On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §498 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: actual not intra nos; imputation in God

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

t then pass into all humans no less, or as the Apostle speaks, enter, than corruption? Is Adam's actual sin therefore inside us, no less than corruption? Or can it be inside us, and yet not be in us, not inhere? That imputation is outside us, in God, and was made long before we were: Adam's actual sin also ceased to be some thousands of years before we began to be. How then can it be said to have entered into us, and indeed by that imputation?

Latin

PLAC. Itane non minus in homines omnes transit, seu ut loquitur Apostolus, introiit, quam corruptio? Estne igitur peccatum actuale Adami intra nos, non minus quam corruptio? aut potestne intra nos esse, & tamen nobis non inesse, non inhaerere? Imputatio illa extra nos est, in Deo, diuque antequam essemus, facta: actuale quoque Adami peccatum desiit esse aliquot annorum millibus antequam esse inciperemus. Qui igitur dici potest in nos introiisse, & quidem illa imputatione?

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