Comparing Human Nature In Edwards, Olaudah Equiano, And Thomas Jefferson

In Early American texts, through written history, the authors learn the importance of knowing human nature. Jonathan Edwards, Olaudah Equiano, and Thomas Jefferson all have distinctive views of human nature through the relationship of the government, law, and equality. They use rhetorical strategies to show how human nature is cruel and brutal, believing humans should be carefully understood to be protected from being manipulated and to understand where it stands in society. Jonathan Edwards views human nature as sinful, in which people are already sentenced to hell by God. He believes that God is presented as being omniscient and powerful, aware of all of the sinful acts committed by every individual person. In “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”, Edwards states that “God is bound by any promise to hold them up one moment.” God sets out expectations and when they are not met, he is “angry”. Since God is very powerful, he is the decision maker when it comes to placement either in heaven or hell. He is our savior, but is not obligated to keep his promise. Humans are sometimes unaware that they sin, so Edwards warns them to repent, asking for …show more content…
Every human is born into having natural rights, which should not be abused or taken away. In the article, “he… prevent the Population… obstructing the laws… imposing taxes on use without our consent.” King George III stripped away the basic rights from the colonists. The colonists believed they are all entitled to have a say without restrictrictions, but without regard to the people, King George III continuously took away the rights, refusing to agree to laws, and many other things which angered the colonists. His actions then led to a desire in the colonists to separate from Britain, rather than staying under the King’s control and obeying his