On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §66 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 8: Type major limited — better argue from type to antitype

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

Next, this argument can be dissolved without any trouble. For as to the major: the proposition "What is exhibited in the thing represented by a type must have preceded in the type" needs this limitation — if, that is, the type was set up to represent that thing. For otherwise often many things have been exhibited in the represented matter which could not be represented by one type; and for that reason several have been employed to sketch the same thing. Then even when that limitation is applied, the proposition is not true except so far as the nature of the thing which is the type can bear, the difference between Type and antitype (τὸ ἀντίτυπον), shadow and body, being kept. Therefore argumentation from the type to the thing shadowed is better than from this latter back to the former.

Latin

Deinde nullo negotio dissolvi potest hoc argumentum. Ad majorem enim quod attinet, propositio, Quod in re per typum representata exhibetur, illud in typo praecessisse oportuit. Eget hac limitatione, si nempe ad id representandum typus fuit comparatus. Nam alioqui saepenumero multa in re representata exhibita fuerunt, quae non potuerunt uno typo representari; quapropter multi ad eandem rem adumbrandam adhibiti sunt. Deinde etiam adhibita illa limitatione propositio vera non est, nisi quantum pati potest ejus rei, quae typus est, natura, servata inter Typum & τὸ ἀντίτυπον, umbram & corpus differentia. Itaque melior est a typo ad rem adumbratam, quam ab hac ad illam argumentatio.

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