Wesley Corpus

Now, let us view it more closely: “Adam cculd not sin without a sinful inclination.” The sentence is ambiguous. Either it may mean, “Adam could not choose ill, without some sinful temper preceding;” and in this sense it is false; or, “He could not commit outward sin, without first inclining, that is, choosing so to do.” 2. “This his sinful in clination (or temper) was so strong as to overcome his inbred propensity to holiness.” It was not any sinful inclination (in this sense) which overcame his propensity to holiness; but strong temptation from without: How strong we know not, and the circumstances of it we know not. 3. “This his sinful inclination was so malignant, as to expel that principle at once, and totally.” Not by any sinful inclination, but by yielding to temptation, he did lose the love and image of God. But that this was totally and at once, we have no authority to affirm. 4. “Consequently, original righteousness in Adam was consistent with a sinful propensity, vastly stronger, and more malignant, than ever was or can be in any of his posterity.” It was consistent with no sinful propensity at all, but barely with a power of yielding to temptation. It declined in the same proportion, and by the same degrees, as he did actually yield to this. And when he had yielded entirely, and eaten the fruit, original righteousness was no more. Therefore, the Fifth proposition, “Thus original righteousness proves to be far worse than original sin,” is flourish. What a figure does this fair argument make, now it is turned inside out ! From all this it may appear, that the doctrine of original righteousness (as well as that of original sin) hath a firm foun dation in Scripture, as well as in the attributes of a wise, holy, and gracious God. As you do not offer any new argument in your conclusion, I need not spend any time upon it. You subjoin Remarks on Dr. Watts's Additions to his book. Some of these deserve a serious consideration: 1. Either the new-created man loved God supremely, or not. If he did not, he was not innocent ; since the very law and light of nature require such a love to God. If he did, he stood disposed for every act of obedience. And this is true holiness of heart.