N05663:201
A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of…
A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of will, which is supposed to be essential to moral agency, virtue and vice, reward and punishment, praise and blame. By Jonathan Edwards, A.M. Pastor of the church in Stockbridge. ; [One line from Romans]A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of will, which is supposed to be essential to moral agency, vertue and vice, reward and punishment, praise and blame. By Jonathan Edwards, A.M. Pastor of the church in Stockbridge. ; [One line from Romans]
printed by S. Kneeland, 1754
Part 2 › Section 7: Concerning the Notion of Liberty of Will consisting in Indifference.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And that is, that the first Choice is exerted without Choice, in order to produce it self.
If any, to evade these Things, should own, that a State of Liberty, and a State of Indifference are not the same, and that the former may be without the latter; But should say, that Indifference is still essential to the Freedom of an Act of Will, in some Sort, namely, as 'tis necessary to go immediately before it; It being essential to the Freedom of an Act of Will that it should directly and immediately arise out of a State of Indifference: still this will not help the Cause of Arminian Liberty, or make it consistent with it self. For if the Act springs immediately out of a State of Indifference, then it do's not arise from antecedent Choice or Preference. But if the Act arises directly out of a State of Indifference, without any intervening Choice to choose and determine it, then the Act not being determined by Choice, is not determined by the Will; the Mind exercises no free Choice in the Affair, and free Choice and free Will have no Hand in the Determination of the Act. Which is entirely inconsistent with their Notion of the Freedom of Volition.
If any, to evade these Things, should own, that a State of Liberty, and a State of Indifference are not the same, and that the former may be without the latter; But should say, that Indifference is still essential to the Freedom of an Act of Will, in some Sort, namely, as 'tis necessary to go immediately before it; It being essential to the Freedom of an Act of Will that it should directly and immediately arise out of a State of Indifference: still this will not help the Cause of Arminian Liberty, or make it consistent with it self. For if the Act springs immediately out of a State of Indifference, then it do's not arise from antecedent Choice or Preference. But if the Act arises directly out of a State of Indifference, without any intervening Choice to chuse and determine it, then the Act not being determined by Choice, is not determined by the Will; the Mind exercises no free Choice in the Affair, and free Choice and free Will have no Hand in the Determination of the Act. Which is entirely inconsistent with their Notion of the Freedom of Volition.