On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §432

Man. Post. Cap. VIII: first — tree interdict syllogism; conclusion conceded

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

The first breaks out from the interdict of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and proceeds thus. If that interdict, you say, and the threat looked not only to the first parents but also to the whole human race, it follows that the transgression of that Command made not only the first parents liable to death, but also the whole human race. But the prior is true. Therefore the latter also. The first part of the major (which concerns the interdict) is outside controversy: for who will deny that the Lord gave the law not only to Adam but also to all posterity? Who will deny that by that law eating of that fruit was forbidden to all men? And the consequence is manifest from the event: for when the interdict was violated, both Adam and all posterity were made liable to death. At the outset I concede the conclusion of this argument of yours: for it is friendly to my opinion as well as to yours. I believe firmly with you that Adam's transgression made not only the first parents liable to death, but also the whole human race. But the question between us is only about the mode by which that transgression made the whole human race liable to death.

Latin

Primum erumpit ex interdicto arboris scientiae boni & mali, & sic procedit. Si interdictum illud, inquis, & comminatio non tantum primos parentes spectavit, sed etiam totum genus humanum, sequitur transgressionem illius Mandati non tantum primos parentes morti obnoxios fecisse, sed etiam totum genus humanum. Atqui verum prius. Ergo & posterius. Prima pars maioris (quae est de interdicto) extra controversiam est: nam quis inficias ibit Dominum legem dedisse non tantum Adamo, sed etiam posteris omnibus? quis negabit lege illa interdictum omnibus hominibus esum illius fructus? Consequentia vero manifesta est ex eventu: Nam violato interdicto, & Adam & omnes posteri morti obnoxii facti sunt. Principio huius tui argumenti conclusionem concedo: est enim tam meae quam tuae sententiae amica. Credo tecum firmiter, transgressionem Adami non tantum primos parentes morti obnoxios fecisse, sed etiam totum genus humanum. Sed quaestio est inter nos duntaxat de modo, quo transgressio illa totum genus humanum morti obnoxium fecit.

About this text

New English, free to read. Open any section below.

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.