On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §486 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: three names is not actual cut from Adam's corruption

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

Next I deny that the Apostle by any of those three names designated Adam's actual sin cut off from the corruption which it produced in Adam, although yet this our controversy must be understood of actual sin so cut off. For you will have it that by that actual sin of his Adam earned that corruption both for himself and for us. You cannot therefore prove that by hamartia in this place Adam's actual sin must be understood.

Latin

Deinde nego Apostolum ullo eorum trium nominum peccatum actuale Adami designasse praecisum à corruptione quam in Adamo peperit, cum tamen de peccato actuali ita praeciso intelligenda sit haec nostra controversia. Vis enim peccato illo suo actuali Adamum meruisse cum sibi tum nobis illam corruptionem. Non ergo potes probare per ἁμαρτίαν hoc loco peccatum actuale Adami esse intelligendum.

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