Jonathan Edwards was powerful religious leader that had an impact on his audiences just by his illustrative language. His words painted a graphic picture that was very fear provoking and meant to ‘awaken’ his audience. His words are so powerful that in his sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” he helped bring the Puritans back to the church of God. I don’t know exactly how I feel about Jonathan Edwards. The first time I heard him he was a little frightening. His sermons were somewhat scary with his vivid imagery and the seriousness in his voice. "Consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind an outrageous doctrine." I think his rhetoric preaching techniques are effective and get the point across to his listeners because of the fear he puts in his messages. "Unless they fear His wrath, many won’t seek His love." He described this vision of a vengeful God and the awful consequences of sin he would bestow on us if we don’t right our wrongs. I think his use of simile’s, metaphors, and personifications are what make his threats feel so real. He portrays this powerful and angry God in comparison to a simple man that is weak. I think he utilizes rhetorical language to the fullest, and is very successful at rousing the crowd.
Jonathan Edwards will always be known as one of the greatest and influential theologians and Christian preachers to many. I feel that Edwards was very good at executing what he wanted the people to hear and live by. Edwards played a large role in shaping the first Great Awakening and oversaw some of the first fires of revival at his church. His sermons were very loud and to the pint and made great points, but to me I feel that he is way over the top for someone I should look up to. Although he lived and brainstormed in a different time period than I do, I don’t know what to think about his work. His sermons to me used great rhetorical strategies to execute his theories and beliefs. For example, the piece we heard in class was very effective if you could gather everything he was trying to convey. I went back a couple times and listened to parts of it over and over. When I was listening to the words that he preached I could continuously hear the rhetoric in his speech and the effectiveness that he could relay to his people and even others who might have been listening. Some people will say that they disagree with some of Edwards’s theories or specific statements he has spotlighted, but I believe that it all comes back to what you believe as far as morals and religion. This to me, does not stop people from respecting and realizing the good that he has done through his work and preaching for many in his time.
Jonathan Edwards was definitely one of a kind, when it came to his practice and his way of expressing himself through christianity. Most people might think his teaching were over the top, and he used controversial fear appeals. It hard to give an accurate opinion because I see both sides to it. I believe he has good intentions and he gets his messages across well. I think it would depend on the personality on an individual because people take messages differently and some are effected more then others. I believe people need to be feared to an extent because in my eyes Christianity is not just happy and easy. Nothing in life in given to you, you have to earn it. Just like you have to earn salvation. So just repenting and saying sorry is not going to cut it. Putting fear in people will change their decisions and actions. His use of words was a word of Art, and for that I value him.
The sermon given by Jonathan Edwards is one that is definitely unforgettable, as well as laden with explicit fear appeals. One thing that is for certain is he utilized the era that he was in to justify his rhetoric. For instance, had he delivered a sermon like “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” to a modern Christian audience, the reception would be less than ideal. The response to his preaching would be akin to how the public responds to the Westboro Baptist church or how a college student body responds to Brother Jed and family when they speak in the free speech areas. Though a lot of college students are Christian and do believe in the overall message of what is being said, they feel the implementation is problematic and only slanders their faith. For instance the metaphor of the spider that is hanging over the cauldron only would be perceived as a scare tactic by a modern day crowd. The Christian religion does not feel like scare tactics are the best way to construct religion, rather show the compassion and love of Christ. Though there are extremities out there, for the most part the Christian religion has switched the fear appeal from “you will be banished to hell for your actions” to “your acceptance of God will get you into heaven”. The switch of this rhetoric demonstrates the relationship between the Facilitation and Inhibition types of fear appeal. The same end goal is in mind, it is only justified by other ways.
Jonathan Edwards was so powerful a speaker that I find it difficult to resist the power of his speech. In reflecting on the effect of his words, I find myself torn between the rational self and the emotional self. Rationally, I reject much of his rhetoric because he speaks with such authority about things he cannot know. It is ridiculous for him to depict God as angry and Hell as a real place of eternal suffering when he cannot possibly have personal knowledge of such things. I, too, can read the Bible and make my own interpretations, and if they are entirely different from Edwards’, are they any less credible? What Edwards has (that most people lack) is the ability to paint a vivid picture with his words. It is the picture that affects me on an emotional level. It is precisely because the ideas of an angry God and the torments of Hell are imaginary that they arouse an emotional response. Listening to Edwards, I feel as though I have walked into a horror movie; I can tell myself that everyone in the film is an actor and that none of the images are real, but I feel frightened nevertheless. Upon leaving the theater, however, my fear evaporates, and I believe it would dissipate just as quickly upon leaving his church. In summary, I understand completely why Edwards was so influential when he spoke from the pulpit. Like all great orators, he had interesting things to say and a compelling way to say them. Fear appeals have always been –and will always be –effective in the hands of a wordsmith.
Jonathan Edwards’s style of preaching was well fitted for the audience he was speaking to. At a time in which almost everyone attended church services, many were only there because of the social stigma attached to not attending church. Jonathan Edwards needed to remind his congregation of the realities of hell, and that they were in fact, in danger of being sent there. While from a biblical perspective I do believe what he preaches is true. I do believe the sermon was meant for a particular audience, an audience consisting of backsliding Christians, not the non-believers. This type of sermon has too strong of fear appeals to be effective on an audience that does not believe the premise that non-believers are going to hell. In today’s modern society, there is not as great a social stigma in not attending church, therefore fewer people attend for social reasons, which could explain why less “fire and brimstone” sermons are preached.
Jonathan Edwards has done a great job getting his views known by people who may or may not agree with him. His voice is sharp and clear, he knows what he is going to say and how he is going to say it. That has a lot to do with either following or disliking a persons view upon the world. A particular sermon that he gave which made him more well known was called "Sinners in the hands of an angry God". This sermon had fear appeal after fear appeal mostly I took it as a "shock and aww" for his audiences to take him seriously about our society. I am a Christian and as I do believe in what he preaches theres also the freedom of choice that could clairfy "faith" in what Christianity believes, YOU have to choose for yourself. I dont really like his scare tactics because a personal religious view should be ones personal choice not influenced by fear. The belief in God should be joyful and held high instead of focusing on the bad or "HELL" part of it. Wheres the good in believing he did not sound very happy that he has chosen to believe in God. Though his works are very well put together and thought out I cant seem to believe he actually believes what he is saying because it sounds so rehearsed and dishonest. My view on religion is that most views stear towards being a better person for yourself and the people around you and not so much selfish. He reminds me of a back-woods southern preacher trying to scare his followers instead of leading them to more prosperous lives here on EARTH instead of just focusing on the after life and avoiding "hell" like what seems to be what he is doing.
Edwards was a theologian best known for his role in the first great awakening. He spoke quietly and softly in most of his sermons, drawing his audiences to conclusions with his emotional appeals. Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God is not typical of Edwards style--this type of sermon is described as fire and brimstone preaching. In the sermon fear is transmitted to the audience through power. The power in Edward’s sermon comes from his ability to paint a vivid picture of life without salvation, putting fear and movement into his congregation and followers. His style draws on the emotional response to a vengeful and angry God who punishes. His sermons were so convincing there was a trend in suicide amongst his followers. The fear appeal forces the audience to accept they will be punished by Edward’s angry God and sentenced to damnation. This is concurrent with the revivalist teachings of the time but the emotional response Edward’s draws makes him noteworthy. The people of America at this time were religiously sensitive and therefore susceptible to Edward’s use of rhetoric and fear appeals. The vulnerability of Edward’s audience played in his favor giving him the opportunity to spread his fear in the minds of his followers. The rhetoric and fear appeals are what motivated his congregation and cemented him in American history as a theologian.
In “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” Jonathan Edwards utilizes fear appeals to make his point clear. Edwards was a persuasive speaker and lectured with emotive sermons. He was able to focus on a purpose of his sermons and was able to identify his main audience. He was aware of the times that the Puritans lived in and realized who was a part of his congregation. As a speaker, he uses biblical allusions to reach out to his audience and form a connection with them. The tone of this sermon is greatly affected by the purpose that Edwards was striving for. By using emotional appeals, Edwards was able to spur strong feelings from the audience towards his speech. Some consider this speech to be one of the most famous sermons every given. Many were believed to have been converted by his sermon.
Jonathan Edwards was powerful religious leader that had an impact on his audiences just by his illustrative language. His words painted a graphic picture that was very fear provoking and meant to ‘awaken’ his audience. His words are so powerful that in his sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” he helped bring the Puritans back to the church of God. I don’t know exactly how I feel about Jonathan Edwards. The first time I heard him he was a little frightening. His sermons were somewhat scary with his vivid imagery and the seriousness in his voice. "Consider the concept of hell as endless torment in body and mind an outrageous doctrine." I think his rhetoric preaching techniques are effective and get the point across to his listeners because of the fear he puts in his messages. "Unless they fear His wrath, many won’t seek His love." He described this vision of a vengeful God and the awful consequences of sin he would bestow on us if we don’t right our wrongs. I think his use of simile’s, metaphors, and personifications are what make his threats feel so real. He portrays this powerful and angry God in comparison to a simple man that is weak. I think he utilizes rhetorical language to the fullest, and is very successful at rousing the crowd.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Edwards will always be known as one of the greatest and influential theologians and Christian preachers to many. I feel that Edwards was very good at executing what he wanted the people to hear and live by. Edwards played a large role in shaping the first Great Awakening and oversaw some of the first fires of revival at his church. His sermons were very loud and to the pint and made great points, but to me I feel that he is way over the top for someone I should look up to. Although he lived and brainstormed in a different time period than I do, I don’t know what to think about his work. His sermons to me used great rhetorical strategies to execute his theories and beliefs. For example, the piece we heard in class was very effective if you could gather everything he was trying to convey. I went back a couple times and listened to parts of it over and over. When I was listening to the words that he preached I could continuously hear the rhetoric in his speech and the effectiveness that he could relay to his people and even others who might have been listening. Some people will say that they disagree with some of Edwards’s theories or specific statements he has spotlighted, but I believe that it all comes back to what you believe as far as morals and religion. This to me, does not stop people from respecting and realizing the good that he has done through his work and preaching for many in his time.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Edwards was definitely one of a kind, when it came to his practice and his way of expressing himself through christianity. Most people might think his teaching were over the top, and he used controversial fear appeals. It hard to give an accurate opinion because I see both sides to it. I believe he has good intentions and he gets his messages across well. I think it would depend on the personality on an individual because people take messages differently and some are effected more then others. I believe people need to be feared to an extent because in my eyes Christianity is not just happy and easy. Nothing in life in given to you, you have to earn it. Just like you have to earn salvation. So just repenting and saying sorry is not going to cut it. Putting fear in people will change their decisions and actions. His use of words was a word of Art, and for that I value him.
ReplyDeleteThe sermon given by Jonathan Edwards is one that is definitely unforgettable, as well as laden with explicit fear appeals. One thing that is for certain is he utilized the era that he was in to justify his rhetoric. For instance, had he delivered a sermon like “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” to a modern Christian audience, the reception would be less than ideal. The response to his preaching would be akin to how the public responds to the Westboro Baptist church or how a college student body responds to Brother Jed and family when they speak in the free speech areas. Though a lot of college students are Christian and do believe in the overall message of what is being said, they feel the implementation is problematic and only slanders their faith. For instance the metaphor of the spider that is hanging over the cauldron only would be perceived as a scare tactic by a modern day crowd. The Christian religion does not feel like scare tactics are the best way to construct religion, rather show the compassion and love of Christ. Though there are extremities out there, for the most part the Christian religion has switched the fear appeal from “you will be banished to hell for your actions” to “your acceptance of God will get you into heaven”. The switch of this rhetoric demonstrates the relationship between the Facilitation and Inhibition types of fear appeal. The same end goal is in mind, it is only justified by other ways.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Edwards was so powerful a speaker that I find it difficult to resist the power of his speech. In reflecting on the effect of his words, I find myself torn between the rational self and the emotional self. Rationally, I reject much of his rhetoric because he speaks with such authority about things he cannot know. It is ridiculous for him to depict God as angry and Hell as a real place of eternal suffering when he cannot possibly have personal knowledge of such things. I, too, can read the Bible and make my own interpretations, and if they are entirely different from Edwards’, are they any less credible? What Edwards has (that most people lack) is the ability to paint a vivid picture with his words. It is the picture that affects me on an emotional level. It is precisely because the ideas of an angry God and the torments of Hell are imaginary that they arouse an emotional response. Listening to Edwards, I feel as though I have walked into a horror movie; I can tell myself that everyone in the film is an actor and that none of the images are real, but I feel frightened nevertheless. Upon leaving the theater, however, my fear evaporates, and I believe it would dissipate just as quickly upon leaving his church. In summary, I understand completely why Edwards was so influential when he spoke from the pulpit. Like all great orators, he had interesting things to say and a compelling way to say them. Fear appeals have always been –and will always be –effective in the hands of a wordsmith.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Edwards’s style of preaching was well fitted for the audience he was speaking to. At a time in which almost everyone attended church services, many were only there because of the social stigma attached to not attending church. Jonathan Edwards needed to remind his congregation of the realities of hell, and that they were in fact, in danger of being sent there.
ReplyDeleteWhile from a biblical perspective I do believe what he preaches is true. I do believe the sermon was meant for a particular audience, an audience consisting of backsliding Christians, not the non-believers. This type of sermon has too strong of fear appeals to be effective on an audience that does not believe the premise that non-believers are going to hell.
In today’s modern society, there is not as great a social stigma in not attending church, therefore fewer people attend for social reasons, which could explain why less “fire and brimstone” sermons are preached.
Jonathan Edwards has done a great job getting his views known by people who may or may not agree with him. His voice is sharp and clear, he knows what he is going to say and how he is going to say it. That has a lot to do with either following or disliking a persons view upon the world. A particular sermon that he gave which made him more well known was called "Sinners in the hands of an angry God". This sermon had fear appeal after fear appeal mostly I took it as a "shock and aww" for his audiences to take him seriously about our society. I am a Christian and as I do believe in what he preaches theres also the freedom of choice that could clairfy "faith" in what Christianity believes, YOU have to choose for yourself. I dont really like his scare tactics because a personal religious view should be ones personal choice not influenced by fear. The belief in God should be joyful and held high instead of focusing on the bad or "HELL" part of it. Wheres the good in believing he did not sound very happy that he has chosen to believe in God. Though his works are very well put together and thought out I cant seem to believe he actually believes what he is saying because it sounds so rehearsed and dishonest. My view on religion is that most views stear towards being a better person for yourself and the people around you and not so much selfish. He reminds me of a back-woods southern preacher trying to scare his followers instead of leading them to more prosperous lives here on EARTH instead of just focusing on the after life and avoiding "hell" like what seems to be what he is doing.
ReplyDeleteEdwards was a theologian best known for his role in the first great awakening. He spoke quietly and softly in most of his sermons, drawing his audiences to conclusions with his emotional appeals. Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God is not typical of Edwards style--this type of sermon is described as fire and brimstone preaching. In the sermon fear is transmitted to the audience through power. The power in Edward’s sermon comes from his ability to paint a vivid picture of life without salvation, putting fear and movement into his congregation and followers. His style draws on the emotional response to a vengeful and angry God who punishes. His sermons were so convincing there was a trend in suicide amongst his followers. The fear appeal forces the audience to accept they will be punished by Edward’s angry God and sentenced to damnation. This is concurrent with the revivalist teachings of the time but the emotional response Edward’s draws makes him noteworthy. The people of America at this time were religiously sensitive and therefore susceptible to Edward’s use of rhetoric and fear appeals. The vulnerability of Edward’s audience played in his favor giving him the opportunity to spread his fear in the minds of his followers. The rhetoric and fear appeals are what motivated his congregation and cemented him in American history as a theologian.
ReplyDeleteIn “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” Jonathan Edwards utilizes fear appeals to make his point clear. Edwards was a persuasive speaker and lectured with emotive sermons. He was able to focus on a purpose of his sermons and was able to identify his main audience. He was aware of the times that the Puritans lived in and realized who was a part of his congregation. As a speaker, he uses biblical allusions to reach out to his audience and form a connection with them. The tone of this sermon is greatly affected by the purpose that Edwards was striving for. By using emotional appeals, Edwards was able to spur strong feelings from the audience towards his speech. Some consider this speech to be one of the most famous sermons every given. Many were believed to have been converted by his sermon.
ReplyDelete