(Extracts from Francis Turretin, edited into modern English)
Was
man created in puris
naturalibus
(a
purely natural state), or could he have been so created?
We deny
this against the Pelagians and the Scholastics.
The
phrase puris
naturalibus
means
“in
pure nature.”
It
teaches that man could have been created:
Without original righteousness
Without holiness
Morally neutral
Neither sinful nor righteous
Capable of choosing good or evil on his own
According to this view, righteousness would be something added later, not something essential to man’s original creation.
Turretin strongly rejects this idea.
Man
was not created morally neutral.
He was created righteous, holy,
and upright from the beginning.
To deny this is to misunderstand both God and man.
Scripture clearly teaches that man was created with righteousness, not without it.
Genesis 1:26–27 — Man was created in the image of God
Genesis 1:31 — Everything God made was “very good”
Ecclesiastes 7:29 — “God made man upright”
Ephesians 4:24 — The image of God includes “true righteousness and holiness”
Colossians 3:10 — The image involves knowledge after God
Turretin argues:
The image of God cannot be separated from righteousness and holiness without destroying the image itself.
Turretin gives several careful reasons.
If God had created man without righteousness, then:
Man would lack moral direction
Man would not be rightly ordered toward God
Man would be unfinished as a moral creature
But God does nothing defective or incomplete.
A rational creature without righteousness is not “very good.”
Man was created:
With understanding
With will
With affections
A being like this must be oriented either toward God or away from Him.
There is no middle moral state.
To be without righteousness is already to lack conformity to God.
Turretin makes an important distinction:
Righteousness was natural to man as created
But it was not essential (it could be lost)
So Adam’s righteousness was:
Given by God
Proper to human nature as God designed it
Not self-generated
Not unchangeable
This avoids two errors:
Pelagianism (man makes himself righteous)
Roman Scholasticism (righteousness is a later supernatural addition)
The Pelagians argued:
Adam was created morally neutral
He became righteous by choice
We are born the same way
Turretin answers:
If Adam created his own righteousness, then:
Obedience would be self-generated
Grace would not be needed
Sin would be only imitation, not corruption
Scripture denies all of this.
Adam fell from righteousness, not into sin from neutrality.
Many Scholastics taught:
Man was created in pure nature
Original righteousness was a superadded gift
Its loss only removed a bonus, not man’s true nature
Turretin responds:
If righteousness was merely an added gift, then:
The Fall did not corrupt human nature
Sin becomes only a lack, not a ruin
Grace repairs less than Scripture claims
But Scripture teaches:
Man fell from a righteous state
Human nature is now corrupted
We need regeneration, not moral improvement
This is not a minor issue.
Original sin
Total depravity
The necessity of grace
The work of Christ
If man was not created righteous, then:
The Fall is minimized
Sin is weakened
Grace becomes optional
Christ becomes an assistant, not a Savior
Turretin concludes:
Man was created righteous and holy
This righteousness belonged to his original condition
It was not self-produced
It was not a later addition
It was lost through the Fall
It must be restored by Christ alone
Adam
was created upright.
We are born fallen.
Only Christ
restores what was lost.
Key Points to Remember:
Man was not created morally neutral
Righteousness was part of God’s design
Neutrality is a myth
The Fall was a real fall from holiness
Salvation requires new creation, not moral effort