On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §246 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 4: posterior resp.; confirmation syllogism

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Placeus. This later reply seems aimed at the second support of my minor. First it never touches that support. Then it contradicts itself. Finally it turns silly.

The support ran thus: Whoever, on the day he sinned, was not hit with bodily death or eternal death, did not die that day as God had threatened. But Adam, the day he sinned, was not hit with bodily death or eternal death. Therefore Adam did not die that day as God had threatened.

Latin

PLAC. Haec posterior responsio ad secundam Minoris argumenti mei confirmationem spectare videtur: Sed primo eam non attingit; Deinde sese ipsa contradictione implicat; Denique se praebet ridiculam. Sic enim se habebat illa confirmatio, ut eius vim explicem, Cui, quo die peccavit, non est inflicta mors corporis, nec aeterna, is non est eo die, sicuti Deus minatus fuerat, mortuus. Atqui Adamo, quo die peccavit, non est inflicta mors corporis, nec aeterna. Ergo Adamus non est eo die, sicuti Deus minatus fuerat, mortuus.

Report a mistake in this passage

About this text

Josué de la Place (Placeus) on the imputation of Adam's first sin: chapters 1 to 12 and 14, and the later disputation up to its chapter on Romans 5:14, from the Latin. The rest is not yet translated.

Josué de la Place (c. 1596–1655), known in Latin as Placeus, was pastor at Nantes and from 1633 professor of theology at the Academy of Saumur, the school of Cameron and Amyraut.

On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin argues the distinctive Saumur thesis: Adam's sin reaches his posterity only mediately, through the inherited corruption — never by immediate reckoning of a sin they did not commit. Fellow Reformed theologians rejected the view, but the book remains its classic statement.

Part only: Chapters 1–12 and 14, and the disputation up to Romans 5:14

Datec. 1645–1655 AD (written after the 1645 Synod of Charenton, and read in draft by Drelincourt by 10 December 1653; printed posthumously at Saumur, 1661; Reformed / Amyraldian circle)

The English is made from the 1661 Saumur Latin of chapters 1 to 12 and 14 and part of the later disputation. No earlier English was copied.

Printed text used

Translated from Latin (Saumur 1661) (Latin)
Also checked Text extract of Caput Primum (Latin)
Also checked machine-read text of the 1661 volume (Latin)

We have not yet re-checked this work against its source. We made this study translation with AI help. No scholar has yet certified it as faithful and complete. Open Latin on any section, or the Latin source link, to see the source text. It is not a critical edition.

Report a mistake