On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §527 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: if omit hereditary: not from Adam – Christ collation

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

For if you shall say that he passed over hereditary corruption, two things will follow: One, that it cannot be gathered from this whole collation which the Apostle instituted between the first and the second Adam. For in the following verses he does not teach that other evils flowed from Adam into the human race than those which he named in this v. 12. But that will greatly help Pighius's cause.

Latin

Nam, si dixeris eum corruptionem haereditariam praetermisisse, sequentur duo: Unum, eam ex hac tota collatione, quam inter primum & secundum Adamum Apostolus instituit, colligi non posse. Non enim alia mala ex Adamo in genus humanum manasse sequentibus versibus docet, quam quae hoc v. 12. nominavit. Id autem Pighii causam valde iuvabit.

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