On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §583 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: What being corrupted in Adam would mean

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

snares are none, nor do I easily get free. For the Apostle has not said that we have sinned in Adamf he had said it, what sense the proposition that we are corrupt and vitiated in Adam can have must be considered. The sense is that we are corrupted by corruption derived from Adam, or, which comes to the same, that Adam's corruption was the fountain from which our corruption sprang, or, that Adam was corrupted, and Adam's corruption was propagated into us.

Latin

PLAC. Hi laquei nulli sunt, neque facile expedio. Primum enim Apostolus non dixit nos in Adamo peccasse, & ut dixisset, propositio nos esse corruptos & vitiatos in Adamo quem sensum habere possit, considerandum est. Sensus est nos derivata ab Adamo corruptione corruptos esse, vel, quod eodem redit, corruptionem Adami fuisse fontem unde nostra scaturiit corruptio, vel, corruptum fuisse Adamum, & corruptionem Adami in nos propagatam fuisse.

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