A01540:284
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.
But to apply this to the present. First, tRecreation in general is granted by all to have good warrant from Gods word, as a thing both allowed by permission, and enjoined by precept, if not directly and expressly, yet at least by just consequence: and therefore I will not stand upon the proof of it.
But to apply this to the present. First, tRecreation in generall is granted by all to haue good warrant from Gods word, as a thing both allowed by permission, and inioyned by precept, if not directly and expresly, yet at least by iust consequence: and therefore I will not stand vpon the proofe of it.
Secondly, for the matter and manner of it, or the things wherewith we may recreate our selves, uthere is nothing determined; any means therefore of recreation that are not against the general Rules of *comeliness and decency, of xconveniency and expediency, yof religion and piety, and the like, are by the word of God allowed, and have from thence sufficient warrant. For example; If question be whether Bowls or Chess be lawful or no: what can there be said in justification o them more than this, that recreation in general is by Gods word allowed; the matter of it in particular not determined: these games not prohibited; therefore lawful and allowable. Now the very same may be said of Lots and Lottery. Game in general is