In five pages this paper contrasts and compares the theories of Jonathan Mayhew and Jonathan Edwards. Two sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: D0_MBsubmsn.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
to decide what exactly submission meant in terms of their relation to England and duty to their own civil liberties. Both Jonathan Edwards and Jonathan Mayhew offered contrasting points of
view on this topic, especially as it pertained to higher governmental and religious powers. Jonathan Edwards, easily counted among the greatest philosophers in mankinds history, seemed to doubt the
ability the average citizen to govern himself, as well as embracing civic liberty. He was one of the first to use the term of the people to denote the position
of a persons ruler to them. Interestingly enough, he had the foresight to see that at some point in the future, there would be a war waged between Christian
ideologies and civil duty. That government was necessary, he does not disagree. However, he states that the Christian has a vital duty to be involved in all facets of society
beyond the church walls, but in the end to be in submission to the higher authorities as the Church is to Christ. He tended to argue that the colonists
must obey King George III whether he was right or wrong. Paul, in the Bible, had written that Christians were to obey authorities. They are instituted by God, serve God,
and existed to do good. Therefore, he sermonized, citizens should obey not just for fear of punishment but for consciences sake. "Under all the cultivations of heaven, they brought forth
bitter and poisonous fruit; as in the two verses next preceding the text. -- The expression I have chosen for my text, their foot shall slide in due time, seems
to imply the following things, relating to the punishment and destruction to which these wicked Israelites were exposed"(Edwards 474). His