Wesley Corpus

15-20. On this you remark, “The threatening, ‘Thou shalt surely die,” is addressed to Adam personally; and therefore nothing can be concluded thence, with regard to Adam’s posterity.” (Pages 93, 94.) Is this consequence good? Was not the sentence also grounded on this threatening, “Unto dust thou shalt return,” personally directed to him? And is this nothing to his posterity? Nay, does it not from this very consideration appear, that all his posterity were concerned in that threatening, because they are all partakers of the death which was so threatened to Adam? “But we cannot gather from Romans v., or 1 Cor. xv., ‘that all mankind sinned in Adam, if we understand sinned as distin guished from suffering.” It has been largely proved that we can; and that sinning must necessarily be understood there, as distinguished from suffering. “But the Apostle says, “The offence of one’ brought death into the world; whereas, had all mankind sinned in Adam when he sinned, then that offence would not have been ‘the offence of one,’ but of millions.” (Page 95.) It might be, in one sense, the offence of millions, and in another, “the offence of one.” “It is true, Adam's posterity so fell with him in that first transgression, that if the threatening had been immediately executed, he would have had no posterity at all.” The threatening ! What was the threatening to them? Did not you assure us, in the very last page, “The threatening is addressed to Adam personally; and therefore nothing can be concluded from thence with regard to his posterity?” And here you say, Their very “existence did certainly fall under the threatening of the law, and into the hands of the Judge, to be disposed of as he should think fit.” As he should think fit. Then he might, without any injustice, have deprived them of all blessings; of being itself, the only possible ground of all ! And this, for the sin of another. You close the article thus: “We cannot from those passages conclude, that mankind, by Adam’soffence, incurred anyevil but temporal death.” Just the contrary has been shown at large. 3. Their Second proposition is, “The fall brought man kind into a state of sin and misery.” (Page 96.) To prove this, they cite Romans v. 12; a proof which all the art of man cannot evade; and Romans iii.