A01540:414
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. Mr. B. it seemeth, little passeth what he say, though never so little to the purpose, so he may seem to say something. The instances some of them are by Mr. B. himself, though contrary to his own purpose, alleged. Mine Argument standeth thus: Nothing is said by Solomon in this place of Lots, but what may with good warrant from Gods word be truly said of all other humane actions, in the most whereof yet God worketh not immediately, but by means. There is nothing therefore said of a Lot in this place, that may prove any immediate providence of God therein. Now what is it to the purpose whether there be an immediate providence of God in some of them or no. This phrase that may be truly used, where none such is, proveth it not. The impropriety of speech here used I pass by, because it is nothing to the purpose. But till either the Antecedent here be disproved, or the Consequence (which I suppose no ⟨p. 184⟩man will once question) infringed, Mr. B. remaineth clean put beside his main bulwark.
T. G. Mr. B. it seemeth, little passeth what hee say, though neuer so little to the purpose, so hee may seeme to say something. The instances some of them are by Mr. B. himselfe, though contrary to his owne purpose, alledged. Mine Argument standeth thus: Nothing is said by Salomon in this place of Lots, but what may with good warrant from Gods word be truly said of all other humane actions, in the most whereof yet God worketh not immediatly, but by meanes. There is nothing therefore said of a Lot in this place, that may proue any immediate prouidence of God therein. Now what is it to the purpose whether there be an immediate prouidence of God in some of them or no. This phrase that may be truly vsed, where none such is, proueth it not. The impropriety of speech here vsed I passe by, because it is nothing to the purpose. But till either the Antecedent here be disproued, or the Consequence (which I suppose no ⟨p. 184⟩man will once question) infringed, Mr. B. remaineth cleane put beside his maine bulwarke.