Jonathan Edwards on prophecy

[openairboy]

A friend of mine claims that Jonathan Edwards was the Jack Van Impe of his day. He claimed that the majority of the works that we read by Edwards was pre-"prophecy Jack Van Impe-style", but wanted to fight the Catholics and stuff like that later in his life.

Has anyone heard or read anything suggesting this?

Thanks,
openairboy

 

[LadyFlynt]

I'll talk to DH and have him get back at ya on this one. We have a friend at Covenant Seminary that might know this one.

(off subject) Is Providence the in city church plant that Twin Oaks has going?

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Ask him what he has specifically read. Jack Van Impe is a nut crazed Hyper Dipensationalist who keeps updating his outdated updates. Edwards wasn't like that. Ask him if he ever read 'Sinners in the hands' or 'Freedom of the will', or 'Discourses of the Savior' etc. He did do some writing on the Apocolypse during his early years.

[Edited on 1-6-2005 by puritancovenanter]

 

[ReformedWretch]

Jack Van Impe is a nut crazed Hyper Dipensationalist who keeps updating his outdated updates.

 

[openairboy]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter
Ask him what he has specifically read. Jack Van Impe is a nut crazed Hyper Dipensationalist who keeps updating his outdated updates. Edwards wasn't like that. Ask him if he ever read 'Sinners in the hands' or 'Freedom of the will', or 'Discourses of the Savior' etc. He did do some writing on the Apocolypse during his early years.

[Edited on 1-6-2005 by puritancovenanter]

For clarity: not in the strictly Dispensational sense, but in the running to the "newspaper" sort of sense. I think this makes some sense considering he was an historicist and, to my knowledge, saw the millennium on the horizon, but acted like there were some less known sources from later in Edwards' life suggesting an highly apocolyptic outlook.

He would acknowledge those Edwards' works, but see it as being early in his life, which he claims most are familiar with.

One of the kickers is that he is repeating this stuff second hand, so he can't specifically point me to sources.

openairboy

 

[LadyFlynt]

Originally posted by houseparent

Jack Van Impe is a nut crazed Hyper Dipensationalist who keeps updating his outdated updates.

Can't believe I used to watch this guy when I first married...waiting up for dh to get off of work.

Occasionally dh tries to turn it on to be funny...full well knowing that I WILL throw something!

 

[ReformedWretch]

Colleen, I used to not only watch him, but take notes!

 

[Ranger]

Both Edwards and Van Impe have memorized a lot of Scripture. But only Edwards seems to understand it.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Originally posted by Ranger
Both Edwards and Van Impe have memorized a lot of Scripture. But only Edwards seems to understand it.

Stop, you're killing me!

 

[Irishcat922]

Roxella is quite the astute co-anchor though!

 

[LadyFlynt]

Originally posted by houseparent
Colleen, I used to not only watch him, but take notes!

At least I was only cross-stitching! Had them on for noise...and between him and Roxella, they could sure make alot of it!

 

[Ranger]

Can you imagine an episode of JVI with Edwards on it? I doubt he would make it through the entire thirty minutes without either exploding or just leaving.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Originally posted by LadyFlynt

Originally posted by houseparent
Colleen, I used to not only watch him, but take notes!

At least I was only cross-stitching! Had them on for noise...and between him and Roxella, they could sure make alot of it!

Well, that note taking is what made me realize how silly he was being. I remained Premill, but when I looked up all those verses he quoted I was like "How does he come to that conclusion?"

I knew JVI was a little "out there" before I left dispensationalism.

 

[Ivan]

Hmmm...Jack Van Impe...Jonathan Edwards...hmmm...which one to read....hmmm...let's see some guy on TV with a funny hairdo or the greatest American theologian EVER!! Hmmm...I'm so confused...I don't know who to choose.....

NOT!!!!!!!!

 

[openairboy]

Anyone have anything on the original question? I believe Jack is confused, but I don't think he is a charlatan like the TBN folk.

P.S. Flynt, who is DH?

 

[LadyFlynt]

DH is online lingo for darling husband
dc is dear children
dd dear daughter
ds dear son
mil and fil and sil and bil mother in law, father in law, and so on and so forth

My dh is seen on here as "street preacher"

 

[sastark]

My impression of Jack Van Impe:
**Seth Clears His Throat**

Jack: In today's news, we see that another bus was bombed in Israel, Daniel 14:23. Also, the UN today approved sanctions against Sudan, Jeremaiah 19:3.

Roxella: Well, Jack, that certainly is interesting.

Jack: The Dow closed up 15 points, Revelation 7:3.

Roxella: Amen.

------

Anyway, me and a couple of friends used to watch this show just for the pure comedic value. Have you ever tried to look up the verses he gives as "proof" texts? THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, EVER!

That, too me, was the funniest part. I mean, I could have my own TV show where I read the paper and randomly threw out Scripture references, too, I suppose.

"Hmm, the Kings beat the Lakers today, John 9:16."

 

[ReformedWretch]

Originally posted by sastark
My impression of Jack Van Impe:
**Seth Clears His Throat**

Jack: In today's news, we see that another bus was bombed in Israel, Daniel 14:23. Also, the UN today approved sanctions against Sudan, Jeremaiah 19:3.

Roxella: Well, Jack, that certainly is interesting.

Jack: The Dow closed up 15 points, Revelation 7:3.

Roxella: Amen.

"Hmm, the Kings beat the Lakers today, John 9:16."

ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!

 

[sastark]

Oh, and to address the original question, has this friend of yours ever read Edwards? Comparing him to Van Impe is like comparing apples and really, really bad, rotten apples.

Edwards based his interpretations of prophecy on Scripture, not the "newspapers" of his day. Your friend needs to either provide specific examples of places he believes Edwards was acting like Van Impe, or he needs to stop making outlandish accusations like this. It's slanderous to a godly man (and I don't mean Van Impe).

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Originally posted by sastark
My impression of Jack Van Impe:
**Seth Clears His Throat**

Jack: In today's news, we see that another bus was bombed in Israel, Daniel 14:23. Also, the UN today approved sanctions against Sudan, Jeremaiah 19:3.

Roxella: Well, Jack, that certainly is interesting.

Jack: The Dow closed up 15 points, Revelation 7:3.

Roxella: Amen.

------

Anyway, me and a couple of friends used to watch this show just for the pure comedic value. Have you ever tried to look up the verses he gives as "proof" texts? THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, EVER!

That, too me, was the funniest part. I mean, I could have my own TV show where I read the paper and randomly threw out Scripture references, too, I suppose.

"Hmm, the Kings beat the Lakers today, John 9:16."

Sorry Scott I can't Resist.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Seriously Keith,

I believe Edwards was taken by the Apocolypse early but Pastoral duties pulled him to the mature writings most of us appreciate him for.

 

[Ranger]

My dh is seen on here as "street preacher"

When I see DH I think of one thing. The hated designated hitter rule.

 

[Ivan]

The designated hitter is for wimps.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Boy this sure has a lot to do with Jonathon Edwards being an ancient JVI.

What is the designated hitter?

[Edited on 1-7-2005 by puritancovenanter]

 

[openairboy]

Originally posted by puritancovenanter
Boy this sure has a lot to do with Jonathon Edwards being an ancient JVI.

What is the designated hitter?

[Edited on 1-7-2005 by puritancovenanter]

I think every young man that gets interested in the Lord and even the curious is attracted to the apocolypse.

The DH is the designated hitter. Do you know what a designated drive is? It is sort of like that, but in baseball. A designated driver is the person who is set apart to drive, because other individuals are unable. The designated hitter is set apart to hit for those that are unable.

It's a baseball rule in the American League that allows you to substitute a field player for a player off the bench when it is the field player's turn to bat. A team usually sits their pitcher, because he is the worst hitter, and has some high percentage batter come off the bench to hit for him. Like a pitch hitter, but bats every time.

Wow. That is the most unclarifying way to explain the dh, but I know of no other way. I hope that helps.

openairboy

 

[Robin]

Originally posted by openairboy
Anyone have anything on the original question? I believe Jack is confused, but I don't think he is a charlatan like the TBN folk.

Does anybody want a real answer to the question? (We're studying this right now: Puritan eschatology.) I won't contribute if there's no serious interest...

Robin

 

[LadyFlynt]

There is serious interest...but we just all HAD to have SOME fun with this one...the idea...the comparison...

Go ahead...It'll help the discussion side of things...

 

[Robin]

Thanks Colleen! (Gurlfriend!)

First off, I enjoy watching the blasphemous teachers I was once enthralled with, once upon a time --- hooboy - God is so merciful!

These days, we're studying the Antichrist - through the Redemptive Historical/Reformed grid...and it is fascinating.

Yes...Edwards was into date setting and all sorts of endtimes speculation. The Jack VI reference is not so funny when we also note that the Apostles were trying to do the SAME thing in Acts 1. (!) The Apostles were dispensationalists!! But....

Jesus yells at them for this....He apparently had a different agenda for them - to focus on the Gospel.

Now about Edwards, et al. These guys were hugely impacted by current events - the Papacy ran the world power system: Spanish Armada; English civil war raged; gold from the New World fueled Spain -- all of it governed by the Pope. The English queen was Spanish -- and 100's of thousands of Reformed Christians were killed by the Roman Catholic church. (Forgive this cryptic/brief history.) But the point is --- how could any literate Christian NOT correlate such scary times with what they read in Revelation? IF, they only thought Revelation - as literature, was only prophecy?

Anybody hearing this? Again - what IF Revelation is a different kind of literature than what most folks think -- that's going to change what it means.

Gotta go for now -- but if anyone wants to know more....I'll do another post.

Robin

 

[Ranger]

I would think that a traditional Historicist interpretation (do we have any of those guys on this board, btw?) would require almost a newspaper theology type of understanding since history is constantly changing, and therefore must our understandings of the apocalypse.

 

[Ranger]

But the point is --- how could any literate Christian NOT correlate such scary times with what they read in Revelation? IF, they only thought Revelation - as literature, was only prophecy?

First, I would question whether they interpreted it solely as prophecy in this manner. I don't have anywhere to look it up atm, but I would have to assume that the various interpretive methods of the book showed up throughout puritan eschatology as well.

Second, I'm in a Revelation class this week and posed a similar type of question concerning the modern persecutions/tribulations of the church, but in response to a different system. It strikes me as odd that so many people can look at the Revelation as solely Futurist whenever there are Christians in Rwanda who are currently "living through" the images in Revelation.