Speech, Circum fiances ofthe place, with the aime ofour Saviour in fpeak- ing, exa&ing this fenceofthe words. The words are wsz ¿MJVs. It is the contrant import oftheword todefigne the Event ofthe thing, which bywhat 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 placeby force infranced forit Rom:7.6. itpoints clearely at the Event: lea is fometimes put forit, but not on the contrary; and the words É+ ebva,dv, though not fo ufed alwaies, (though fometimes theyare, as Gal.-4.15,) do fignify at leafs a mo- rall impoflìbility, whenthey referre to the indeavours ofinen;but relating to thepredi&ion ofan event by God himfelfe, they are equivalent to an abfo- lute Negationofit; That ofAdis 20.16. is urged to the contrary. Paul hoped Jvaiv, tobe at jerufalemat thePentecofi. Ifit 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 tobe expounded in the fame fente ? The termes here, [ if it bepoffible] refpe& not the futnritionof the thing, but the uncertainty to Paul of its poflibility or impoffibility ; theun- certainty (I fay) ofPaulin hisconje&ure, whether he fhould get to jerufalem by fuch a time, or no ofwhich he was ignorant. Did our Saviour here con- je&ure;about a thing, whereofhe was ignorant whether it would come to paffe,or no ? We faynot then, that in this place,where £' dsvardv is expreffive of the uncertaintyof him, that attempts any thing, of Event , that it af- firmes an impoffibilityofit, and fo to mfinuate that Paul made allhaft to doe that, whichhe knew was impolliblefor him to doe: but that the words are ufed in thefe two places in difrin&fences , according to the inclolorethat is made ofthem by others: But (faith Mr Goodwin) tofäy,that Paul might be Ignorant, whether his beingat jerufalem byPentecoJi, mightbepofble or no, and that he on. lyrefolved to make tryall ofthe truthherein to the utntofi, is to afperfe this great Apojile with a ridiculous imputationofIgnorance. And why fo Iprayyou ? It is true; he was a great Apostle indeed. But it was no part ofhis 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 tobe uncertain, in what fpace oftime he might fade fromMiletus toPtolemais. Paul had a fhort time to finial this voyage in. He wasat Philippi at thedayes ofVnleavened Bread, and afterwards, v.6. thence hewas five daies failing to Troasv:6. and there he abode (even daiesmore it may well be fuppofed, that it cofr himnot leffe then (even claies more to come toMiletns.: v: 13,14,15. how long he tarried thereis uncertaine : Evi- dent howeverit is, that-there was avery (mallfpace of time left toget toJe- rufalem byPentecoft.- Paul was one that had met, not only withCalmes, and s cor.iz.a5 contrary Windes, but Shipwrackalfo: fo that he might well doubt, whether it were poffible for him to makehis voyage in that fpace of time , he had de- figned to doeit in and this furely without the leafs difparagement tobis A- poilolicall knowledge, and wifdome. In briefe, when this phrafe relates tothe Cares and defires ofmen, andunto any thing of their Ignorance of the llfue, it may defigne the uncertainty ofthe event, as in this place and that ofRom. 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 fenceofour Saviours words, who is Petting forth and aggravating the prevalencyoffeducers in evill timesby him thenforetold , is, that it (hall be filch, and fo great, as that ifit were not impoflible upon the accountof their Ele&ion, theyfhould prevaile againfr the very Eldi themfelves. But 6.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=