soul itself contain no bias to evil? As well may we suppose that something may exist or take place without an adequate cause; which, to say the least, is very unphilosophical.

Rom. vii. 18, 19, 20. "To will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not, for the good that I would, I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Whether the Apostle is here speaking of himself as a christian, or as an awakened sinner; or whether he is simply personating one awakened to a sense of his danger, as a sinner, yet under the influence and guilt of sin, groaning for the pardoning mercy of God and " ing of the Holy Ghost," by which he is to be delivered from the law of sin and death, are questions which do not materially affect the present argument; the latter however is our opinion. The text, we think, clearly teaches that human nature is corrupt, and that too beyond the will or volitions of the mind. Three things are to be particularly noticed.

renew

1. The Apostle informs us that he could will that which was good. This, no doubt, was through the help of the Holy Spirit, under whose arrest and awakening energies his mind was labouring. Now, as to will was present, while he did not the good that he willed, it follows beyond the possibility of doubt that the sinner's depravity and helplessness does not consist merely in the perverseness of his will.

2. The Apostle declares that he finds not how to perform that which is good, and that he does that which he would not. This argues that there is in human nature a strong bias to evil, against which the will has to conten.l. If, as some contend, the sinner has a natural ability to do all that the perfect law of righteousness requires, without supernatural aid, the perverseness of his will only preventing, it is not possible to conceive how a man can sin by not doing the good which he wills, and by doing the evil which he would not.

3. The Apostle explains how he does that which he would not, by saying it is sin that dwelleth in him. "If I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." This clearly points out the corruption of human nature. The Apostle does evil: "The evil which I would not that I do.' This clearly points out actual sin. But why does he do it

He declares that it is the work of sin that dwelleth in him. What then is this indwelling sin? It cannot be his volitions or voluntary actions, for he assigns it as a cause why he acts as he does, and it would be absurd to make the Apostle say that his actons were the cause of his actions; hence, there is in man an indwelling corruption which does not consist in action, and this we say, in the language of the church, "is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually." (Methodist Disci→pline, Article, VII.)

Psa. li. 5. "Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me." On this text Dr. Clark has the following pointed remark. "Notwithstanding all that Grotius and others have said to the contrary, I believe David to speak here of what is commonly called original sin; the propensity to evil which every man brings into the world with him; and which is the fruitful source whence all transgression proceeds." That this is the true sense of the text is clear from the following more critical remarks made by Rev. Richard Watson. "What possible sense can be given to this passage on the hypothesis of man's natural innocence? It is in vain to render the first clause, I was brought forth in iniquity,' for nothing is gained by it. David charges nothing upon his mother, of whom he is not speaking, but of himself: he was conceived, or if it please better, was born a sinner. And if the rendering of the latter clause were allowed, which yet has no authority, in sin did my mother nurse me,' still no progress is made in getting quit of its testimony to the moral corruption of children; for it is the child only which is nursed, and if that be allowed, natural depravity is allowed; depravity before reasonable choice, which is the point in question."

We respond to the above: "What possible sense can be given to this passage," if no reference be had to inherited depravity? On such a supposition, it must stand a mere blank in the midst of a most interesting and pathetic subject. David is making confession of his sin, and imploring pardon for the same, and while thus confessing his actual sins, which he

had committed, he adds an acknowledgement of his native corruption. "For I acknowledge my transgression, and my sin is ever before me; Against thee and thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight: Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me." Understand the Psalmist in the above sense and the connexion is clear, the confession full, and the climax regular and grand. We understand him as saying, I have committed sin; I have not only sinned, but my sin has been of the most daring character, it has been committed against thee O God, Majesty of heaven! yea, I confess more; I have not only done wickedly, but my very nature is sinful; these outbreaking sins have been only the streams issuing from a fountain of corruption within, existing in my very nature which was shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin. When my mother conceived me, she conceived a sinful nature, and when I was formed into an organized being, my moral shape or likeness, was after the form of iniquity; i. e. in the image of a fallen spirit, and not after the image of God in which the first man was created.

Rom. viii. 7. "The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." The whole connexion in which this text stands, goes to show that by the "carnal mind" we are to understand the soul of man in its natural state, unrenewed by the quickening grace of God. The Apostle here notes the difference between a natural state and a renewed state. "To be carnally minded is death, but to be spirtitually minded is life and peace; for the carnal mind is enmity against God. So then they that are in the flesh, cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you." To be carnally minded then, is to be destitute of the spirit of God by which he renews and sanctifies the soul; hence, the carnal mind is one unrenewed by the spirit of God: not "born of the spirit." Now, that this carnal mind, or state of enmity against God is the natural state of the soul, is evident from its being opposed to a state of grace and salvation. The scriptures speak of a two fold state: our natural state, spiritual or renewed state. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit," John

and a

i. 6. The first state must be our state by nature, the second state is a supernatural, gracious, and renewed state. The first state is a fleshly state in which we cannot please God; a carnal state, which is enmity against God: the second state is a state of reconciliation to God, a state of conformity to the divine will and likeness. Therefore, the carnal mind, which is enmity against God, being the natural state of the soul, it follows that man is by nature an enemy to God, or possesses a natural and inherent want of subjection or conformity to the divine law, which requires holiness in the inner parts. The texts above quoted, are to be regarded as mere specimens, of the many which, in similar language, describe the human soul in its natural state as a fallen spirit, full of. wickedness, estranged from God, possessing unholy affections and passions.

V. Those scriptures which speak of the necessity, and describe the nature of regeneration, clearly imply the corruption of the human soul through the fall. John iii. 3. “Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." that this text has reference to a moral change for the better, of some sort, we trust will not be denied by any; and that it is the change which constitutes the difference between a christian and a sinner, in the popular sense of these terms, appears from a consideration of the agent by which the change is effected; the spirit of God is the agent by which sinners are renewed and sanctified; hence, the Apostle says "he hath saved us by the renewing of the Holy Ghost. The words of Christ "born again" exactly correspond to the words of the Apostle "renewing of the Holy Ghost," both implying the same change. That the necessity of such a change, as is implied by being born again, arises from the corruption of human nature, and not merely from the wickedness of human conduet, appears from the reason assigned by him, who "knew what was in man, ," "that which is born of the spirit is spirit, and that which is born of the flesh is flesh. Marvel not that I said unto you ye must be born again." Here the natural birth, which is of the flesh, and by which we are introduced into the world, is opposed to the spiritual birth by which we are introduced into the kingdom of God or church of Christ; and the necessity of the latter is made to depend upon the circumstances