Some Thoughts on the Psalms

The psalms express the whole range of human emotion and feeling. This has been part of their appeal for the many thousands of years they have been sung, recited, and prayed. In beautiful poetry, the psalms express the message of Scripture as a whole. Martin Luther famously said of the psalms:

You may rightly call the Psalter a Bible in miniature, in which all things which are set forth more at length in the rest of the Scriptures are collected into a beautiful manual of wonderful and attractive brevity.[1]

It is a sad indication of the decline of evangelical Christianity that the psalms are not taken seriously in contemporary worship. While there is much to commend in modern worship, there is also something missing. That something is God’s own hymnbook – the Psalter. This brief introduction to the psalms will consider the text, title, authorship, arrangement, historiography, and theology of the psalms.

Text

The Hebrew text behind the modern translations of the psalter is the Masoretic Text (MT). This is a generally reliable text, but even this presents problems for the translator, making variant readings common. There is also a Greek translation in the Septuagint (LXX). Scholars often compare LXX with the MT to clarify the original meaning of the psalmist, occasionally this helps shed light on an obscure text. A third text is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, this is known as the Palestinian text type. MT is the most reliable of the three textual sources, but LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls are useful points of comparison.

Title

The title in Hebrew for the Psalter simply means ‘Songs of Praise’ (Tehillim). This reflects the fact that most of the Psalter is composed of praises to God, even the laments often contain a note of praise. The title most familiar to us is derived from the Greek translation ψαλμοί (psalmoi) meaning "instrumental music". Since many of the psalms would have been set to music and used in the context of worship, this is also an appropriate title for the collection. Combining both titles, we have ‘praises set to instrumental music’.

Authorship

Modern scholarship generally rejects the reliability of the many superscriptions to the psalms. Though many of these refer to David, they could equally read ‘A psalm attributed to David’ or ‘a Psalm concerning David’, or ‘a Psalm about David’. Some of the psalms are attributed to other authors such as Asaph and Solomon, others are noted as being ‘for the chief musician’ or ‘for the sons of Koreh’. These superscriptions were probably not part of the original psalms and represent subsequent traditions regarding authorship. David who famously played the harp to soothe King Saul is an obvious choice in terms of ascribing authorship. We cannot rule out the possibility that David may have actually composed some of the psalms, but modern scholarship generally rejects Davidic authorship – leaving most of the psalms anonymous. It has been suggested that many of the psalms could have been written by devout women. Anonymity would have been sought in a patriarchal society.

Arrangement

The Psalter was arranged into five books by the post-exilic community. There does not appear to be any distinctive reason for this arrangement, but some have suggested theological and historical reasons for this particular arrangement. The editors may have chosen the five books of David (so to speak) to reflect the five books of Moses. This would be quite plausible. There has been renewed interest in the particular arrangement of the psalms in recent studies during the 20th century. Allen P. Ross, for example, sees a definite historical-theological arrangement behind the books of psalms:

Those who study the arrangement of the Psalter conclude that it was deliberately planned with theological and historical contexts in mind. In general, Books I and II lay out the foundation of God’s programme in the Davidic monarchy, Book III reflects the failure of the monarchy and was shaped with the exile in mind, and Books IV and V present the restoration and the hope for the future with the LORD as king.[2]   

This arrangement sees distinctively historical and theological reasons for the post-exilic arrangement of the psalms, particularly reflecting God’s dealings with His covenant people.

Historiography

The Church originally interpreted the psalms theologically and saw in them clear references to Christ and his kingdom. This was generally the approach of the early Church Fathers and the medieval doctors. The psalms were interpreted as showing types of the antitype: Christ Jesus, the ultimate son of David. The historical context was generally lost in these considerations and little attention was given to critical analysis of the psalms or what the psalms would have originally meant to their composers. 

The Reformers incorporated the psalms into their worship as hymns, especially in the Calvinist tradition where only psalms were sung. The paraphrases by Isaac Watts (1674–1748) became enormously popular in Reformed circles and are still sung with relish today. However, with the Reformation came a more critical approach to the psalms and an emphasis on going back to the original Hebrew text. This approach was in line with the Reformers emphasis on Sola Scriptura, but it was also a part of the Renaissance emphasis on going back to the sources (ad fontes) in Hebrew and Greek. This method of careful source analysis was particularly true following the Enlightenment in the 18th century. Davidic authorship was questioned and scholars took seriously the task of determining date, authorship, composition and unity of the psalms. The place of Christ in the psalms seemed to be eschewed by these thinkers in favour of historical and literary analysis.

The form-critical approach of the 20th century has radically changed the way we read psalms. Hermann Gunkel divided the psalms into five primary types or forms: hymns (songs of praise for God’s work in creation or history), communal laments (or laments for the whole nation), royal psalms (or psalms relating to kingship and coronation), individual laments (usually expressing sorrow for sin), and thanksgiving psalms (thanking God for deliverance from some particular distress). Subsequent work on the psalms has tried to identify their function in relation to the cult. Sigmund Mowinckel suggested a single cultic setting and festival patterned after the Babylonian festival, the enthronement of the deity. Arthur Weiser modified this approach by suggesting that the festival was not to do with the enthronement of Yahweh, but reflected the desire for covenant renewal.

These are just some of the ways modern scholarship has interpreted the psalms. It seems that Christ has been lost within the higher critical schools. While taking seriously the concerns of modern scholarship, there should be scope for considering how the psalms relate to Christ and his kingdom – particularly in how the New Testament uses the psalms to speak of Christ. This would see a partial return to how the Church Fathers viewed the psalms, albeit with due consideration to the insights of modern scholarship.

Theology

The psalms speak about God. They arguably tell us more about God than any other part of the Old Testament. They speak in terms of doxology which is based on a rich evangelical theology. The psalms affirm both God transcendence and immanence. The God of the psalmist is both “wholly other” as the great Creator and “wholly revealed” as the good shepherd of the sheep. In terms of immanence, God is intimately involved in the life of Israel. He is a help and shield, a deliverer, a rock, a high tower, and a gentle shepherd. He is also a king, the transcendent creator of all reality. As the hymnwriter puts it,

O tell of his might!
O sing of his grace!
Whose robe is the light,
whose canopy space.
His chariots of wrath
the deep thunderclouds form,
and dark is his path
on the wings of the storm.

Rather than an either/or in terms of transcendence and immanence, the psalmist thinks in terms of both/and. As John Goldingay says, ‘While in one sense Yhwh lives outside the cosmos and in another sense makes a home in the heavens, Yhwh also deigned to make a home on Zion, in the temple. It is Yhwh’s house, his place to settle permanently’.[3]

In terms of humanity, the psalmists express a deep honesty about life and death. The psalmist often faces enemies, battles with sins, struggles with the forces of darkness, but in all this he knows God is with him. As Psalm 23 reminds us, ‘Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me’ (Psalm 23:4). However, the psalmist does not a have a fully developed eschatology of heaven and hell. Death is taken up by Sheol, the pit, a place of darkness to which the dead go. In the New Testament, Sheol becomes a place of punishment and the abode of the wicked, whereas paradise is the abode of the righteous who have faith in Jesus. They dead in Christ anticipate the resurrection of the body and the glorious life of the world to come. While the wicked anticipate judgement.

Conclusion

Ultimately the Psalms celebrate God’s sovereign rule as king over his covenant people and all creation. He is portrayed as infinite, eternal and unchanging in his being, the same yesterday, today, and forever. The Psalmist considers God as wise, loving, holy, righteous, good, faithful, and true. The psalms also teach us how to pray to this very God, how to worship Him, how to grieve over sins, how to confess our sin, how to give thanks for his mercies and steadfast love, and how to make requests of God. There is a psalm for every occasion in our liturgy and confession as Christians. They deserve a place in our worship because they are holy and infallible hymns about our majestic Lord and Saviour.

Our doxology should be shaped by the theology of the psalms. They should form an integral part of our worship. We could try to sing or read at least one psalm every Sunday during worship. We could also incorporate the psalms into our daily prayer life, making the words of the psalmist our own words to God. I would suggest using a daily devotional on the psalms such as Timothy Keller’s short book, My Rock, My Refuge: A Year of Daily Devotions in the Psalms (2015). This contains an extract from the psalms, some devotional thoughts, and a suggested prayer. You will find your prayer life deeply enriched by a careful study of the psalms. The Psalmist offers words of comfort, hope, joy, deliverance, and lament and often expresses the deepest feelings of our hearts.

Recommended Reading

I have chosen mostly non-technical commentaries to aid the pastor, preacher, and layperson in their understanding of the Psalms.

Alter, Robert, The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary (W. W. Norton and Company, 2007).

deClaisse-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, Beth LaNeel Tanner, The Book of Psalms (NICOT) (Eerdmans, 2014).

Estes, Daniel J., Handbook on the Wisdom Books and Psalms (Baker Academic, 2005). 

Eveson, Phillip, The Book of Psalms: From Suffering to Glory, vol. 1 (Evangelical Press, 2014).  

Eveson, Phillip, The Book of Psalms: From Suffering to Glory, vol. 2 (Evangelical Press, 2015).

Goldingay, John, Psalms, vol. 1 (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms) (Baker Academic, 2006).

Goldingay, John, Psalms, vol. 2 (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms) (Baker Academic, 2008).

Goldingay, John, Psalms, vol. 3 (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms) (Baker Academic, 2008).

Grant, Jamie A., & Dennis Tucker Jr, Psalms: The NIV Application Commentary, vol. 2 (Zondervan Academic, 2018).

Keller, Timothy, My Rock, My Refuge: A Year of Daily Devotions in the Psalms (Hodder, 2015).

Lane, Eric, Psalms 1– 89: The Lord Saves (Christian Focus, 2006).

Lane, Eric, Psalms 90 – 150: The Lord Reigns (Christian Focus, 2006).

Longman, Tremper, Psalms: An Introduction and Commentary (TOTC) (IVP, 2014).

Ross, Allen P., A Commentary on the Psalms, vol. 1 (Kregel, 2011).

Ross, Allen P., A Commentary on the Psalms, vol. 2 (Kregel, 2013).

Ross, Allen P., A Commentary on the Psalms, vol. 3 (Kregel, 2016).

Spurgeon, Charles, Psalms, vol. 1 (The Crossway Classic Commentaries) (Crossway, 1993).

Spurgeon, Charles, Psalms, vol. 2 (The Crossway Classic Commentaries) (Crossway, 1993).

Wilson, Gerald H., Psalms: The NIV Application Commentary, vol. 1 (Zondervan Academic, 2014).


[1] Luther, Works, ed. 1553, vol. iii, p. 356.

[2] Allen P. Ross, A Commentary on the Psalms, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI, 2011), pp. 53–54.

[3] John Goldingay, Psalms, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI, 2006), p. 71.

George Whitefield (1714–70): Historiography

The evangelical popular press to this day prints hagiographical biographies of Whitefield along with selections from his published writings for devotional use.[1] These biographies present Whitefield as an evangelical icon, a hero of the faith, someone to be emulated and admired. The Whitefield portrayed in such filiopietistic literature is a saintly figure, a model of evangelical zeal and devotion. Whitefield is presented through rose-coloured spectacles while the authentic, deeply flawed, human being is hidden from view. Such biographers nostalgically romanticise the eighteenth-century revivals and idealise the leaders of the Methodist revival as heroes of the faith – a methodology reflective of Thomas Carlyle’s maxim that the ‘history of the world is but the biography of great men’.[2] This is especially true of the semi-popular biographies of Whitefield published during the nineteenth century which ‘feed the late Victorian appetite for larger than life historical heroes’.[3] Though Whitefield has been the victim of hagiography, there have been more scholarly and critical biographies in recent years – especially those of the American Academy.[4] This literature aims to capture the authentic Whitefield through a careful and critical analysis of the source material on George Whitefield. The following discussion aims to navigate the literature on Whitefield from the earliest filiopietistic literature published following the evangelist’s death to contemporary scholarly critiques of his life and ministry.[5]

The historiography of George Whitefield begins with John Gillies. Gilles magnum opus was his Historical Collections Relating to Remarkable Periods of the Success of the Gospel (1754). This account attempted to chart the success of the Gospel from the closing of the Book of Acts in the New Testament down to the contemporary revivals which Gilles himself had experienced first-hand. In addition to this compendium, Gilles published the first account of Whitefield’s life and ministry, Memoirs of the Revered George Whitefield M.A. (1772), and also edited his published writings – sermons, tracts, and letters – in a six-volume edition of his collected works. According to David Ceri Jones, ‘Gilles biography furnished the evangelical reading public with a detailed picture of the quintessential evangelical’.[6] George Whitefield was presented as a role model for devout evangelicals to emulate and admire.  Gillies sources were mostly all from Whitefield’s pen – some 1500 letters, published sermons, and most of his shorter published pieces. The result is a decisively pro-Whitefield biography designed to answer the objections of critics in the late eighteenth century.  Not surprisingly, Gilles biography laid the foundation stone for subsequent generations of hagiographers.

Robert Phillip was inspired to write a new life of Whitefield – updating Gilles account – by the congregational philanthropist Thomas Wilson, a member of Whitefield’s Tabernacle and a founding member of both the Religious Tract Society and the London Missionary Society. In his preface to The Life and Times of George Whitefield MA (1837), Phillip writes, ‘This work is chiefly from Whitefield’s own pen. So far as it is mine, it is in his own spirit’. Despite claims to capture the authentic Whitefield, the result is a filiopietistic biography designed to promote evangelical religion. The real Whitefield is hidden behind hagiography. Phillip depends heavily upon George Whitefield’s Journals and the account of his life by John Gilles – quoting extensively from both.

The name of Luke Tyerman dominates the scene of nineteenth century historiography. His Life of John Wesley runs to some 1,857 pages. It provides a wealth of material on the evangelical revivals of the eighteenth century, particularly as they concern life and ministry of John Wesley. Tyerman’s interest in Wesley emerged from his personal commitment to Wesleyan Methodism as both a minister and historian of early Methodism. Martin Wellings suggests that ‘the Methodism in which Tyerman was raised often displayed an uncritical and uninformed adulation of its founder’.[7] Though Tyerman’s approach to the history of Methodism was rigorous, making a careful and studious use of sources, he nonetheless held Wesley in high esteem and eclipsed to some extent the role of Whitefield in the evangelical revivals. Even so, Tyerman’s two volume biography The Life of the Rev. George Whitefield B.A. of Pembroke College, Oxford, 2 vols (1876–7) was ‘the most ambitious to that point … [it] was a testimony to his rigorous approach and contained much that had evaded Gilles’ grasp’.[8] Tyerman’s personal commitment to Wesleyanism leads him to a personal distaste for Whitefield’s Calvinism –  a fact leading Jones and Hammond to suggest that Tyerman’s ‘real hero’ was John Wesley.[9] As Wellings observes, ‘Tyerman’s Wesleyanism also placed him firmly on the Arminian side in the debates which fractured the evangelical movement in the eighteenth century’.[10]  

In the early twentieth century Albert D. Belden’s biography George Whitefield–The Awakener: A Modern Study of the Evangelical Revival (1930) offered a uniquely social perspective on Whitefield’s life and ministry. His biography opens with a forward by J. Ramsay Macdonald, Britain’s first Labour prime minister, a passionate advocate of Christian socialism. Macdonald is not an altogether unusual advocate for Whitefield, especially as one considers Whitefield’s philanthropy and care of the Georgia orphan house. Belden approaches Whitefield’s biography and influence both from the perspective of evangelicalism and Christian socialism. He therefore gives special consideration to Whitefield’s evangelism, philanthropy, and concern for the education of children and future evangelical minsters. Belden goes so far as to describe Whitefield as ‘the pioneer of modern philanthropy’ who made ‘continuous association of the Gospel with practical charity’.[11] Belden sees the early Methodist societies as anticipating the social organisation of trade unionism. For Belden, the collective organisation of Methodist societies brings with it a sense of spiritual life and wellbeing: ‘By Methodism a newly-oppressed, bewildered, and miserable proletariat … received a new infusion of Life from spiritual sources’.[12] The concluding chapters explore Whitefield’s social impact and consider the evangelical revival in the light of today from theological, psychological, and sociological perspectives – adopting a theologically and socially liberal approach. According to Belden, a revival for the modern world will inevitably be political: ‘Politics will therefore become … for the socially minded the medium of such an active collectivist ethic, the expression of a religion that sees a passionately social God as the centre of a divinely-human kingdom, as the Father of a divinely human family’.[13] For Belden, the new evangelical revival will espouse not only the new birth, but a social Gospel – one that actively transforms society for the betterment of humankind.   

By far the most comprehensive study during the twentieth century was written by Arnold Dallimore, a Canadian Baptist pastor. Dallimore approaches Whitefield’s life and ministry from the sympathetic perspective of Reformed evangelicalism.[14] The result is a comprehensive but filiopietistic biography – more akin to a hagiography than an honest life of Whitefield. Though Dallimore suggests he makes known Whitefield’s faults, he nonetheless confesses that he can hardly find anything to criticise about him:

I have endeavoured to give my portrait of Whitefield both reality and depth. I make known not only his accomplishments and abilities, but also his foibles and mistakes. I must confess, however, that I had almost wished his faults had been more pronounced, lest by reason of their fewness and feebleness, I should be charged with favouritism.[15]

He inevitably smooths over some of the rough patches in his life and career – not least his appalling treatment of women. However, Dallimore does sharply criticise Whitefield for his advocacy and personal ownership of slaves, though he commends him for treating his slaves well and instructing them in the Gospel.  

Written to counter the dominance of the Wesleyan perspective in Methodist studies, Daillimore’s account is careful to present Whitefield in the light of his moderate Calvinism, attempting to present eighteenth-century Methodism as originally Calvinistic in theology as opposed to Wesleyan. Ian Hugh Clary suggests that ‘His didactic method aimed to stir up evangelical readers to deeper devotion and more zealous mission, and to warn them against false notions concerning conversion, revival, and charismatic gifts’.[16] The narrative is shaped by his commitment to Reformed soteriology and is very much the work of an evangelical pastor concerned to present Whitefield as a spiritual role model for contemporary evangelicals. The design of Daillimore’s biography is to explain the evangelical awakening as a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit – a work of divine providence: ‘Whitefield’s life teaches us that Revival is a sovereign work of God, a supernatural work, a mighty out-pouring of the Holy Spirit’.[17] Though commendable for drawing attention to Whitefield’s evangelical Calvinism, this study nonetheless is part of an attempt by Reformed evangelicals during the twentieth century to claim early evangelicalism as originally Calvinistic rather than Wesleyan or Arminian.

From Dallimore onwards, the literature on George Whitefield takes a more scholarly and critical turn. This critical approach begins with Harry S. Stout’s biography: The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism (1991). Stout presents Whitefield as ‘Anglo-America’s first modern celebrity’, a larger than life figure whose early acting experiences paved the way for his dramatic presence in the pulpit.[18] According to Stout, Whitefield synthesised evangelical religion with the language and techniques of the stage – he became an ‘actor-preacher rather than a scholar-preacher’.[19] These techniques allowed Whitefield to popularise evangelical religion on both sides of the Atlantic, attracting thousands to hear his sermons. Though commendable for drawing attention to Whitefield’s dramatic style and oratory, Stout’s biography neglects the substance behind his preaching – particularly his evangelical Calvinism. It is debatable whether Whitefield’s childhood experiences in acting can be properly extended to cover his entire preaching career. Perhaps Whitefield’s listeners were as much captivated by the content of his sermons as the eloquence of his preaching.

Frank Lambert’s work builds on the critical perspective of Stout, particularly by considering Whitefield’s innovations. [20] Lambert approaches Whitefield from the perspective of the marketplace and commerce during the eighteenth century. Whitefield is described as a trend-setter who drew upon the techniques of commerce to sell his brand of evangelical Calvinism in marketplace of ideas. Lambert draws attention to Whitefield’s aggressive use of print media to publicise his awakenings on both sides of the Atlantic – selling his divinity in newspapers, magazines, and pamphlets. The epilogue concludes by comparing Whitefield to Charles Finney, Dwight L. Moody, and Billy Graham, his innovative counterparts in revivalism. Though not sharing the same theological perspective as Charles Finney, Whitefield’s use of print media to advertise his revivals anticipates the pioneering techniques of subsequent revivalism. The parallel with Finney is somewhat undermined by Whitefield’s commitment to the doctrine of predestination – theologically speaking, they are diametrical opposites. Nonetheless, Whitefield use of the press did unite evangelicals throughout the colonies, arguably paving the way for the collective consciousness of the Revolution.  

Taking up the political theme of collective consciousness, Jerome Dean Mahaffey explores Whitefield’s influence in forming a cohesive American identity through a ‘rhetoric of community’.[21] This study pays particular attention to the language of Whitefield’s sermons, especially the rhetoric of the new birth and its influence in forming a community of like-minded evangelicals throughout the American colonies. By carefully analysing the rhetoric of George Whitefield’s sermons, Mahaffey shows his influence in the emergence of a collective and distinctively American religious identity. A religious rhetoric that would eventually be transformed into the political rhetoric of the American Revolution. Whitefield, for Mahaffey, should be seen as an American patriot and as one of the ‘founding fathers’ of the nation itself.[22]

Thomas S. Kidd approaches Whitefield both as a sympathetic evangelical and an as academic historian.[23] The result is a carefully balanced biography locating Whitefield within his evangelical context while also drawing attention to his failings such as his ‘appalling behaviour in relationships with women … his advocacy of slavery and his personal ownership of slaves’.[24] Kidd attempts to show how Whitefield helped to establish an interdenominational religious movement, theologically committed to ‘the gospel of conversion, the new birth, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the preaching of revival across Europe and America’.[25] George Whitefield emerges from this study not only as an evangelical leader, but as America’s spiritual founding father. The study highlights the charismatic nature of Whitefield’s life and ministry. Whitefield emerges almost as a prototype of the modern Pentecostal.

Broadening the approach slightly, Jessica Parr considers Whitefield as a ‘religious icon of the British Atlantic world’, while also considering his ‘understudied influence on evangelical beliefs about slavery, race, and religion’.[26] As a religious icon, Whitefield was a symbol in the post-Reformation struggle for religious tolerance. With respect to slavery, Whitefield inspired abolitionists with his early antislavery sentiments and his preaching of equality before the eyes of God. He also, somewhat paradoxically, was a ‘model of proslavery’ as his personal ownership of slaves suggests. He apparently saw ‘no contradiction between slave owning and his faith’.[27] According to Parr, Whitefield emerges as a crucial figure in the debate over religious culture and liberty in early modern Atlantic world. The final chapter considers Whitefield posthumous role as a transnational icon – highlighting the morbid fascination of evangelicals with the bones and skull of Whitefield in the Newburyport crypt. It was after all the tomb of an American icon.  

The most important critical study of twenty-first century is the collaborative volume edited by Geordan Hammond and David Ceri Jones: George Whitefield: Life, Context, and Legacy (2016). This study brings together a team of professional historians working at universities across the globe to present new and creative research regarding the life, ministry, and impact of George Whitefield. The editors open with a consideration of Whitefield’s biographers – giving particular attention to Gilles, Tyerman, Dallimore, Stout, Lambert, and Mahaffey. For Hammond and Jones, there is a general transition in the historiography on Whitefield from hagiography to scholarly criticism.

Boyd Stanley Schlenther opens with a consideration of Whitefield’s personal life and character.[28] He narrates aspects of Whitefield’s biography – his involvement in the Holy Club at Oxford, his difficulties in forming personal relationships, his appalling treatment of women (particularly his own wife), as well as his tendency towards boastfulness, judgementalism, and pride. Schlenther also considers the financial clouds that haunted his life and ministry, particularly with respect to his oversight of the Bethesda Orphanage. Schlenther closes with an account of Whitefield’s physical decline and final years – noting his corpulent appearance and his irascibility in the final years. 

Mark K. Olson explores Whitefield’s conversion and early theological formation – considering his progression from Oxford Methodism, to evangelical Methodism, and eventually Calvinistic Methodism. Whitefield’s early association with High Church sacramentalism and holy living theology was gradually replaced with evangelical convictions regarding justification by faith and the new birth. Eventually developing into a moderate Calvinism emphasising the electing love of God and the final perseverance of the saints.[29] In chapter three, William Gibson considers Whitefield’s difficult relationship to the Church of England – examining the attitudes of the clergy and Anglican bishops towards Whitefield and their specific concerns regarding ecclesiastical authority, popery, Jacobitism, and antinomianism.[30]    

Frank Lambert explores Whitefield’s complex interaction with the Enlightenment.[31] Lambert assumes there were ‘many competing Enlightenments’ throughout the Atlantic world during the eighteenth century and that Whitefield spiritual enlightenment may be considered a part of them.[32] Whitefield formulated his own distinctively religious response to the Enlightenment in which human reason must first be ‘illuminated by God’s grace’.[33] Whitefield’s opposition to John Tillotson’s theology is explored in considerable depth as well as his more promising relationship to Benjamin Franklin. ‘For Whitefield, there could be no true enlightenment without the transforming grace of God that wrought a new nature in the minds, hearts, and wills of men and women’.[34] In chapter five, Carla Gardina Pestana explores Whitefield’s engagement in the culture of empire – noting how he travelled extensively through the British empire and represented it to his readers in his published journals and letters.[35] He also ‘embraced its characteristic institutions of religious diversity and slavery’, and was instrumental in reshaping its religious culture.[36]

Geordan Hammond focuses on the early relationship between Whitefield and John Wesley.[37] He gives particular consideration to the tensions that characterised the ‘chaotic beginnings’ of the revival and Wesley’s use of the lot in making decisions.[38] Hammond explores the fascinating correspondence between Wesley and Whitefield from their early friendship and deferential relationship to the emerging Calvinist-Arminian conflicts between them. In chapter seven, Kenneth P. Minkema explores the relationship between Whitefield and the philosopher-theologian Jonathan Edwards.[39] He focuses on their interactions in 1740 and the ‘virtually ignored visit’ of 1745, noting especially the frictions between them as well as their shared interests in revival and religious experience. Minkema particularly considers Edwards’ criticisms of impulses, impressions and dreams, of which Whitefield had made much in the early editions of his published journals.

Keith Edward Beebe and David Ceri Jones (co-authors) consider Whitefield’s engagement with the revivals in the ‘Celtic’ nations of the British Isles – Wales, Scotland, and Ireland.[40] Beebe and Jones explore Whitefield’s involvement in creating a British-wide evangelical Calvinist network. The chapter does much to address Whitefield’s role as a ‘unifier of evangelicals in each of the four constituent nations of the British Isles’.[41]  In chapter nine, Brett C. McInelly explores the criticism and controversy surrounding Whitefield’s life and ministry.[42] McInelly argues that Whitefield’s ‘public clashes’ reveal much about his ‘character and conviction’, while his apologetic for the evangelical awakening became part of the ‘media machine by which … [he] advanced the Methodist cause’.[43] Whitefield revelled in criticism – taking persecution as a mark of assurance for his ministry and labours, recognising that even ‘bad publicity is good publicity’.[44]   

Braxton Boren explores whether it would have been physically possible for Whitefield to preach to the vast crowds supposedly attending his public sermons.[45] The chapter draws upon Benjamin Franklin’s account of Whitefield’s incredible voice and the estimated crowd that could have reasonably heard him – amounting to some 30,000 listeners – similar to the vast crowds that would gather before army generals in ancient history. Using modern simulation techniques and Franklin’s data, as well as the largest crowd estimates for Whitefield’s preaching services, Boren suggests that Whitefield ‘could perhaps have been heard intelligibly by a crowd of 50,000 people’ under ideal acoustic conditions’.[46] In chapter eleven, Emma Salgard Cunha offers a close reading of Whitefield’s sermon ‘Abraham’s Offering up his Son Isaac’, highlighting the similarities between the use of affective language in contemporary poetry and the affective rhetoric of George Whitefield’s preaching.[47] Cunha compares the British dramatist and critic John Dennis (1658–1734) to Whitefield, highlighting the poetics of eighteenth-century evangelicalism with its peculiar concentration on heart religion and the religious affections.

Stephen R. Berry considers the time Whitefield spent on the Atlantic and how he occupied himself on board ship.[48] Remarkably, Whitefield spent approximately three years of his life on the water. In Berry’s words, ‘The Atlantic Ocean defined Whitefield’s identity’.[49] Berry distinguishes four aspects to Whitefield’s life aboard – ‘the ship as parish, the ship as wilderness, the ship as cloister, and the ship as haven’.[50] These headings capture Whitefield’s relationship to the ocean and the way he utilized the journey for spiritual ends. Peter Choi’s chapter considers Whitefield’s relationship to the colony of Georgia, particularly his quest to establish a college on the site of the Bethesda orphanage.[51] According to Choi, Whitefield’s ‘concerns [for Bethesda] developed beyond religious interests to include cultural and imperial aspirations … the Bethesda project was one attempt by Whitefield to sketch his vision of an ascendant Protestant empire on the fluid canvas of colonial life’.[52]

Mark A. Noll considers the importance of A Collection of Hymns for Social Worship published by Whitefield in 1753.[53] The collection was published to coincide with the opening of the Tabernacle in London and represented a pivotal time in Whitefield career. Noll assesses the sensibility and the theology of Whitefield’s Collection ‘which appeared at a transitional moment in the early history of modern evangelical Christianity’.[54] Noll considers the medium in which the hymns were written, the central message of the hymns (namely, the saving work of Christ), and the spirituality they convey. In chapter fifteen, Isabel Rivers’ assesses the various responses to Whitefield’s life and ministry from his death in 1770 to the centenary celebrations in 1839.[55] Whitefield’s irenic interdenominationalism earned both supporters and opponents within Dissent and the Established Church. Many of Whitefield’s supporters were dissenters who struggled with Whitefield’s evangelical catholicism; while many of his opponents were Anglican evangelicals who ‘regarded his influence as extremely damaging to the Church’.[56]

Andrew Atherstone closes the volume with a chapter on the commemoration of Whitefield in popular culture during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.[57] Whitefield was remembered with ‘memorial sermons, monuments, statues, churches, colleges, institutes, re-enactments, and evangelistic campaigns’.[58] Atherstone zooms in on four locations – Newburyport, Victorian England, Savannah and Philadelphia, and post-1950s England – to consider the ways in which Whitefield was understood by successive generations.

Taking a decisively political perspective, Peter Y. Choi’s George Whitefield: Evangelist for God and Empire (2018) gives particular attention to the later part of Whitefield’s career – asking the question: ‘What happened after the revival?’[59] Choi portrays Whitefield as an ‘agent of British culture who used his political savvy and theological creativity to champion the cause of imperial expansion’.[60] The study explores the way in which the Great Awakening became increasingly entwined with the expansion of the British empire and culture throughout the Atlantic world. Whitefield with his itinerating on both sides of the Atlantic – crossing the ocean no less than seven times – was a key figure in this development. The study follows the gradual accommodation of the evangelical awakening to the culture of empire.  

This survey of the historiography on George Whitefield has shown that much of literature is largely biographical in nature, with the tendency being to focus on his life and ministry. Recent scholarly literature tends to be decisively American in its focus and often political orientated, either focusing on Whitefield’s role as a forgotten ‘founding father’ or his influence in bringing the culture of empire to the American colonies. Much of the scholarly literature has virtually ignored Whitefield’s theological development, giving little or no attention to his published sermons – a key source for exploring Whitefield’s theology. While political and social studies have their place in the study of Whitefield’s life and career, a good case can be made for exploring the theological themes that animated his preaching. No doubt many were attracted to Whitefield by the eloquence of his preaching and his dramatic presence in the pulpit, but perhaps what gripped them most was the life changing doctrines he expounded – particularly the new birth and justification by faith. If they came for the eloquence, they stayed for the doctrine. A scholarly and critical approach to Whitefield’s theology – drawing upon the best theological literature – is therefore needed.    

Bibliography

Belden, Albert D., George Whitefield – the Awakener: A Modern Study of the Evangelical Revival (London, 1930).

Carlyle, Thomas, On Heroes, Hero-worship, & the Heroic in History (London, 1840).

Choi, Peter Y., George Whitefield: Evangelist for God and Empire (Grand Rapids, MI, 2018).

Clary, Ian Hugh, ‘Arnold Dallimore: Whitefield’s Champion’, in Andrew Atherstone & David Ceri Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History: Faith, Scholarship and the Evangelical Past (Oxford, 2019), pp. 170–93. 

Dallimore, Arnold A., George Whitefield: The Life and Times of the Great Evangelist of the 18th Century Revival, 2 vols (London and Edinburgh, 1980).

Gilles, John, Memoirs of the Life of the Reverend George Whitefield M.A. (London, 1772).

Gledstone, James Paterson, The Life and Travels of George Whitefield (London, 1871).

Hammond, Geordan & David Ceri Jones (eds), George Whitefield: Life, Context, and Legacy (Oxford, 2016).

Haykin, Michael, Bitesize Biographies: George Whitefield (2015).

Jones, David Ceri, ‘“So Much Idolised by Some, and Railed at by Others”: Towards Understanding George Whitefield’, Wesley and Methodist Studies 5 (2013), 3–29.

Jones, David Ceri, ‘John Gilles and the Evangelical Revivals’, in Andrew Atherstone and David Ceri Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History: Faith, Scholarship and the Evangelical Past (Oxford, 2019), pp. 22–41.

Kidd, Thomas S., George Whitefield: America’s Spiritual Founding Father (New Haven, 2014).

Lambert, Frank, “Pedlar in Divinity”: George Whitefield and the Transatlantic Revivals (Princeton, NJ, 1994).

Lawson, Stephen J., The Evangelistic Zeal of George Whitefield (2014).

Macaulay, James, Whitefield Anecdotes: Illustrating the Life, Character, and Work of the Great Evangelist (London, 1886).

Maddock, Ian J. (ed.), Wesley and Whitefield? Wesley versus Whitefield (Eugene, OR, 2019).

Maddock, Ian J., Men of One Book: A Comparison of Two Methodist Preachers, John Wesley and George Whitefield (Eugene, OR, 2011).

Mahaffey, Jerome Dean, Preaching Politics: The Religious Rhetoric of George Whitefield and the Founding of a New Nation (Waco, TX, 2007).

Mansfield, Stephen, Forgotten Founding Father: The Heroic Legacy of George Whitefield (Nashville, 2001).

Parr, Jessica m., Inventing George Whitefield: Race, Revivalism, and the Making of a Religious Icon (Jackson, MS, 2015).

Pederson, Randal J., George Whitefield: Daily Readings (2010).

Phillip, Robert, The Life and Times of George Whitefield MA (London, 1837). 

Pollock, John, George Whitefield: The Evangelist (Fearn, 1973).

Scotland, Nigel, George Whitefield: The First Transatlantic Revivalist (Oxford, 2019).

Stout, Harry S., The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, MI, 1991).

Tyerman, Luke, The Life of the Rev. George Whitefield B.A. of Pembroke college, Oxford, 2 vols (London, 1876–7).

Wakeley, j. b., Anecdotes of the Rev. George Whitefield, with a Biographical Sketch (London, 1900).

Wellings, Martin, ‘Luke Tyerman and the History of Early Methodism’, in Andrew Atherstone & David Ceri Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History: Faith, Scholarship and the Evangelical Past (Oxford, 2019), pp. 102–20.


[1] See, for example, John Pollock, George Whitefield: The Evangelist (Fearn, 1973); Stephen J. Lawson, The Evangelistic Zeal of George Whitefield (2014); Michael Haykin, George Whitefield (2015); Randal J. Pederson, George Whitefield: Daily Readings (2010). For an example of popular biography that avoids hagiography see Nigel Scotland, George Whitefield: The First Transatlantic Revivalist (Oxford, 2019).   

[2] Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes, Hero-worship, & The Heroic in History (London, 1840), p. 21. 

[3] Geordan Hammond & David Ceri Jones (eds), George Whitefield: Life, Context, and Legacy (Oxford, 2016), p. 7. Examples of such biographies include James Paterson Gledstone, The Life and Travels of George Whitefield (London, 1871); James Macaulay, Whitefield Anecdotes: Illustrating the Life, Character, and Work of the Great Evangelist (London, 1886); J. B. Wakeley, Anecdotes of the Rev. George Whitefield, with a Biographical Sketch (London, 1900). 

[4] See, for example, Harry S. Stout, The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, MI, 1991). Frank Lambert, “Pedlar in Divinity”: George Whitefield and the Transatlantic Revivals (Princeton, NJ, 1994). Jerome Dean Mahaffey, Preaching Politics: The Religious Rhetoric of George Whitefield and the Founding of a New Nation (Waco, TX, 2007).

[5] For an analysis of Whitefield’s biographers see David Ceri Jones, ‘“So Much Idolised by Some, and Railed at by Others”: Towards Understanding George Whitefield’, Wesley and Methodist Studies 5 (2013), 3–29.

[6] David Ceri Jones, ‘John Gilles and the evangelical revivals’, in Andrew Atherstone and David Ceri Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History: Faith, Scholarship and the Evangelical Past (Oxford, 2019), p. 25.

[7] Martin Wellings, ‘Luke Tyerman and the History of Early Methodism’, in Atherstone & Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History, p. 107. 

[8] Jones & Hammond (eds), George Whitefield, p. 6.

[9] Jones & Hammond (eds), George Whitefield, p. 6.

[10] Wellings, ‘Luke Tyerman and the History of Early Methodism’, p. 119.

[11] Albert D. Belden, George Whitefield–The Awakener: A Modern Study of the Evangelical Revival (London, 1930), p. 235.

[12] Belden, George Whitefield–The Awakener, p. 248. 

[13] Belden, George Whitefield–The Awakener, p. 288.

[14] Arnold Dallimore, George Whitefield: The Life and Times of the Great Evangelist of the Eighteenth-Century Revival, 2 vols (Edinburgh, 1970, 1980).

[15] Dallimore, George Whitefield, 1:15.

[16] Ian Hugh Clary, ‘Arnold Dallimore: Whitefield’s Champion’, Atherstone & Jones (eds), Making Evangelical History, p. 170.

[17] Dallimore, George Whitefield, 2:537.

[18] Harry S. Stout, The Divine Dramatist: George Whitefield and the Rise of Modern Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids, MI, 1991), xiii.

[19] Stout, The Divine Dramatist, xix.

[20] Frank Lambert,“Pedlar in Divinity”: George Whitefield and the Transatlantic Revivals (Princeton, NJ, 1994)

[21] Jerome Dean Mahaffey, Preaching Politics: The Religious Rhetoric of George Whitefield and the Founding of a New Nation (Waco, TX, 2007).

[22] For a similar perspective see Stephen Mansfield, Forgotten Founding Father: The Heroic Legacy of George Whitefield (Nashville, 2001).

[23] Thomas S. Kidd, George Whitefield: America’s Spiritual Founding Father (New Haven, 2014).

[24] Kidd, George Whitefield, p. 4.

[25] Kidd, George Whitefield, p. 3.

[26] Jessica M. Parr, Inventing George Whitefield: Race, Revivalism, and the Making of a Religious Icon (Jackson, MS, 2015), p. 5. 

[27] Parr, Inventing George Whitefield, p. 8.

[28] Boyd Stanley Schlenther, ‘Whitefield’s Personal Life and Character’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 12–28.

[29] Mark K. Olson, ‘Whitefield’s Conversion and Early Theological Formation’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 29–45.

[30] William Gibson, ‘Whitefield and the Church of England’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 46–63.

[31] Frank Lambert, ‘Whitefield and the Enlightenment’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 64–81.

[32] Lambert, ‘Whitefield and the Enlightenment’, p. 66.

[33] Lambert, ‘Whitefield and the Enlightenment’, p. 71.

[34] Lambert, ‘Whitefield and the Enlightenment’, p.70.

[35] Carla Gardina Pestana, ‘Whitefield and Empire’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 82–97.

[36] Pestana, ‘Whitefield and Empire’, p. 82.

[37] Geordan Hammond, ‘Whitefield, John Wesley, and Revival Leadership’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 98–114.

[38] Hammond, ‘Whitefield, John Wesley, and Revival Leadership’, p. 98.  

[39] Kenneth P. Minkema, ‘Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, and Revival’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 115–31.

[40] Keith Edward Beebe and David Ceri Jones, ‘Whitefield and the ‘Celtic’ Revivals’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 132–49.

[41] Beebe & Jones, ‘Whitefield and the ‘Celtic’ Revivals’, p. 132

[42] Brett C. McInelly, ‘Whitefield and His Critics’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 150–66.

[43] McInelly, ‘Whitefield and His Critics’, p. 150.

[44] McInelly, ‘Whitefield and His Critics’, p. 151.

[45] Braxton Boren, ‘Whitefield’s Voice’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 167–89.

[46] Boren, ‘Whitefield’s Voice’, p. 187.

[47] Emma Salgard Cunha, ‘Whitefield and Literary Affect’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 190–206.

[48] Stephen R. Berry, ‘Whitefield and the Atlantic’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 207–23.

[49] Berry, ‘Whitefield and the Atlantic’, p. 207.

[50] Berry, ‘Whitefield and the Atlantic’, p. 208.

[51] Peter Choi, ‘Whitefield, Georgia, and the Quest for Bethesda College’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 224–40.

[52] Choi, ‘Whitefield, Georgia, and the Quest for Bethesda College’, p. 225.

[53] Mark A. Noll, ‘Whitefield, Hymnody, and Evangelical Spirituality’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 241–60.

[54] Noll, ‘Whitefield, Hymnody, and Evangelical Spirituality’, p. 241.

[55] Isabel Rivers, ‘Whitefield’s Reception in England 1770–1839’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 261–77.

[56] Rivers, ‘Whitefield’s Reception in England 1770–1839’, p. 261.

[57] Andrew Atherstone, ‘Commemorating Whitefield in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries’, in Jones & Hammond, George Whitefield, pp. 278–299.

[58] Atherstone, ‘Commemorating Whitefield in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, p. 278.

[59] Peter Y. Choi, George Whitefield: Evangelist for God and Empire (Grand Rapids, MI, 2018), p. 2.

[60] Choi, George Whitefield, p. 3.