On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §574

Man. Post. Cap. IX: PLAC tip — satisfaction imputed after faith, not before existence; tip before 'alius pro nobis'

xample is not like, nor does it in any way overturn my reasoning. Christ's satisfaction is indeed imputed to us believing, but that imputation follows our faith, does not come before it, much less before our very existencer we are justified by faith, not before faith. When therefore we are said to have satisfied in Christ, as the phrase does not stand in Scripture, so it ought to be taken conveniently, and cannot be understood properly. The sense ought to be no other than this, Christ satisfied for us.

Latin

PLAC. Hoc exemplum non est simile, nec meam ratiocinationem ullo modo evertit. Imputatur quidem nobis credentibus Christi satisfactio, sed ea imputatio fidem nostram sequitur, non antecedit, nedum ut antecedat nostram existentiam. Iustificamur enim fide, non ante fidem. Cum igitur dicimur satisfecisse in Christo, ut locutio non extat in Scriptura, sic commode accipi debet, nec proprie intelligi potest. Sensus alius esse non debet quam iste, Christus satisfecit pro nobis.

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.