A01540:365
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 answer: The Assumption is not true if it be understood1 universally: it concludeth nothing to the Question if it be taken particularly.
I answer: The Assumption is not true if it be vnderstood1 vniuersally: it concludeth nothing to the Question if it be taken particularly.
- 1T. G. Answer. Of Lots, chap. 7. Sect. 5.
The proof annexed to it scarce carrieth good sense: the Printer, it may be, is in fault. But if the meaning of the Author be, as I conceive it, (for I must in part go by guess) that the disposition of every Lot is wholly attributed to, and the event wholly expected from the special and immediate Providence of God; I deny it, neither do the places produced prove it. The fformer of them, concerning ordinary Lots, or Lots in general, was examined and answered sufficiently before.
The proofe annexed to it scarce carrieth good sense: the Printer, it may be, is in fault. But if the meaning of the Author be, as I conceiue it, (for I must in part goe by guesse) that the disposition of euery Lot is wholly attributed to, and the euent wholly expected from the speciall and immediate Prouidence of God; I denie it, neither doe the places produced proue it. The fformer of them, concerning ordinary Lots, or Lots in generall, was examined and answered sufficiently before.