Chapter 4: Original justice was the condition, not the thing promised
Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.
nswer openly contradicts the learned man himself.He seems to reply, yet does not—he yields.We were arguing about original justice, as my case shows.Of the two justices he split apart, which is original?The supernatural homeland justice of glorified man?No. Adam lacked that before the fall and was never going to hand it down.
So original justice in the argument is natural justice—of the way, of created man.But Garissoles admits that justice was the condition of the promise.He therefore admits it was not promised—the very point I meant to prove, which he had denied.If it was not promised, losing it was not the death the threat denounced.That is what I had to establish.
Latin
PLAC. Hac responsione sibi Vir Doctus aperte contradicit, & cum videatur respondere, non respondet tamen, sed dat manus. Agebatur enim de justitia originali, ut patet ex meo argumento. Utra igitur duarum illarum, quas distinxit, justitiarum est justitia originalis? Num illa supernaturalis, patriae, hominis glorificati? Non certe. Non enim illa Adamus priusquam peccaret praeditus erat: non illam erat propagaturus in posteros. Est igitur justitia naturalis, viae, hominis creati, justitia originalis de qua agebatur in argumento? Atqui Vir doctus confitetur hanc Justitiam fuisse conditionem promissionis. Confitetur ergo non fuisse promissam: id quod probare institueram, & ipse negaverat. Quod si non fuit promissa, eius privatio non fuit mors comminatione denunciata. Id quod mihi probandum incumbebat.