A01540:253
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.
T. G. Albeit this be nothing to that that I say, for I say not, that the creature hath a natural power to be a Lot, but that the creature in such a Lot is used to no other end or use, but what it hath a natural power unto. Yet is it most undoubtedly and undeniably true, that the creature that is used in a Lot hath a natural power to be made matter of a Lot; as a stone hath a natural power to be driven upward: else could not either of them by any Art or humane ⟨p. 102⟩power be effected with either, nor without some supernatural work. So that to the Assumption also rightly understood here is nothing at all said.
T. G. Albeit this be nothing to that that I say, for I say not, that the creature hath a naturall power to be a Lot, but that the creature in such a Lot is vsed to no other end or vse, but what it hath a naturall power vnto. Yet is it most vndoubtedly and vndeniably true, that the creature that is vsed in a Lot hath a naturall power to be made matter of a Lot; as a stone hath a naturall power to be driuen vpward: else could not either of them by any Art or humane ⟨p. 102⟩power be effected with either, nor without some supernaturall worke. So that to the Assumption also rightly vnderstood here is nothing at all said.
I. B. God keep me from teaching that Christian liberty warranteth the unlawful use of any Creature, whatsoever natural power it hath to that use.
I. B. God keepe me from teaching that Christian libertie warranteth the vnlawfull vse of any Creature, whatsoeuer naturall power it hath to that vse.