A01540:516
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.
To apply these distinctions then to the present Argument: If they take the word sanctify in the stricter sense, the Proposition is true, but the Assumption is unsound: for Lots are not set apart, or said so to be in either of the aplaces produced, to any holy or spiritual, but to a civill use only.
To apply these distinctions then to the present Argument: If they take the word sanctifie in the stricter sense, the Proposition is true, but the Assumption is vnsound: for Lots are not set apart, or said so to be in either of the aplaces produced, to any holy or spirituall, but to a ciuill vse onely.
If in the larger and more general sense, then either ⟨p. 222⟩they speak of things sanctified only but not appropriated, or of things both sanctified and appropriated too, and that either the whole kind in general, or some of the kind only.
If in the larger and more generall sense, then either ⟨p. 222⟩they speake of things sanctified onely but not appropriated, or of things both sanctified and appropriated too, and that either the whole kinde in generall, or some of the kinde only.