On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §679 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 10: prove OT faithful knew antecedent imputation; Scripture? tradition?

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

where does the learned man get itere equally known to the faithful of the Old Testament?

From Scripture? Why did he not produce a place?

From unwritten tradition? Then Scripture was not enough for them; and where is that tradition?

He flees to Paul in vain: for whether Paul taught that antecedent imputation or not is just what is now disputed between us; the learned man has not proved that he taught it; I have already proved by several arguments that he did not, and I am engaged in proving it.

Latin

PLAC. Primum unde habet Vir doctus fidelibus veteris Testamenti aeque notum utrumque fuisse? Ex Scriptura? Cur locum non protulit? Ex traditione non scripta? Non igitur sufficiebat illis Scriptura; & ubi illa traditio? Ad Paulum frustra confugit: utrum enim illam imputationem antecedentem docuerit, necne, nunc quidem inter nos controvertitur; docuisse non probavit Vir doctus; Ego non docuisse iam aliquot argumentis probavi, & in eo sum ut probem.

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