A01540:536
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. B. But suppose the use of a Lot be not (thus) enjoined; yet doth not Gods counsel (which me thinks is a commandment, though it be said of a mans counsel, that it is no commandment) sanctify it to be used to end controversies? This (I think) will not be denied.
I. B. But suppose the vse of a Lot be not (thus) inioyned; yet doth not Gods counsell (which me thinks is a commandement, though it be said of a mans counsell, that it is no commandement) sanctifie it to be vsed to end controuersies? This (I thinke) will not be denied.
T. G. ⟨p. 229⟩1. If it will not, as indeed it is not: why doth Mr. B. keep such a coil about it; as if it were denied, when it is not. But thus Mr. B. as he saith of some, gloveth to be brief in the main point, and long (even to tediousness) in by-matters. 2. Whether difference be or no between Gods counsels and commands, (the Apostle seeming hto allow some things, which yet he would not advise, and not absolutely to enjoin some things, which yet he wisheth and adviseth to) I stand not now to dispute. Sure I am, that he that adviseth a man rather to divide by Lot, than to waste himself at Law, doth not enjoin him thereby to divide by Lot, but only to use that course, or some other of like nature, (for it tieth him not to that particular) whereby a quiet end may be had. 3. But to what end should words be multiplied more about this, when as it is acknowledged, whether it be a counsel or a command, a permission or injunction, it is sufficient to sanctify Lots to that use? So that Mr. B. need not have strained himself to utter herein an untruth, and then dilate upon it with so many Rhetorical amplifications, if he had not been disposed ito pick a quarrel without cause.