A01540:377
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. In stead of making good his own Logic, Mr. B. ⟨p. 170⟩telleth us what will hold good in Mr. Gs. Logic. What he meaneth by my Logic, I neither know nor inquire. When I make such an Argument as Mr. B. here frameth, then let him answer it and not before. For this is but to set up men of straw, and then having run a course or two at them, to ride away in triumph, as if he had done some great matter, and laid Mr. G. or I know not whom in the dust. But mean while Mr. B. forgetteth to show us the validity of his own Logic; to wit, how an Argument will follow, from one singular example of an extraordinary Lot (by himself confessed to be such) used therein by Gods special direction, to the ordinary use of Lots in general.
T. G. In stead of making good his owne Logick, Mr. B. ⟨p. 170⟩telleth vs what will hold good in Mr. Gs. Logick. What he meaneth by my Logick, I neither know nor inquire. When I make such an Argument as Mr. B. here frameth, then let him answer it and not before. For this is but to set vp men of straw, and then hauing runne a course or two at them, to ride away in triumph, as if he had done some great matter, and laid Mr. G. or I know not whom in the dust. But meane while Mr. B. forgetteth to shew vs the validitie of his owne Logick; to wit, how an Argument will follow, from one singular example of an extraordinarie Lot (by himselfe confessed to be such) vsed therein by Gods speciall direction, to the ordinarie vse of Lots in generall.
I. B. But Mr. G. maketh another difference, to wit, an immediate and special providence in an extraordinary Lot, which is not in an ordinary Lot. He doth so: and therefore in his Logic, he cunningly joineth a supposed extraordinary Event to a supposed extraordinary Act, and declineth the proof of an extraordinary Act, which rather he should have done, because mine Argument standeth upon the use of Lots.
I. B. But Mr. G. maketh another difference, to wit, an immediate and speciall prouidence in an extraordinary Lot, which is not in an ordinary Lot. He doth so: and therefore in his Logick, he cunningly ioyneth a supposed extraordinarie Euent to a supposed extraordinarie Act, and declineth the proofe of an extraordinarie Act, which rather he should haue done, because mine Argument standeth vpon the vse of Lots.