A01540:450
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.
Secondly, an Oath and a Lot are not alike: the comparison therefore laid between them will not hold. For neither is the right of ought in an ordinary Lot put to the special providence or immediate and extraordinary work of God; as tthe truth of the thing testified is in an oath put to his testimony: neither is there in every Lot any such solemn invocation of God, as there is in an Oath ever either uexpressed or implied, by which God is called to witness with us the truth of that we avow, or the truth of our purpose to perform what we promise: as may hereby appear.
Secondly, an Oath and a Lot are not alike: the comparison therefore laid betweene them will not hold. For neither is the right of ought in an ordinary Lot put to the speciall prouidence or immediate and extraordinary worke of God; as tthe truth of the thing testified is in an oath put to his testimonie: neither is there in euery Lot any such solemne inuocation of God, as there is in an Oath euer either uexpressed or implied, by which God is called to witnesse with vs the truth of that we auow, or the truth of our purpose to performe what we promise: as may hereby appeare.