On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §673

Man. Post. Cap. X: PLAC — what of real corruption until the law? That helps Pighius/Pelagius

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

Next, what will become of the corruption which truly is sin, and really was in all men until the law?

What reason is there why it ought not to be understood under the name of sin in this place, after the Apostle’s manner?

Could the learned man invent anything that would more help the cause of Pighius—nay, of Pelagius?

Latin

Deinde quid fiet de corruptione quae vere peccatum est, & revera fuit in omnibus hominibus usque ad legem? Quid est cur peccati nomine hoc loco, pro Apostoli more, non debeat intelligi? Potuitne Vir doctus quicquam comminisci, quod magis causam Pighii, imo Pelagii, iuvaret?

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.