Walter Isaacson writes about how Jonathan Edwards and Benjamin Franklin were contrasting cultural figures.
I do not agree with everything Isaacson says about Edwards, but he is right to point out that Franklin paved the way for those with a “puritan ethic” without the puritan beliefs. In addition, Franklin’s ideals sound very similar to what is popular today: tolerance, earthly values, salvation through good works, pragmatism, and practical benevolence.
On one side were those, like Edwards and the Mather family, who believed in an anointed elect and in salvation through God’s grace alone. They tended to have religious fervor, a sense of social class and hierarchy, and an appreciation for exalted values over earthly ones.
On the other side were the Franklins, those who believed in salvation through good works, whose religion was benevolent and tolerant, and who were unabashedly striving and upwardly mobile.
Out of this grew many related divides in the American character, and Franklin represents one strand: the side of pragmatism versus romanticism, the practical benevolence versus moral crusading. He was on the side of religious tolerance rather than evangelical faith. The side of social mobility rather than an established elite. The side of middle-class virtues rather than more ethereal mobile aspirations.
[...] Benjamin Franklin v. Jonathan Edwards « Ad FontesView Franklin G Edwards V, MQC’s professional profile on LinkedIn. LinkedIn is the world’s largest business network, helping professionals like Franklin G … [...]