A19884:299
An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of…An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of…
An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his writings. By John Davenport BD.An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his wrightings. By Iohn Davenporte BD.
Rotterdam: printed by Isaac van Waesberghe, 1636Rotterdam: printed by Isaack van Waesberghe, 1636
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.
3. To the third.] It is to be observed, that he doeth not deny, that he opposed some of these men, only he knoweth no reason, why it should be wondered at.
3. To the third.] It is to be observed, that he doeth not deny, that he opposed some of these men, only he knoweth no reason, why it should be wondred at.
First, For my part, I think no man will wonder at it, if by reading his answer (as he calleth it) he have but some such insight into his disposition, as Pythagoras is said to have into the stature and strength of Hercules his body, by the measure of his foot.
First, For my part, I thinck no man will wonder at it, if by reading his answer (as he calleth it) he have but some such insight into his disposition, as Pythagoras is sayd to haue into the stature and strength of Hercules his body, by the measure of his foote.
Secondly, Suppose those men are, in some few opinions, opposite each to other. Will that justify his opposing and rejecting them? Let him draw his argument into form of a Syllogism, and it will prove a mere Sophism, and to labour of an equivocation, in the word opposite & oppose, which, in the Antecedent, noteth difference in judgement only (which may stand with personal concord) in the consequent, it signifieth personal opposition, and so there be 4 terms in it.
Secondly, Suppose those men are, in some few opinions, opposite each to other. Will that justify his opposing and rejecting them? Let him draw his argument into forme of a Syllogisme, and it will prove a mere Sophisme, and to labour of an aequivocation, in the word opposite & oppose, which, in the Antecedent, noateth difference in judgement only (which may stand with personall concord) in the consequent, it signifyeth personall opposition, and so there be 4 termes in it.