On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §496

Man. Post. Cap. IX: minor clear / major agreed; tip before GAR Cap. VII

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

The Minor is clear. How the Major could be denied I do not see. For it is agreed and convenes between us that through Adam hereditary corruption which is truly sin entered into all humans: which being posited, what is there why we should not take the Apostle's words of it?

Latin

Minor est liquida. Maior quomodo negari possit non video. Constat enim & convenit inter nos per Adamum corruptionem haereditariam quae vere peccatum est in omnes homines ingressam esse: quo posito, quid est quamobrem de ea non accipiamus Apostoli verba?

About this text

Josue de la Place (Placeus) — Capita I–XIV partial of De imputatione primi peccati Adami from the 1661 Saumur Latin, through Man. Post. Caput X (GAR.1–3 Rom. 5.13 tip) / before PLAC on reatus-only. Honest partial; Cap. X Rom. 5:14+ / ~494 pp Disputatio remain.

English follows the locked 1661 Saumur Latin of Capita I–XIV partial through Man. Post. Caput IX (eph-ho / eph-ho pantes) before eph-ho / eph-ho pantes, reconstructed from IA PDF page images with Vision OCR and pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Cap. IX deepen+ remain.

Catalogue & scope

IA deimputationepri00lapl. Densify: Capita I–XII + Caput XIV + Man. Post. Cap. II–VI through Cap. X Rom. 5:14 tip. Not whole Disputatio; Cap. X Rom. 5:14+ / ~494 pp Disputatio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.