On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §355 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 6: antecedent vs consequent judgment; Ps 119

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

Therefore the examples brought forward are not to the purpose. For in those it is a matter of judgment following the sin of those on whom punishment is inflicted. Here the question is of a judgment preceding the sin of those who are punished. Next, did the learned man think this is the perpetual signification of God's judgment in Scripture, or not? If he thought so, he erred: for not rarely it is taken otherwise, as is plain from Ps. 119:7, 12, 19, 29, &c. If he did not think so, to what end did he praise such places? and what force can they have to refute me?

Latin

Non sunt igitur ad propositum quae afferuntur exempla. In illis enim agitur de judicio sequente eorum, quibus poena irrogatur, peccatum. Hic vero quaestio est de judicio, antecedente eorum qui puniuntur, peccatum. Deinde censuitne vir doctus, hanc esse judicii Dei perpetuam in Scriptura significationem, necne? Si censuit, erravit: non raro enim aliter accipitur, ut patet ex Ps. 119. 7. 12. 19. 29. &c. Si non censuit, quorsum eiusmodi loca laudavit? & quam vim habere possunt ad me refellendum?

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