148 / 504
Speech, Circum fiances
of
the
place, with
the
aime
of
our
Saviour
in fpeak-
ing,
exa&ing
this
fence
of
the
words.
The
words
are
wsz
¿MJVs.
It
is
the contrant import
of
theword
to
defigne
the
Event
of
the
thing,
which by
what attends
it,
is
afferted,
or
denyed.
fo Gal: 2.13. Mat:
8
28.
15.31.
r
Theft.
r.8.
Neither
is
it ever ufed for
wa.
In
the
place
by
force
infranced
for
it
Rom
:7.6. it
points clearely
at
the Event:
lea is
fometimes
put
for
it,
but
not
on
the contrary;
and
the
words
É+
ebva,dv,
though
not
fo
ufed
alwaies,
(though
fometimes
they
are,
as Gal
.-4.15,) do
fignify
at
leafs
a
mo-
rall
impoflìbility, whenthey referre
to the
indeavours
ofinen
;but
relating
to
the
predi
&ion
of
an event by God
himfelfe, they are equivalent
to
an abfo-
lute
Negation
of
it; That
of
Adis
20.16.
is
urged to
the
contrary.
Paul hoped
J
vaiv,
to
be at
jerufalem
at
the
Penteco
fi.
If
it
be
poJble,
here
cannot
imply an
impoJJibility as
to
the event,faies
Mr G.
But
are
thefe
places paralleli? Are all
places, where
the
fame phrafe
is
ufed,
alwaies
to
be expounded
in
the
fame
fente
?
The
termes here,
[
if
it
be
poffible] refpe&
not the futnrition
of
the
thing, but the
uncertainty to
Paul
of
its
poflibility or impoffibility
;
theun-
certainty (I fay)
of
Paulin his
conje&ure,
whether
he fhould get
to
jerufalem
by
fuch a
time,
or
no
of
which
he was
ignorant. Did our
Saviour here con-
je&ure;about a
thing, whereof
he was
ignorant whether
it
would come to
paffe,or
no
?
We
fay
not then,
that
in
this place,where
£'
dsvardv
is
expreffive
of
the uncertainty
of
him,
that
attempts
any
thing,
of
Event
,
that it
af-
firmes an impoffibility
ofit,
and
fo
to
mfinuate
that
Paul
made
all
haft
to doe
that,
which
he
knew was impollible
for him
to
doe:
but that the
words are ufed
in thefe two
places in difrin&fences
, according
to the
inclolore
that
is
made
of
them
by others: But
(faith
Mr
Goodwin) to
fäy,that
Paul
might
be
Ignorant,
whether
his being
at
jerufalem
by
PentecoJi,
might
be
pof
ble or
no,
and
that
he
on.
ly
refolved
to
make
tryall
of
the
truth
herein to the utntofi,
is to afperfe
this great
Apojile
with
a
ridiculous imputation
of
Ignorance.
And why
fo I
pray
you
?
It
is
true;
he was a great
Apostle
indeed.
But
it
was
no
part
of
his
Apofrolicall
furnifhment ,
to
know
in
what
fpace
of
time he might make
a
Sea-voyage.
Had
Mr
Goodwin
ever been at
Sea,
he would
not have thought it
ridiculous
Ignorance,
for
a
man
to
be uncertain,
in
what
fpace
of
time he
might fade
from
Miletus
to
Ptolemais.
Paul
had
a
fhort time
to
finial this
voyage
in.
He
was
at
Philippi
at
the
dayes
of
Vnleavened Bread,
and afterwards, v.6. thence
he
was five daies failing
to
Troas
v:6.
and
there
he abode (even
daies
more
it
may well be fuppofed,
that
it
cofr
him
not
leffe
then
(even
claies
more to
come
to
Miletns.:
v:
13,1
4,15.
how long he
tarried there
is
uncertaine
:
Evi-
dent however
it
is, that-
there
was a
very (mall
fpace
of
time left
to
get
to
Je-
rufalem
by
Pentecoft.-
Paul was
one
that
had
met,
not
only with
Calmes,
and
s
cor.iz.a5
contrary Windes, but
Shipwrackalfo:
fo
that
he
might
well
doubt,
whether
it
were
poffible
for him
to
make
his
voyage in
that
fpace
of
time
,
he had de-
figned
to doeit
in
and
this furely
without the
leafs
difparagement
to
bis A-
poilolicall
knowledge,
and
wifdome.
In
briefe, when this phrafe relates
to
the
Cares and
defires
of
men, and
unto
any
thing
of
their
Ignorance
of
the llfue,
it
may defigne
the uncertainty
of
the event,
as in
this
place and that
of
Rom.
12.18.
But
when
it
poynts
at the
event it
felfe,
it
peremptorily
defignes
its
accomplifhment or not, according
to
the
tendency
of
the
Expreflion
,
which!
affirmes
or
denies.
Notwithftanding then
all Evafions,
the
fimple,dire&, and
proper
fence
ofour
Saviours
words, who
is Petting
forth
and
aggravating the
prevalency
of
feducers in evill times
by
him
thenforetold ,
is,
that it
(hall be
filch,
and fo great,
as
that if
it were not impoflible
upon
the account
of
their
Ele&ion,
they
fhould
prevaile
againfr
the
very
Eldi
themfelves. But
6.