A01540:306
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. B. Touching the Proposition of his main Argument, I marvel why Mr. G. avouching such subject matter ⟨p. 120⟩&c. to be lawful as are not forbidden, limiteth this Assertion with these words (of a thing lawful in it self.) As if such a thing may warrant our recklessness in and about the subject matter &c. As if God doth not, according to the old saying, love Adverbs. An Oath is a thing lawful in it self. Are not we therefore to make conscience, that the subject matter &c. be agreeable to the word of GOD?1
I. B. Touching the Proposition of his maine Argument, I maruell why Mr. G. auouching such subiect matter ⟨p. 120⟩&c. to be lawfull as are not forbidden, limiteth this Assertion with these words (of a thing lawfull in it selfe.) As if such a thing may warrant our retchlesnesse in and about the subiect matter &c. As if God doth not, according to the old saying, loue Aduerbs. An Oath is a thing lawfull in it selfe. Are not we therefore to make conscience, that the subiect matter &c. be agreeable to the word of GOD?1
- 1T. G.
I. B. Why I insert those words into mine Assertion, may easily appear to any that will not wilfully shut his eyes: because my dispute is concerning Recreation, a thing granted to be such, and the Question only about the subject matter of it. And so far are my words from implying any such matter, as Mr. B. here thence would infer, that I say in express terms, that As well for the doing of every act, as for the doing of it in this or that manner there must be warrant had out of Gods wordh. But I marvel much more at this ground, Such things are lawful as the word doth not forbid. I set it down thus, because the confirmations tend to make this good, and so conclude. All things not prohibited are permitted: and therefore the subject matter &c. of a thing lawful in it self. I marvel, I say, because Mr. G. confirmeth a thing or act it self to be lawful in it self, if it be in the word, either commanded, or permitted expressly, or by just consequence. Which I acknowledge to be so clear a truth, that (me thinks) Mr. G. cannot, but in proportion of reason, if he believe the word to be