N05663:562
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
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.
The Opposition of his Heart has the Mastery over Him, having an Influence on his Mind far superior to the King's Grace and Condescension, and to all his kind Offers & Promises. Now, is it agreeable to common Sense, to assert and stand to it, that there is no Difference between these two Cases, as to any Worthiness of Blame in the Prisoners; because, forsooth, there is a Necessity in both, and the required Act in each Case is impossible? 'Tis true, a Man's evil Dispositions may be as strong and immovable as the Bars of a Castle. But who can't see, that when a Man, in the latter Case, is said to be unable to obey the Command, the Expression is used improperly, and not in the Sense it has originally and in common Speech? And that it may properly be said to be in the Rebel's Power to come out of Prison, seeing he can easily do it if he pleases; tho' by Reason of his vile Temper of Heart which is fixed and rooted, 'tis impossible that it should please Him?
The Opposition of his Heart has the Mastery over Him, having an Influence on his Mind far superiour to the King's Grace and Condescension, and to all his kind Offers & Promises. Now, is it agreable to common Sense, to assert and stand to it, that there is no Difference between these two Cases, as to any Worthiness of Blame in the Prisoners; because, forsooth, there is a Necessity in both, and the required Act in each Case is impossible? 'Tis true, a Man's evil Dispositions may be as strong and immovable as the Bars of a Castle. But who can't see, that when a Man, in the latter Case, is said to be unable to obey the Command, the Expression is used improperly, and not in the Sense it has originally and in common Speech? And that it may properly be said to be in the Rebel's Power to come out of Prison, seeing he can easily do it if he pleases; tho' by Reason of his vile Temper of Heart which is fix'd and rooted, 'tis impossible that it should please Him?
Upon the whole, I presume there is no Person of good Understanding, who impartially considers the Things which have been observed, but will allow that 'tis not evident from the Dictates of the common Sense, or natural Notions of Mankind, ⟨p. 219⟩