There is some idea among Christians that groups of theologians from the past, such as the Church Fathers or Reformers, all shared a common theological framework and view. Anyone reading beyond just a few Church Fathers knows this is not true. Theologians and pastors through the third and fourth centuries had very few theological positions in common—perhaps just the deity of Christ, that salvation is through faith alone in Christ alone, and a few other basics. The Reformation is presented as a “common view” held among many theologians—but Zwingli did not hold, for instance, that Revelation should be included in the Canon.

It should be no surprise that Puritan theologians and pastors also had a wide range of views. When we think of Puritan theologians, we often think of several basic points they would share beliefs such as:

• There are two Covenants, of works and of grace
• Infants should be baptized; if the state of the infant is uncertain because one parent is among the elect and the other is not, this is resolved via the halfway covenant
• The Elect are preselected from the foundation of the world (we do not have free will in salvation)
• That Israel has been condemned of God since the death of Christ, replaced by the Church as the “people of God”
• That Christ is going to return after the Church builds a global Kingdom (postmillennialism)
• That America is the “shining city on a hill,” the origin of the millennial Christian Kingdom
• That only Christians have any measure of the truth of the Gospel; that there are no other religious systems or cultures that have any of the truth

Edwards did, in fact, believe almost all of these.

According to Victor Zhu, three of these Edwards did not believe, and one he modified.

Who is Victor Zhu, and why should we trust him? According to the biography included in the book and some basic searches on the Internet, he is an Edwards scholar, part of a school that focuses on Edward’s thought in England. Further, this book reads like it is the result of dissertation-level work. It is deeply researched and heavily footnoted. Contrary views are accurately described—and countered.

Let’s look at the three beliefs that Edwards rejected in the list above.

God has Rejected Israel

While Edwards held God rejected Israel for some time, he also held that God would return to Israel to build the Millennial Kingdom. Zhu says:

I will demonstrate his Judeo-centric view of the millennium, while being aware of the danger of promoting Israel superiority. … Israel’s restoration is essential in Edwards’s vision of the millennial kingdom, because it will determine the destiny of the world. This conviction of the theological significance of Israel in God’s kingdom marks a remarkable departure from the supersessionism of his contemporaries and reflects his rejection of anti-Semitism.
page 10

According to Zhu, Edwards held the conversion of Israel was critical for two reasons.

First, they would be a powerful witness to the world of God’s faithfulness:

After Israel’s eschatological restoration, all the Jewish Christians will bless the rest of the world by actively engaging in the evangelistic ministry. They will become the most glorious and effective witness to the rest of the world. pg 117

Second, Edwards was convinced that in most cases, when the Scriptures speak of Israel, the author is speaking of the nation of Israel rather than the church.

There were times when Edwards read “Israel” to mean “the church” in the Scriptures, and other times when he read “Israel” to mean “Israel.” Unfortunately, the author’s primary argument does not require him to dive too deeply into the hermeneutical rabbit hole to explain why Edwards chooses one or the other in various places.

America is the Millennial Kingdom’s Origin

Many Puritans held to a rather progressive view of America.

First, America was growing economically and geographically. America was populated by people who believed they were building a “shining city on a hill,” a light to the nations. Edwards, who died in 1758, could probably see the oncoming Revolutionary War and its inevitable results on the future of America. America was growing, becoming an economic powerhouse.

Second, the initial stages of discovery were in progress during Edward’s lifetime. Natural philosophers, the forerunners to modern scientists, formed the Royal Society in 1660. These new scientific enterprises promised an explosion of knowledge, foretelling a far different future.

Third, the First Great Awakening had left a considerable mark on America. Starting in the 1730s, this mass revival filled the churches and saw many people profess Christ. For theologians who hold to postmillennialism, this revival could easily appear to be the beginning of the revival that would form the foundation of the Millennial Kingdom since this revival was centered in America, the coming Kingdom.

Edwards, however, considered the Great Awakening a failure. It might have filled the churches, but the churches became courser rather than the people becoming finer. He particularly disliked that so much of the Great Awakening was primarily an Arminian event.

Perhaps more importantly, Edwards’ literal reading of “Israel” in most of the writings of the Apostles convinced him that the only revival that counted would be among Jews living in the physical land of Israel.

Christians have the only Measure of the Truth

Most Christian theologians throughout history have held that only Christians have access to the “fullness of the truth” about God. Some hold the People of Israel have some access to the truth. Even when cultures or religions have some appearance of truth, it is only by sheer accident or imitation.

Edwards held there was one exception to this rule: China. Zhu says:

… Edwards was convinced that China was incorporated in God’s redemptive scheme from the very beginning of its civilization. In particular, he believed that there was an apparent correlation between Noah and Fu Xi, the founder of ancient Chinese civilization.
page 114

The theologian believed the Chinese were directly ruled by the line of Noah for many hundreds of years, leading them to have a better foundation in God’s truth even though they did not have the Scriptures.

Conclusion

As one of the most important theologians in America, it is surprising Jonathan Edwards did not place America at the center of the coming Millennial Kingdom—unlike so many other American theologians. Progress was “in the air” in America even before the Revolutionary War. A large, largely unexplored continent lay before the colonies, the foundations of the Industrial Revolution were laid, and man’s understanding of the world rapidly increased.

Edwards placed Israel at the center of the Millennial Kingdom based on his hermeneutical understanding of the Scriptures and his disappointment in the shape of the Great Awakening, which sets him apart from most theologians of his day—and ours.

---

Zhu, Victor. America’s Theologian Beyond America: Jonathan Edwards, Israel, and China. Oxford University Press, 2022.