A01540:547
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. I believe Mr. B. that if I believed as he doth, (for I hope he thinketh as he writeth) I should believe otherwise than I do. But these coleworts come so oft in still, that I fear there is the less savour for ⟨p. 236⟩them in this his tedious discourse, which yet he promised us should have the more savour in it for the length of it. He must prove, he must prove this his immediate providence and imaginary special presence, before he control others either for not admitting of it, or not observing what would necessarily ensue upon it. But why was he offended with me for putting that into his Assumption, that he himself, as appeareth here, would have therein maintained?
T. G. I beleeue Mr. B. that if I beleeued as he doth, (for I hope he thinketh as he writeth) I should beleeue otherwise than I doe. But these coleworts come so oft in still, that I feare there is the lesse sauour for ⟨p. 236⟩them in this his tedious discourse, which yet he promised vs should haue the more sauour in it for the length of it. He must proue, he must proue this his immediate prouidence and imaginarie speciall presence, before he controll others either for not admitting of it, or not obseruing what would necessarily ensue vpon it. But why was he offended with me for putting that into his Assumption, that he himselfe, as appeareth here, would haue therein maintained?
I. B. It is true, that a matter of less weight in it self, may be the subject matter of a controversy, as a controversy may be among men, as well mean, as mighty in their estate, as Mr. G. here saith, p. 137. For by mighty men (as in Gen. 6. 4. so) in Prou. 18. 18. are meant men strong in affections, so as the controversy cannot be well ended without a Lot, whether the subject matter of the Controversy be of more or less weight in it self, so as there is a necessie that one or both parties be satisfied. For otherwise there may be a great quarrel about a matter of less weight. Neither do I say, that only great quarrels are to be ended, or prevented by a Lot, as Mr. G. denieth not, but some may. For (as he saith truly, p. 173.) God speaketh in