Merit and Atonement

Merit, Jonathan Edwards said, is “anything . . . in one person . . which appearing in the view of another is a recommendation of him to the other’s regard, esteem and affection.”

On this definition of merit, Edwards is able to insist that imputation is not “unreasonable, or against nature,” since nothing is more common than that “respect should be shown to one on account of his . . . conntexion with another.” Jenson ( America’s Theologian ) explains the point this way: “what ‘recommends’ person A to person C should also recommend B, A’s ‘connexion,’ to C.”

Union with Christ is also central to Edwards’ atonement theology. When one “that is very dear to any person, and of great merit in [his] eyes . . . not only stands in a strict union with another, but also does particularly express a great desire of that other’s welfare . . . it is agreeable to nature, that the welfare of the person united to him should be regarded . . . as if it were his own.” Jesus in other words has “that which commends Him to the Father’s affection,” and when He in turn commends us, His closely united friends, to the Father, the Father accepts us on the basis of Jesus’ “merits.” He goes on to characterize the atonement to a rescue of a client by a patron: It is as “when the patron’s heart is so united to the client, that when the client is destroyed, he from love is willing to take the destruction on himself.”