. Anyhow, he did a helpful interview about the book here: Conversations with Scholars: Sam Storms on Jonathan Edwards. This may help place the book from Storms perspective. He himself says that he wants this book to be merely an introduction, and not a substitute. I think I may pick it up to read through in a few years when I may not be able to give the appropriate amount of time to Edwards' Religious Affections as I would like.



Do you have any suggestions for the mechanics of reading Edwards with understanding? I have no one with whom to meet to read it. I'm thinking about outlining, underlining, paraphrasing, tidying up the sentences by scratching out extraneous phrases, notes in the margins and so forth. My patience with ponderous writing is minimal and it's SO hard to stay focused.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 18, 2008)

My pastor wrote this in connection with Jonathan Edwards' _Freedom of the Will_, but it may be of some interest:

Links and Downloads Manager - Educational Links - Reading Difficult Books -- Steven Dilday - The PuritanBoard


----------



## Leslie (Dec 18, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> My pastor wrote this in connection with Jonathan Edwards' _Freedom of the Will_, but it may be of some interest:
> 
> Links and Downloads Manager - Educational Links - Reading Difficult Books -- Steven Dilday - The PuritanBoard



I'm technologically challenged and could not figure out how to get this downloaded. Can you or anyone else help?


----------



## FenderPriest (Dec 18, 2008)

Leslie said:


> FenderPriest said:
> 
> 
> > The Religious Affections is one of my favorite books. I finished it this year, and it's on my "once a year" list for the next couple years just so I can glean a good bit for it early in life. His work in this book has been one of the top 10 most helpful and influential peices of work (from sentences and paragraphs to complete works and multi-volumes) that I've ever read.
> ...



I'd say do those things except for scratching out extraneous phrases. Edwards can be wordy at times - by his own admission. But bear with him. Get the help-books that other's have written. The nice thing is that while he's hard to understand, you're not alone in that struggle, so other's have done a lot of the foot work for you in making him more accessible. I think you'll find that you catch him better as you read him more. So mainly: Relax! You'll get him.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 18, 2008)

Leslie said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> > My pastor wrote this in connection with Jonathan Edwards' _Freedom of the Will_, but it may be of some interest:
> ...



The link is to a pdf document which means you must be able to download using Adobe Acrobat. If you need to do so, it can be downloaded for free here. I hope this helps.


----------



## Leslie (Dec 18, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Leslie said:
> 
> 
> > VirginiaHuguenot said:
> ...



Success! Thank you. I'd also appreciate other feedback from others.


----------

