Interpretations III: Edwards and the Revival Tradition

Scripture focus

Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

Acts 3:19 KJV

At a glance

Summary of the chapter

Few figures have shaped Protestant revival theology as decisively as Edwards; D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones called him 'preeminently the theologian of Revival,' and Richard Lovelace credited his writings with laying 'the foundational theology of spiritual renewal in English.' Yet McClymond and McDermott stress that Edwards has been read selectively. His own stance combined real openness — 'the Spirit of God is sovereign in his operations… and uses a great variety' — with real caution, since he also warned that even the apostolic age saw abundant 'counterfeits.'

Tracking Edwards's major revival writings in sequence reveals a trend toward increasing caution: Distinguishing Marks (1741) leans toward openness, Some Thoughts Concerning the Revival (1743) occupies the middle, and Religious Affections (1746) lands decisively on the side of order and discernment. Later readers gravitated toward whichever text suited their purposes. Charles Hodge preferred the cautious Edwards but still found him too permissive; radical New Lights like James Davenport, and later John Wesley, embraced bodily manifestations and visions with an enthusiasm Edwards never shared.

The chapter also traces a deeper fault line within Calvinism itself: 'Old Calvinists' distrusted revivalism's emotionalism and stressed ordinary means of grace, while others hungered for spiritual dynamism. Charles Finney's Lectures on Revivals of Religion (1835) broke sharply with this Calvinist caution by insisting revival is not a miracle but simply 'the right exercise of the powers of nature' — a claim that scandalized Calvinist readers who still looked to Edwards.

Key points

• D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones called Edwards "preeminently the theologian of Revival," and Richard Lovelace credited him with the foundational theology of spiritual renewal in English.
• Edwards's own writings combined openness to the Spirit's sovereign variety with caution about counterfeit religious experience — a tension he never fully resolved.
• His three major revival treatises show a trajectory: Distinguishing Marks (1741) toward openness, Some Thoughts (1743) in the middle, and Religious Affections (1746) toward caution and discernment.
• Different later movements selectively favored different Edwards texts: Charles Hodge preferred the cautious Edwards, while radical New Lights, Wesley, and modern Pentecostal-Charismatics favored the more open Edwards of Distinguishing Marks.
• Charles Finney's claim that revival is "not a miracle" but the "right exercise of the powers of nature" marked a decisive break from the Calvinist revival tradition Edwards represented.

A line worth remembering

Since the mid-1700s, no author has had a greater impact on the theology and practice of Protestant revival than Jonathan Edwards.

McClymond & McDermott The Theology of Jonathan Edwards, ch. 42

Related Scripture

• Habakkuk 3:2
• Joel 2:28
• 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21
• 2 Chronicles 7:14

For reflection and discussion

1. Edwards himself grew more cautious about revival phenomena over time — what would it look like for you to hold both openness to God's surprising work and discernment about counterfeits, the way he tried to?
2. Which 'Edwards' — the open author of Distinguishing Marks or the cautious author of Religious Affections — does your own church tradition tend to emphasize?
3. Finney argued revival could be produced by the right use of means; Edwards saw it as a sovereign work of the Spirit. Where do you land, and why?