A01540:556
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. So that I doubt not, but that with sound judgement, and a clear conscience not accusing me of not duly respecting the special providence of God by his immediate disposing of a Lot, I may affirm, That the more weighty the subject matter of a controversy is, the more justifiable is the Controversy: and be that matter of more or less weight, the greater the necessity of ending a Controversy is, the more justifiable is the use of a Lot. Is not then playing with a Lot an irreligious abusing of Gods ordinance?
I. B. So that I doubt not, but that with sound iudgement, and a cleare conscience not accusing me of not duly respecting the speciall prouidence of God by his immediate disposing of a Lot, I may affirme, That the more weightie the subiect matter of a controuersie is, the more iustifiable is the Controuersie: and be that matter of more or lesse weight, the greater the necessitie of ending a Controuersie is, the more iustifiable is the vse of a Lot. Is not then playing with a Lot an irreligious abusing of Gods ordinance?
T. G. ⟨p. 240⟩It is the manner of bad pleaders ywhen proofs fail them to fall to protesting. And it is reported to be the guise of your preaching Friars, when they know not how to confute our doctrine, to assure their hearers upon their salvation that it is heresies Mr. B. methinks should do otherwise. I say nothing in this point without reason; which Mr. B. must refute, if he will have me alter my judgement. But if it may be had with protestations, Mr. B. will not miss of it. Which when he hath thus solemnly made, grounded still upon a false supposal, (which unless you grant him, all is gone,) he then demandeth, Is not then playing with a Lot an irreligious abuse? Why so? what is the reason. Because Mr. B. is persuaded so as he saith. All This *wind will shake but little corn, save with such, if there be any, that have pinned their faith upon Mr. Bs. sleeve, and must depend upon his persuasions. It is the property of