A01540:594
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. Secondly, I grieve to observe what a gap Mr. G. hath by this doctrine opened to Licentiousness. What! may man disposed to sin, employ any creature, whose use God hath not limited, to what use he will? No: for here is to be understood that exception which is expressed in the next part of the reason touching circumstances, viz. ⟨p. 261⟩[Any use, but that which is prohibited] Howsoever I could demur thereupon, especially if an express prohibition be understood, yet herein I will be silent having enough granted me.
I. B. Secondly, I grieue to obserue what a gap Mr. G. hath by this doctrine opened to Licentiousnesse. What! may man disposed to sinne, imploy any creature, whose vse God hath not limited, to what vse he will? No: for here is to be vnderstood that exception which is expressed in the next part of the reason touching circumstances, viz. ⟨p. 261⟩[Any vse, but that which is prohibited] Howsoeuer I could demurre thereupon, especially if an expresse prohibition be vnderstood, yet herein I will be silent hauing enough granted me.
T. G. These be all but kidle fancies of Mr. Bs. own brain. I open no greater gap to any licentiousness, than lthe word of God warranteth: which Mr. Bs. unjust charge must therefore consequently fall upon, and upon the Apostle himself together with me. I spare to observe what grievous and inextricable straits Mr. B. would cast Christian Consciences into by his contrary Assertions; such, I am sure (let him take heed mwhom he followeth therein) as himself will never endure to be tied to: to wit, to bring some (I say not warrant, but) precept out of Gods word, for every particular Act that he doth, every sort or part of apparel he weareth, every kind of recreation that at any time he useth, and the like. Only I wish that Mr. Bs. ordinary faithfulness may here also be observed. He saith he could demur upon this position, that I give for the circumstances of such Actions, in which they are not determined, viz. [Any use, but that which is prohibited, is lawful] especially, if an express prohibition be understood. When as my words are expressly, not either expressly or by just consequence prohibited. I would know of Mr. B. what precept, (for unless precept, no warrant, saith Mr. B.) or what permission at least there is for such dealing in Gods word. But he hath enough granted him by Mr. G. without this. Let us hear how.