.NDI.MjIzMjA: Difference between revisions

From Newberry Transcribe
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The contents
[in different hand to previous text pages of document]
The contents.


The first case considered, whether Satan may not possibly  
The first case considered, whether Satan may not possibly  
Line 7: Line 8:
Arguments. Arg 1. From [crossed out word] Several Scriptures. p.1. to 11.  
Arguments. Arg 1. From [crossed out word] Several Scriptures. p.1. to 11.  
Arg.2. Because it is possible for the devill in the shape of  
Arg.2. Because it is possible for the devill in the shape of  
an inocent person to do other mischiefs. proved by many instances. p.11 to 15.
an inocent person to do other mischiefs. proved by many
instances. p.11 to 15.
Arg.3. Because if Satan may not Represent an inocent  
Arg.3. Because if Satan may not Represent an inocent  
person as afflicting others, it must be Eitter because  
person as afflicting others, it must be Either because  
hee wants will, or Power to do thus, or because the  
hee wants will, or Power to do thus, or because the  
holy God will never Permit him to do it . None of wch  
holy God will never Permit him to do it. None of wch  
may be affirmed. p.15. to 22.
may be affirmed. p.15. to 22.
Arg.4. It is certayn both from Scripture [2 crossed out words]  
Arg.4. It is certayn both from Scripture [crossed out: & [illegible]]  
History that magicians by their Inchantments, &  
History, that magicians by their Inchantments, &  
hellishe conjurations, may cause a false Representation of  
hellishe conjurations, may cause a false Representation of  
persons & things. p. 22 to 26.
persons & things. p. 22 to 26.
Arg.5. From the concurring judgement of many learned  
Arg.5. From the concurring judgement of many learned  
& judicious men. p.26 to 29.
& judicious men. p.26 to 29.
Arg 6. [o^er? o^e?] owne experience has confirmed ye truth of what wee affirm. 29.
Arg 6. Our [spelled o with with raised e] owne experience has confirmed ye truth of  
what wee affirm. 29.


The second case considerd, viz. If one bewitched is  
The second case considered, viz. If one bewitched is  
struck down at ye Looke or cast or the ey of another,
struck down at ye Looke or cast or the ey of another,  
& after yt recoverd again by a touch from ye same  
& after yt recovered again by a touch from ye same  
person, whether this is not an infallible proof that  
person, whether this is not an infallible proof that  
ye party suspected, & complained of is in league wth  
ye party suspected, & complained of is in league wth  
the Devill? Ans. This may be ground of suspicion  
the devill? Ans. This may be ground of suspicion  
& examination, but not of conviction. p. 30.  
& examination, but not of conviction. p. 30.  
 
The Judgement of Mr Barnard [underlined] & Doctor Cotta [underlined] produced.  
The Judgement of Mr Barnard [underlined] & Doctor [Cotta underlined] produced.  
p. 31, 32. Several things offered against the infalli
p. 31, 32. Several things offered against the infallible, Gility of this proof. 1 - It is possible & probable yt ye  
bility of this proof. 1. It is possible & probable yt ye  
Persons in Question may be obsessed wth Lying Spirits G. V. 33, 3[number scratched out]
Persons in Question may be obsessed wth Lying Spirits . p. 33,34 [last number blotted]
2. Falling down wth ye cast of ye Ey proceede not from a  
2. Falling down wth ye cast of ye ey proceeds not from a  
natural but an Arbitrary cause .p. 35.
natural but an Arbitrary cause. p. 35.
3. That of the bewitched persons being recovered with a Touch
3. That of the bewitched persons being recovered with a Touch
is various & fallible .p.36, 37.
is various & fallible .p.36, 37.

Latest revision as of 09:36, 29 October 2017

[in different hand to previous text pages of document] The contents.

The first case considered, whether Satan may not possibly appear in the shape of an innocent and pious, as well as of a nocent and wicked person, to afflict such as suffer by Diabolical molestations. The Affirmative proved by six Arguments. Arg 1. From [crossed out word] Several Scriptures. p.1. to 11. Arg.2. Because it is possible for the devill in the shape of an inocent person to do other mischiefs. proved by many instances. p.11 to 15. Arg.3. Because if Satan may not Represent an inocent person as afflicting others, it must be Either because hee wants will, or Power to do thus, or because the holy God will never Permit him to do it. None of wch may be affirmed. p.15. to 22. Arg.4. It is certayn both from Scripture [crossed out: & [illegible]] History, that magicians by their Inchantments, & hellishe conjurations, may cause a false Representation of persons & things. p. 22 to 26. Arg.5. From the concurring judgement of many learned & judicious men. p.26 to 29. Arg 6. Our [spelled o with with raised e] owne experience has confirmed ye truth of what wee affirm. 29.

The second case considered, viz. If one bewitched is struck down at ye Looke or cast or the ey of another, & after yt recovered again by a touch from ye same person, whether this is not an infallible proof that ye party suspected, & complained of is in league wth the devill? Ans. This may be ground of suspicion & examination, but not of conviction. p. 30. The Judgement of Mr Barnard [underlined] & Doctor Cotta [underlined] produced. p. 31, 32. Several things offered against the infalli bility of this proof. 1. It is possible & probable yt ye Persons in Question may be obsessed wth Lying Spirits . p. 33,34 [last number blotted] 2. Falling down wth ye cast of ye ey proceeds not from a natural but an Arbitrary cause. p. 35. 3. That of the bewitched persons being recovered with a Touch is various & fallible .p.36, 37.