An Essay of Mine: An Analysis of "Sinners In The Hands of an Angry God"

[BamaLefty]

An Analysis of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”

Jonathan Edwards’s sermons were preached during the period of Great Awakening, a time of religious revival. In his sermons, Edwards used a variety of persuasive techniques, including vibrant images and simple metaphors to persuade sinners to repent.
One of the images that Edwards powerfully delivered to make people turn from their sinful ways is the comparison of God’s wrath to “great waters,” which after being continually contained, rise up and have the potential of destroying the people with a great fury; that is, if God chooses to open the floodgate. Another particularly striking image compares God’s wrath to a “bow” that is bent, with the arrow ready to pierce the heart of the sinner. Edwards used both of these images to convey the power of God to the people, many of whom were illiterate, and could not understand complex words. The people, whose lives were simple, had a respect for the land and the water, including its potentially violent nature, because they lived off the land. Additionally, the listeners knew firsthand the tautness of a ready-to-fire bow. They knew it would take considerable strength to hold an arrow very long once it was aimed at the target. They knew all too well that a well-aimed arrow hitting its target, the heart, meant instant death.
Through the effective use of metaphors, Edwards made comparisons to peoples’ everyday lives. He preached that their state of wickedness was as “heavy as lead” and therefore, pulling them down straight toward Hell. He was quick to say that salvation could not be obtained on their “righteousness alone.” He compared their chances of getting into Heaven on their own “contrivance” to the likelihood that “a spider’s web would have to stop a fallen rock.” This analogy, like many others presented throughout his sermon, was meant to show the depth and magnitude of the peoples’ sin, and their complete dependence on the Almighty God.
Edwards presented an image of God’s wrath hanging over the people as “black clouds.” If God chose to come with fury, like a whirlwind, they would be like the “chaff of the summer threshing floor.” Again, Edwards related to the people an idea to which they could identify on a daily basis. All people knew that with the bountiful harvest, comes the rot and decay of unharvested grain.
In analyzing that God held sinners over the pit of Hell, much as “one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire,” Edwards was wanting to make Hell real for the listeners. Just as the people who lived off the land, would often torch a vile or poisonous snake, so would God let them burn because he despised their sin and vile nature.
In modern society, as in the days of the Great Awakening, some people would pay attention to Edwards’ message, and some would not. Today, as in the days of the Puritans, there are those who would make application of Edwards’s figurative descriptions, including vibrant images and simple metaphors, to their everyday lives. They wholeheartedly want to do what is right and reach Heaven as their final goal. Therefore, the “fear of the unknown” remains a valid technique to persuade people to do some act, or to refrain from that act, based on the laws of God and man. Most people would agree that a certain amount of fear is good for man because it instills in him a certain amount of discipline. We cannot, however, let fear overtake us. Oftentimes, the “fear factor” is dangled in front of people to persuade them to buy a complex security system for protection from the “boogie-man,” take a certain vitamin for health and longevity, buy a particular car for its safety, and vote for a particular political party because it will keep you safe from terror, just to name a few. The bottom line: Listen to Jonathan Edwards. Fear sells today, just as it always did. It will sell tomorrow. Make an informed choice and buy some. Avoid Hell.

Any thoughts are welcomed! :)

[jedr]

1. " Any preacher with more than two suits is a fraud"....Lenny Bruce

Lot of money to be made from fear.... Pat Robertson, hell is waiting!

[Frances]

2. Well done!

I think your thesis is that Jonathan Edwards was selling fear. When I read this essay many years ago in a high school in southern Alabama, I was certainly frightened. When I saw your post, I immediately remembered the image of the spider being held over a fire. I like the way you pointed out that the people listening to the sermon had probably killed a poisonous insect or snake themselves and thus would have first hand experience with this example.

A couple of questions:

You wrote, "In analyzing that God held sinners over the pit of Hell," I was confused by the choice of the word analyzing.

You wrote, "God let them burn because he despised their sin and vile nature." Did you mean their sinful and vile nature?

You wrote, "They wholeheartedly want to do what is right and reach Heaven as their final goal." I think that Edwards assumed that people would be motivated more by their fear of hell than by the thought of the reward of Heaven. So do you think it's possible that it would be more accurate to say that "They wholeheartedly want to avoid hell"? As I see it, Edwards is not one to use positive reinforcement--he's into the punishment mode. (I personally think that many Republicans are in that mode as well but I certainly would not put that into my essay.)

You wrote, "The bottom line: Listen to Jonathan Edwards. Fear sells today, just as it always did. It will sell tomorrow." I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. However, I am not absolutely sure what you meant by "Make an informed choice and buy some. Avoid Hell."

Anyway, I found your essay very interesting. I am sure you will get a good grade on it.

[ContraBass Black]

3. I suggest eliminating the words "just to name a few."

They sound informal, and perhaps somewhat smug. The last item in that list of fear peddlers is much more effective if it ends the sentence unblunted.

[Jack Rabbit]

4. I agree with ContraBass Black; and change the 'and' to 'or'

I know it's a little persnickety, but no one is trying to do all those things at once.

Also, if this is for a general audience, I would either drop the dependent clause because it will keep you safe from terror or balance it with something like or keep your retirement funds safe. Otherwise, I will think you're trying to sell me something; I get annoyed when somebody is trying to sell me anything, even something I'm willing to buy. It seems especially inappropriate here, since your purpose in writing the paragraph would seem to be to inoculate the reader from the effects of the toxic steer manure thrown at him daily by salesmen and other propagandists.

I hope there's more to this essay. I'd like to read it.