John Wesley's 'Kenosis Controversy And Bled For'

God from Adam’s day to the day of Jesus Christ’s return would say about the Word of God’s action. Wesley was long gone when the kenosis controversy emerged in the later part of the next or nineteenth century. His real error is the following: And bled for Adam’s helpless race. Here, as in his other famous hymns, Wesley’s universalism and Arminianism are paramount; and yet supposed Sovereign grace assemblies sound out these words with glee and sing them with hearty gusto without blinking an eyelid. Wesley just king hit the heart of Sovereign Grace Theology (i.e. Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption, the centre piece of the Gospel, the proof that God loves His people and the Christian’s actual salvation) right out of the park. Some try to make the expression ‘And bled for Adam’s helpless race’ to be other than what Wesley intended. They maintain that it is not universalistic but is stating that it means some of the human race as opposed to say the race of monkeys or angels. Their problem is that Adam’s race is all inclusive and means all who came from Adam i.e. the human race in its entirety. ‘Bled for’ indicates the death of Jesus. Wesley is stating, contrary to scripture that
In its original context it is addressed to the God of the OT, called the mighty one, thy glory (one having glory) and thy majesty (one having majesty or kingship) as per this Psalm in verse 3. The subject of this Psalm is God (verse 6). The author of Hebrews (i.e. Paul) says in Hebrews 1:8 that this Psalm and its sentiments apply precisely to the Son, Jesus Christ. The writer is calling him God. The writer may be mistaken about the tie up between Psalm 45 and Hebrews 1:8, but his language definitely indicates there is a close connection. Say you do not believe him – your prerogative. Please do not claim that he is denying the deity of Jesus Christ. Please do not add that he is not fully endorsing the historic Christian view of the Person of Jesus