Wesley Corpus

7. It has been said, indeed, “If Adam fell into sin though he was innocent, then among a million of creatures every one might sin, though he was as innocent as Adam.” (Pages 194, 195.) I answer, There is a possibility of the event; but the improbability of it is a million to one. I prove it thus: If a million of creatures were made in an equal probability to stand or fall; and if all the numbers, from one to one million $nclusively, were set in a rank, it is plainly a million to one, that just any single proposed number of this multitude should fall. Now, the total sum is one of these numbers, that ts, the last of them. Consequently, it is a million to one against the supposition, that the whole number of men should fall. And this argument will grow still ten thousand times stronger, if we suppose ten thousand millions to have lived since the creation. Your argument stood thus: “If we cannot infer from Adam’s transgression, that his nature was originally corrupt, neither can we infer from the transgressions of all mankind, that their mature is originally corrupt.” It is answered, Ifamillion of crea tures were made in an equal probability to stand or fall, it is a million to one they should not all fall. You reply, “This is no answer to my argument.” (Page 196.) Surely it is; and a direct answer. That one man sinned, does not prove he had a corrupt nature. Why? Because (supposing him free to choose good or evil) it was as probable he should sin, as not, there being no odds on one side or the other; but that all men should sin, does prove they have a corrupt nature; because it is not as pro bable, that all men should sin, as that one man should; the odds against it being as a million, or rather ten thousand millions, to one. Either, therefore, we must allow that mankind are more inclined to evil than to good, or we must maintain a supposition so highly improbable as comes very near a flat impossibility.