On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §374 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 7: Did God act as judge when the threat was fulfilled

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

, how is it said that in what befell the first man there was no need of God's judicial action? Had not God, while man was still integral, proposed a law of not tasting the forbidden fruit, with the most grave threat added that if he did otherwise he would die the death, Gen. 2:17? Which threat God fulfilled, and fulfilled as judge, and therefore in stripping man of his gifts and plunging him into various miseries exercised a judicial action? Here too there is nothing unlike.

Latin

GAR. Deinde, quomodo dicitur in iis quae acciderunt primo homini, nulla opus fuisse judiciaria Dei actione? Annon homini adhuc integro legem Deus proposuerat, de non gustando fructu interdicto, addita gravissima comminatione, si secus faceret, morte moriturum, Gen. 2. 17. Quam comminationem Deus adimplevit, & adimplevit ut judex, ac proinde in spoliando homine suis donis, & in varias miserias demergendo judiciariam actionem exercuit? Hic quoque nihil dissimile.

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