A37046:664
The law unsealed
The law unsealed: or, A practical exposition of the Ten Commandments With a resolution of several momentous questions and cases of conscience. By the learned, laborious, faithful servant of Jesus Christ, Mr. James Durham, late minister of the Gospel at Glasgow.
Glasgow: printed by Robert Sanders, 1676
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.
2. That to do so, or to use a Lot in this case is a sin, may also be made out clearly. 1. Because it is against the end of Lots, which is to divide or decide where there is Controversy, and so it interverteth their end, and becometh sinful; even as swearing where no Controversy is, is a sin. 2. There is either no necessity at all to take that way, or there is but a made-necessity of our own, it must therefore be a tempting of God; as suppose this to be the end of Lotting, to know in the upshot whether so much Money should belong to you, or to me; no doubt, that point of right to whom the Money belongeth, may be decided as well at the entry; therefore this way of decision is in vain.
2. That to do so, or to use a Lot in this case is a sin, may also be made out clearly. 1. Because it is against the end of Lots, which is to divide or decide where there is Controversie, and so it interverteth their end, and becometh sinful; even as swearing where no Controversie is, is a sin. 2. There is either no necessity at all to take that way, orthere is but a made-necessity of our own, it must therefore be a tempting of God; as suppose this to be the end of Lotting, to know in the upshot whether so much Money should belong to you, or to me; no doubt, that point of right to whom the Money belongeth, may be decided as well at the entry; therefore this way of decision is in vain.
3. That Lotting which hath in it no reverence to God, but baffleth his Name, nor is consistent with the right manner of Lotting, cannot be lawful: but this is such: for it is not only, de facto, contrary to the former rules, but in its own nature is inconsistent with them: this is clear, 1. From the great frequency of Loathing in these Games. 2. In the little dependence on God for the event that is in them; and indeed a spiritual frame of dependence on him, cannot well, if at all consist with them. 3. From its inconsistency with serious prayer: what! can or dare men pray in earnest for Gods guiding in these things, in every throw of Dice, or shuffling of the Cards? or in faith expect still the revealing of his Decree that way? or when it is done, and past, can they suitably acknowledge Him in it? Men dare not look so seriously on these things, yea, they know they dare not.