# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/1030877386:0189
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/1030877386:0189?run=74
# Title: The Questions Concerning Liberty, Necessity, And Chance (shelfmark Leibn. Marg. 163)
# Folio 189, page id 1030877386:0189
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=1030877386&page=189
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/1030877386/jpgs/default/00000189.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 46 lines, status machine
# Lines: 46 recognised, mean confidence 0.89
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

TOrn
1
lit
edel
et
(180
This opinion mares An eo proceed essentially, hy way oE
Phylicall decerminarion from etre AeA cause. BVE Whacloever
proceedes essentially by waz of Phy Pieal decerminacion From
chetirst cause, is Ciood, and Tust, and L. aWFull. Pheretore
ehiis opinion oEnecesier matiech sin eo be very C00d, sust, anc
T. aWSuII. FI. micht as mell havs concluded mharsoer er man hath
beenmade by God is a good, and just man. Fle observeth nor
that sin is noc arhins really made. Those thines mhich at first
vere actions vere nit ihen sin: thoueh actions of the same na-
ture With ehose, Whichvere afcermards sins; nor mas thenthe mill
to any thine a sin, thonch it vere a ill to the same rhing, Which
in villine nom ve sould sin. Actions became sons, then Arst.
whenthe commandement came: for as Sr. Paul saith, WVichouE
ehe Lam sinis dead; and sin beine but d eransgrection ofthe
Lau, there canbe no action made sin but by ihe Lao. There-
fore this opinion thouchit derive actions essentially from God, it
derives not sins essentially fromhim, but relarively, and by the
Commandement. And conseguent ly the opinion of necessicy; ta-
keth not amay the nature of sin, but necessirateth that action
rhich the Laro hath made sin. And rhoreas Lsaid the nature of
sin consiteth in this, thar ie is an action proccedins From our
willand asainst che Lan, he alloveth it fortrue; and there-
forehe must allov also, that the formal reason of sin lieth not in
the Liberey or necessiry of willine, but in the mill it sels (necessa-
ry or annecessary) in relation to the LaW. And mhereas heli-
mirs this truch mhich he allorved, corhis, that the L a De just
and the Will a Frec rarional Will, it serves to no purpose; for L
have sovnbefore, chat no Lam ean be uniust. And it seemeth
tome, thar a rationall ill, is it be not meant of a Will after de
liberation, Whether he thar deliberateth reasoneth aricht or not
sienifieth nothine. Arational man is richely said, but a racional
Nill in ocher sense, then Thave mentioned, is insienificant.
(b) TBuc supposins (ashedoch) chac the L au injoynes
chinssimpossible in chemselres eobedone, then ic is an un-
just and TrrannicalLam, and che cranscrestion oF ic no tn,
ecc. And supposins likemise (as he doch) chac ehe Willis ine.
vicabli determined, by special inAuence From che Airs cause,
chenic is noc mans WilI, buc C0dsWNViII. ) Femistakes me in
A a 3
this.