Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On the Freedom of the Will: Part II: Section I (Refuting Arminian Free-Willism)
CCEL ^ | 1754 | Jonathan Edwards

Posted on 02/10/2004 10:46:05 AM PST by ksen

On the Freedom of the Will

PART II

Section I: Showing the manifest inconsistence of the Arminian notion of Liberty of Will, consisting in the Will's self-determining Power.

Having taken notice of those things which may be necessary to be observed, concerning the meaning of the principal terms and phrases made use of in controversies concerning human liberty, and particularly observed what Liberty is according to the common language and general apprehension of mankind, and what it is as understood and maintained by Arminians; I proceed to consider the Arminian notion of the Freedom. of the Will, and the supposed necessity of it in order to moral agency, or in order to any one's being capable of virtue or vice, and properly the subject of command or counsel, praise or blame, promises or threatenings, rewards or punishments; or whether that which has been described, as the thing meant by Liberty in common speech, be not sufficient, and the only Liberty, which make, or can make any one a moral agent, and so properly the subject of these things. In this Part, I shall consider whether any such thing be possible or conceivable, as that Freedom of Will which Arminians insist on; and shall inquire, whether any such sort of Liberty be necessary to moral agency, &c. in the next part. And first of all, I shall consider the notion of a self-determining Power in the Will: wherein, according to the Arminians, does most essentially consist the Will's freedom; and shall particularly inquire, whether it be not plainly absurd, and a manifest inconsistence, to suppose that the Will itself determines all the free acts of the will.

Here I shall not insist on the great impropriety of such ways of speaking as the Will determining itself; because actions are to be ascribed to agents, and not properly to the powers of agents; which improper way of speaking leads to many mistakes, and much confusion, as Mr. Locke observes. But I shall suppose that the Arminians, when they speak of the Will's determining itself, do by the Will mean the soul willing. I shall take it for granted, that when they speak of the will, as the determiner, they mean the soul in the exercise of a power of willing, or acting voluntarily. I shall suppose this to be their meaning, because nothing else can be meant, without the grossest and plainest absurdity. In all cases when we speak of the powers or principles of acting, or doing such things we mean that the agents which have these Powers of acting, do them, in the exercise of those Powers. So where we say, valor fights courageously, we mean, the man who is under the influence of valor fights courageously. Where we say, love seeks the object loved, we mean, the person loving seeks that object. When we say, the understanding discerns, we mean the soul in the exercise of that faculty So when it is said, the will decides or determines, this meaning must be, that the person, in the exercise of: Power of willing and choosing, or the soul, acting voluntarily, determines.

Therefore, if the Will determines all its own free acts the soul determines them in the exercise of a Power of willing and choosing; or, which is the same thing, it determines them of choice; it determines its own acts, by choosing its own acts. If the Will determines the Will then choice orders and determines the choice; and acts c choice are subject to the decision, and follow the conduct of other acts of choice. And therefore if the Will deter mines all its own free acts, then every free act of choice is determined by a preceding act of choice, choosing that act. And if that preceding act of the will be also a free act. then by these principles, in this act too, the will is self-determined: that is, this, in like manner, is an act that the soul voluntarily chooses; or, which is the same thing, it is an act determined still by a preceding act of the will, choosing that. Which brings us directly to a contradiction: for it supposes an act of the Will preceding the first act in the whole train, dieting and determining the rest; or a free act of the Will, before the first free act of the Will. Or else we must come at last to an act of the will, determining the consequent acts, wherein the Will is not self-determined, and so is not a free act, in this notion of freedom: but if the first act in the train, determining and fixing the rest, be not free, none of them all can be free; as is manifest at first view, but shall be demonstrated presently.

If the Will, which we find governs the members of the body, and determines their motions, does also govern itself, and determines its own actions, it doubtless determines them the same way, even by antecedent volitions. The Will determines which way the hands and feet shall move, by an act of choice: and there is no other way of the Will's determining, directing, or commanding any thing at all. Whatsoever the will commands, it commands by an act of the Will. And if it has itself under its command, and determines itself in its own actions, it doubtless does it the same way that it determines other things which are under its command. So that if the freedom of the will consists in this, that it has itself and its own actions under its command and direction, and its own volitions are determined by itself, it will follow, that every free volition arises from another antecedent volition, directing and commanding that: and if that directing volition be also free, in that also the will is determined; that is to say, that directing volition is determined by another going before that; and so on, till we come to the first volition in the whole series: and if that first volition be free, and the will self-determined in it, then that is determined by another volition preceding that. Which is a contradiction; because by the supposition, it can have none before it, to direct or determine it, being the first in the train. But if that first volition is not determined by any preceding act of the Will, then that act is not determined by the Will, and so is not free in the Arminian notion of freedom, which consists in the Will's self-determination. And if that first act of the will which determines and fixes the subsequent acts, be not free, none of the following acts which are determined by it can be free.-- If we suppose there are five acts in the train, the fifth and last determined by the fourth, and the fourth by the third, the third by the second, and the second by the first; if the first is not determined by the Will, and so not free, then none of them are truly determined by the Will: that is, that each of them are as they are, and not otherwise, is not first owing to the will, but to the determination of the erst in the series, which is not dependent on the will, and is that which the will has no hand in determining. And this being that which decides what the rest shall be, and determines their existence; therefore the first determination of their existence is not from the Will. The case is just the same, if instead of a chain of five acts of the Will, we should suppose a succession of ten, or an hundred, or ten thousand. If the first act he not free, being determined by something out of the will, and this determines the next to be agreeable to itself, and that the next, and so on; none of them are free, but all originally depend on, and are determined by, some cause out of the Will; and so all freedom in the case is excluded, and no act of the will can be free, according to this notion of freedom. If we should suppose a long chain of ten thousand links, so connected, that if the first link moves, it will move the next, and that the next; and so the whole chain must be determined to motion, and in the direction of its motion, by the motion of the first link; and that is moved by something else; in this case, though all the links, but one, are moved by other parts of the same chain, yet it appears that the motion of no one, nor the direction of its motion, is from any self-moving or self-determining power in the chain, any more than if every link were immediately moved by something that did not belong to the chain.-- If the Will be not free in the first act, which causes the next, then neither is it free in the next, which is caused by that first act; for though indeed the Will caused it, yet it did not cause it freely; because the preceding act, by which it was caused, was not free. And again, if the Will be not free in the second act, so neither can it be in the third, which is caused by that; because in like manner, that third was determined by an act of the Will that was not free. And so we may go on to the next act, and from that to the next; and how long soever the succession of acts is, it is all one: if the first on which the whole chain depends, and which determines all the rest, be not a free act, the Will is not free in causing or determining any one of those acts; because the act by which it determines them all is not a free act; and therefore the Will is no more free in determining them, than if it did not cause them at all.-- Thus, this Arminian notion of Liberty of the Will, consisting in the will's Self-determination, is repugnant to itself, and shuts itself wholly out of the world.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,061-1,0801,081-1,1001,101-1,120 ... 1,181-1,186 next last
To: xzins
It'll be a peaceful utopia
1,081 posted on 02/18/2004 7:06:52 PM PST by Markofhumanfeet (That's okay. The scariest movie that I ever saw was The Silence of the Lambs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1079 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Like I said, you should see some of the list of things said against me. NOT one single suspension and only 1 post pulled. Were I to have said some of those things I would have long ago passed away from FR.

Woody.
1,082 posted on 02/18/2004 7:07:48 PM PST by CCWoody (a.k.a. "the Boo!" Proudly causing doctrinal nightmares among non-Calvinists since Apr2000)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1079 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I disagree. Anyone can start being polite, can start honestly disagreeing with ideas instead of belittling/ridiculing them and attacking the people who propose them, can disagree with denominations but not belittle them......anyone can do those things and not be in violation of the rules.

Jim complained about the abuse button being hit all the time...and that my friend is a sin that belongs to you and your friends,not us

1,083 posted on 02/18/2004 7:07:48 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1079 | View Replies]

To: grinner
Oh well.
1,084 posted on 02/18/2004 7:09:35 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1080 | View Replies]

To: grinner
And how many accouts do you have?
1,085 posted on 02/18/2004 7:10:37 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1080 | View Replies]

To: grinner
Looks like GTXfan is also related to your brothers Wrigley and Red Foley.
1,086 posted on 02/18/2004 7:15:57 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1080 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
GTXfan was me... but I forgot my password. I have no idea how many I have.
1,087 posted on 02/18/2004 7:21:45 PM PST by grinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1086 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Whatever floats your boat.
1,088 posted on 02/18/2004 7:25:50 PM PST by CARepubGal (SWMBFAO. Watching my back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1078 | View Replies]

To: grinner
LOL. Right. Guess you won't be needing the others then.
1,089 posted on 02/18/2004 7:27:34 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1087 | View Replies]

To: CARepubGal
LOL
1,090 posted on 02/18/2004 7:28:45 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1088 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
no worries
1,091 posted on 02/18/2004 7:29:05 PM PST by grinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1089 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; xzins; Religion Moderator; Jim Robinson
Jim complained about the abuse button being hit all the time...and that my friend is a sin that belongs to you and your friends,not us

With all due respect RN, I just don't believe that. In fact I've been told by Calvinists in the past two weeks that they have hit abuse on some of my posts...a couple openly on the threads.

This will not stop until we all admit our guilt. I'm certainly not blameless.

And neither are the Calvinists. It's time you all admitted that. No more excusing any type of behavior just because it's from a Calvinist.

And if you can't do that, Jim's got my vote to shut the place down.

As it stands, it's an embarrassment to the cause of Christ.

1,092 posted on 02/18/2004 7:31:00 PM PST by Corin Stormhands (Will FReep for tag line...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1083 | View Replies]

To: drstevej; Jim Robinson
***Red Foley aka Wrigley banned.***


Then why wasn't P-Marlowe banned? He just recieved three days in the corner?
1,093 posted on 02/18/2004 7:34:29 PM PST by Gamecock (Spurgeon would be banned from FR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1061 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Stuff happens.
1,094 posted on 02/18/2004 7:35:13 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1093 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
(and that was plagiarized)
1,095 posted on 02/18/2004 7:35:40 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1093 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
***And neither are the Calvinists. It's time you all admitted that. No more excusing any type of behavior just because it's from a Calvinist.***


Hey, we're the ones who have "Total Depravity" in our doctrine!

;-)

1,096 posted on 02/18/2004 7:35:46 PM PST by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1092 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
***As it stands, it's an embarrassment to the cause of Christ.***

How many people call you a spiritual father due to interaction on this forum? My point is that the "cause of Christ" seems to be doing just fine, despite what some people seem to think.

Woody.
1,097 posted on 02/18/2004 7:36:14 PM PST by CCWoody (a.k.a. "the Boo!" Proudly causing doctrinal nightmares among non-Calvinists since Apr2000)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1092 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
There is our point;

Marlowe the Arminian gets three days.
Wrigley the Calvinist gets banned.


Both sides are equally to blame, seems like the punishments should be equal.

It's that jack-booted Nazi thing... ;-)
1,098 posted on 02/18/2004 7:38:17 PM PST by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1095 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
More violins wailing in the background...
1,099 posted on 02/18/2004 7:40:23 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1098 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
How many people call you a spiritual father due to interaction on this forum?

I certainly hope no one. I've never pretended to be such.

I guess Woody, it's just that while we often fail miserably, some of us believe that our behavior matters.

1,100 posted on 02/18/2004 7:46:43 PM PST by Corin Stormhands (Will FReep for tag line...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1097 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,061-1,0801,081-1,1001,101-1,120 ... 1,181-1,186 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson