Reference: http://old-baptist-test.blogspot.com/2011/12/chpt-110-mediate-or-immediate.html
In both the linked post above and on the "Baptist Gadfly", Garrett has argued that Edwards viewed regeneration and conversion as synonymous terms.
Certainly the quotations of Edwards that Garrett offers show that Edwards linked the two inseparably, and used them as approximately synonymous. However, Garrett has misrepresented Edwards to argue that he made no distinction between them. Garrett even quotes a crucial passage from Edwards and neglects to give the entire quote, which shows not only that Edwards did not view the terms as completely synonymous but that Edwards viewed the mind as passive in regeneration. There is no doubt from the passivity of the mind in regeneration that Edwards logically (like James White, for example) placed regeneration preceding faith.
Garrett quotes Edwards:
"If we compare one scripture with another, it will be sufficiently manifest that byregeneration, or being begotten or born again, the same change in the state of the mind is signified with that which the Scripture speaks of as effected by true repentance and conversion. I put repentance and conversion together, because the Scripture puts them together (Acts iii. 19), and because they plainly signify much the same thing.'"
However, Garrett omits the next two sentences that show that Edwards distinguished regeneration from conversion:
"I put repentance and conversion together, as the Scripture puts them together, Acts iii. 19, and because they plainly signify much the same thing. The word metanoia (repentance) signifies a change of the mind; as the word conversion means a change or turning from sin to God. And that this is the same change with that which is called regeneration (excepting that this latter term especially signifies the change, as the mind is passive in it), the following things do show…."
Not only are they distinct in magnitude, as regeneration is represented by Edwards here as especially indicative of change, but they are distinct in that while conversion involves the intellect, regeneration does not - man is wholly passive in it! How could Garrett miss that? This misrepresentation should make a person wonder how many of Garrett's quotes and historical representations have been pulled out of context on the pretext of support for his views.
Garrett would do well to research Edwards through the works of such scholars as John H. Gerstner. I recommend Gerstner's article here: http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/reformed-theology/regeneration/regeneration-from-jonathan-edwards-a-mini-theology-by-john-h-gerstner/
Gerstner was a very highly regarded Edwardsean scholastic authority, and his published works testify against Garrett's claim that Edwards made no distinction between regeneration and conversion or that regeneration does not logically precede faith and repentance.
No comments:
Post a Comment