A01540:24
A just defence of certain passages in a former treatise concerning the nature and…A iust defence of certaine passages in a former treatise concerning the nature and…
A just defence of certain passages in a former treatise concerning the nature and use of lots, against such exceptions and oppositions as have been made thereunto to Mr. I.B. Wherein the insufficiency of his answers given to the arguments brought in defence of a lusorious lot is manifested; the imbecility of his arguments produced against the same further discovered; and the point it self in controversy more fully cleared; by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and author of the former treatise.A iust defence of certaine passages in a former treatise concerning the nature and vse of lots, against such exceptions and oppositions as have beene made thereunto to Mr. I.B. Wherein the insufficiencie of his answers giuen to the arguments brought in defence of a lusorious lot is manifested; the imbecillitie of his arguments produced against the same further discouered; and the point it selfe in controuersie more fully cleared; by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and author of the former treatise.
London: printed by John Haviland for Robert Bird, 1623London: printed by Iohn Haviland for Robert Bird, 1623
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
I perceive if Mr. B. might have the framing1 of Mr. G•s. Arguments, there would be very judicious deductions in them indeed. But if without ⟨p. 6⟩any such injudicious deduction, the Question of the Use of Lots in general might well by occasion of that Text be discussed, then is Mr. B. his deduction nothing judicious, from thence taxing Mr. G. as failing in Judgement, for taking occasion thereby to discuss that Question. But herein Mr. B. dealeth with me as he doth with Peter Martyr in his Dialogue; where, because mPeter Martyr relateth in his discourse entreating of Dice-play, how nPlato compareth the Life of Man thereunto, he denieth, yea and seriously confuteth this Consequence, implying the same to be Peter Martyrs;
I perceiue if Mr. B. might haue the framing1 of Mr. G•s. Arguments, there would be very iudicious deductions in them indeed. But if without ⟨p. 6⟩any such iniudicious deduction, the Question of the Vse of Lots in generall might well by occasion of that Text be discussed, then is Mr. B. his deduction nothing iudicious, from thence taxing Mr. G. as failing in Iudgement, for taking occasion thereby to discusse that Question. But herein Mr. B. dealeth with me as he doth with Peter Martyr in his Dialogue; where, because mPeter Martyr relateth in his discourse entreating of Dice-play, how nPlato compareth the Life of Man thereunto, he denieth, yea and seriously consuteth this Consequence, implying the same to be Peter Martyrs;