A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of…

Yea, on these Principles, it will not only follow that Men can't have any reasonable Ground of Judgment or Conjecture, that their Means and Endeavours to obtain Virtue or avoid Vice, will be successful, but they may be sure they will not; they may be certain, that they will be in vain; and that if ever the Thing which they seek comes to pass, it will not be at all owing to the Means they use. For Means and Endeavours ⟨p. 224⟩can have no Effect at all, in Order to obtain the End, but in one of these two Ways; either (1.) Through a natural Tendency and Influence, to prepare and dispose the Mind more to virtuous Acts, either by causing the Disposition of the Heart to be more in Favour of such Acts, or by bringing the Mind more into the View of powerful Motives and Inducements: Or, (2.) By putting Persons more in the Way of God's Bestowment of the Benefit. But neither of these can be the Case. Not the latter; for as has been just now observed, it don't consist with the Arminian Notion of Self-determination, which they suppose essential to Virtue, that God should be the Bestower, or (which is the same Thing) the determining, disposing Author of Virtue. Not the former; for natural Influence and Tendency supposes Causality and Connection; and that supposes Necessity of Event, which is inconsistent with Arminian Liberty. A Tendency of Means, by biassing the Heart in Favour of Virtue, or by bringing the Will under the Influence and Power of Motives in its Determinations, are both inconsistent with Arminian Liberty of Will, consisting in Indifference, and sovereign Self-determination, as has been largely demonstrated.

Yea, on these Principles, it will not only follow that Men can't have any reasonable Ground of Judgment or Conjecture, that their Means and Endeavours to obtain Vertue or avoid Vice, will be successful, but they may be sure they will not; they may be certain, that they will be in vain; and that if ever the Thing which they seek comes to pass, it will not be at all owing to the Means they use. For Means and Endeavours ⟨p. 224⟩can have no Effect at all, in Order to obtain the End, but in one of these two Ways; either (1.) Through a natural Tendency and Influence, to prepare and dispose the Mind more to vertuous Acts, either by causing the Disposition of the Heart to be more in Favour of such Acts, or by bringing the Mind more into the View of powerful Motives and Inducements: Or, (2.) By putting Persons more in the Way of God's Bestowment of the Benefit. But neither of these can be the Case. Not the latter; for as has been just now observed, it don't consist with the Arminian Notion of Self-determination, which they suppose essential to Vertue, that God should be the Bestower, or (which is the same Thing) the determining, disposing Author of Vertue. Not the former; for natural Influence and Tendency supposes Causality and Connection; and that supposes Necessity of Event, which is inconsistent with Arminian Liberty. A Tendency of Means, by biassing the Heart in Favour of Vertue, or by bringing the Will under the Influence and Power of Motives in its Determinations, are both inconsistent with Arminian Liberty of Will, consisting in Indifference, and sovereign Self-determination, as has been largely demonstrated.