Firft, Some fay Trophimus was left fick at Miletum, when St. Paul and his company fayling to Rome, touched upon the Coasts of Afia. A&t. 27. 2. Thus St, Chryfoftom and Beza. In loc. Secondly. Some charge corruption upon the text, boldly alledging Miletum is falfely written for Melite. Thus Baronius and Beza; the latter whereof adjoins it to his former opini❤ In toe. on, with a quanquam potius conjicio, or although Frather con- 13 jecture. But we value not his Conjecture, for 1. 'Tis contrary to all Greek copies. Beza dares not cite bis antient manuscript, but boldly ventures it into the world upon his own Conjecture, as alfo doth Baronin. Now muft thei Church interpret Scriptures by fuch Conjectures; certainly o God hath given his Word to little purpofe, fince mens fanciest may alter it when, an 1 how they please. 2. 'Tis against the credit of all tranflations; the Latine are obvious; the Syriack is thus rendred by Tremellius. Trophimum autem reliqui agrotum in Mileto urbe, or Trophimus have I left fick in the City Miletum. 3. 'Tis andacious, dangerous, and improbable Audacious, be cause it introduceth the Cabala upon the new Teftament. Dangerous, because it may be improved to invalidate the most conclufive Scriptures against heretical opinions, if the words which make most against them have any common letters, with words which favour them. Improbable, becaufe a Metathefis, or tranfpofition of letters will not lay in the words, fince Miletum, and Melite are alfo written in Greek with different vowels. fhall conclude my animadverfion upon this fecond expofition, with Dr. Lightfoots cenfure of Beza, for the fame thing he faith; Har. in lạc...) He is alwaies one of the forwardest to tax the text for corrupt, when be cannot clear it. Thirdly,Others interpret the text offome time after St.Pauls releafe from his firft imprisonment when he perambulated, and: travailed over again his former Stages: thus A Lapide. They firft, and laft of these expofitions are only probable, the middle moft moft improbable and falfe, our prefent enquiry is, which of the two is moft probable: Do any fay the firft is? becaufe Trophimus was not left fick at Miletum when Acts 20. 17. was written, I answer: Grant it to be true, it wipes away the Duft thrown by Presby ters into the face of this Controverfie; when to weaken Timethy's Epifcopate at Ephefis, they fay, St. Paul took his last fare wel of the Elders of the Ephefine Church, and gave them their final finalinftructions, when he told them at Miletum, That they Should fee his Face no more, Acts 20. 25. whereas hereby they grant, that he vifits them again, and might fee, or be feen by them in this Voyage, which according to the fupputation of Chronologers, was under-taken not above four years after that charge. But widing all advantages gamable, by infifting upon the probability of the firft Expofition, we renounce it, and clofe with the latter Expofition as more probable, for this pal fage of leaving Trophimus fick at Miletum, was written ten ful years after St. Paul's firft voyage to Rome, and 'tis utterly improbable either that Trophimus fhould be left fo long fick at one place, or that St. Paul should now write it unto his Neighbour Timethy for News, for this fecond Epiftle was written to Timothy while he was at Ephefus, and laft of all St. Paul's writings, as will appear by and by in the difcuffion of its Date.. 30 , This thin exposition. This allowed by the exact judgement of the late moft eminently learned, and to a miracle judiciously converfant in all forts of Antiquity, Dr. James Usher Arch-Bishop of Armagh, who in his annals of the World, dates the first Epiftle to Timothy in the 5th year of Chrift, not much above a year before St. Paul's Martyrdome, which fufficiently challen geth an allocation of time to the Date of that Epiftle fubfequent to St. Paul's Delivery from his firft imprisonment, in which annals, the faid excellent man, placeth, the leaving of Trophimus fick at Miletum in the year of Chrift 66. not many Moneths before St. Paul's exchanging his Earthly pilgrimage for a Heavenly habitation. (according to his accompt Corollaryfrom But for the prefent difmifling all further conjectures, atthe refutation tend me to what is certain, namely Timothy at the Date of the of the first fort first Epiftle (whatsoever, was the time of its Date) was refident an Argu- at Ephefus: And fo far we have fixed him. When then did he remove? afterwards; (fay Presbyters.) If we ask them in what year of our Lord? they will tell us they cannot tell: But if you will take their word, you fhall hear them fay with much confidence, That he did remove, of Presbyteri ments, to prove Timo- Proceed we to a further Query, and demand their Proofe, their Answer, as the former, will not want confidence; and aver they have enough, fo we will quietly grant their affigned, and refuted Date of the First Epistle to Timothy. And they have fo ordered their bufinefs, as eafily credulous perfons may readily believe he was afterward with St. Paul, or imployed by him in divers places, as appears by Phil. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. Philem. v. 1. Heb Heb. 13. 13. But I fuppofe I have broken the Links of this goodly Argument, and till Timothies Travails can be chained and linked together by one more ftrongly tack't do pofitively deny that any of thefe Texts do treat of him, as removed from Ephe Jus, and difcharged of his Relation unto that Church. This fhall conclude our Refutation of the first fort of Presbyterian Arguments, in proof Timothy's Evangelizate by his pretended Travels. ..But their other body of Arguments (or inftances from fe- Arguments, veral Texts, in both the Epiftles to Timothy) are advancing: for Timothy's And, 1.Tim. 1. 3. fals on: The words are, As I befought thee to a- ces out of the bide ftill at Ephefus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou migh- epiftles to him teft charge fome, that they teach no other Doctrine. This is always 2d. fort of Presbyterian Travels: Or feveral inftan the forlorn of the Caufe, I meet it in Smectymnuus, in the Di First, Tim. vines at Wight, where not? And hereby they would evidence 13. As I beTimathies occafional, and precarious leaving at,not Authoritative abide at ESought thee to miffion to the Church of Ephesus. phefus. This they fay, and I well hoped they would have been weary of infifting an it, when I perceived the Royal Pen (which ftob- SmeЯym. pag. ped to examine every thing of any imaginary weight in the Mi- 37 Wight Div. nifters Papers) difdaining this Objection an Answer: But And firft to I pap. Se&. finding it not raked up in the quiet Ahes of Silence and Obli- that of Timevion, but as fresh and pert as ever among the London Divines, thy and Titus. I was troubled to fee fuch a Trifle, as the vulgar acceptation of an English word to prevail fo far, with men pretending either to folidity of learning, or ingenuity of fpirit; for though it may pals currant with common Capacities, that to befeech the doing of a thing, is not the putting forth of an act of power, en joyning its performance, yet more refined Brains will demur upon it, because they know Jus. Divin. 2 part, p. 66. Anf. Words receive their force and fignification from 1. Anfw. We the quality of their Speakers, who hath Authority to command, are not fo is equally to be obeyed if he do entreat: Did not my Servant much to eye thus interpret my Language, he would fulfil few of my moft what is faid, as who speaks. important commands, their ordinary Style, when neceffity of performance concurs with my defire to have them done, being pritbee do it? Neither can there be a more demonftrable Argu ment of a Slavish fpirit in infe iours to apprehend themselves lefs concerned in their Duty, becanfe their Superiours do not furionfly rate, but mildly intreat them. I appet this to the point in hand thus. Timothy was qualified to impofe hands, cenfure m. cenfure delinquent Presbyters, and others, ere the Apostle be fought him to do them, elfe he would never have befought him, and S. Paul had equal authority to command as to befeech him, for he ordained Timothy, 2 Tim. 1. 6. And all Ordainers lay the command of God upon the Ordained, faithfully to discharge the trufts belonging to their Offices, in the Churches whereun to they are called. Granting therefore S. Paul did onely befeech Timothy to abide at Epbefus, it was cf equal force to inAgage him to remain there, as if he had ufed words of the greateft threatning and charge, especially fince the works he enjoyned him to do there, even Ordination of Minifters, and exercife of cenfures, are of conftant and almof dayly ufe, and he always had a power to do them, and that Church would perpetually call for its exercise. 2 Timothy an- Secondly, Timothy thus understood St. Pauls intreaty, upon derflood the it he faid at Ephesus; neither doth any Scripture, or good auword befought of a fettlement thority remove him from thence, the laft mention which holy Writ makes of him, is as there refident; and Antiquity there fettles him in his life, and buries him after his death (as fhall -be largely evidenced by and by: Befides ftrict obfervation 1. cannot difcern how Timothy could understand S. Paul's befeechcting otherwise then of a fettlement; the words of it are menýλεσε σε ορισμεῖναι ἐν τῷ Εφέσω, or I befought, or exhorted shee to abide Still at Ephefus. The word rom, rendered abide still, by our Tranflators and remaneres by the Vulgar, as it refers to the next following words, or when I went into Macedonia, implies that Se Paul had been at Ephesus before, and left Timothy behind him. As it refpects the laft words of the fame verfe, or that thou mightest charge fome, that they teach no other Doctrine; it interprets S. Paul's befeeching, by Timothy's refidence at Epbefus. Since no work requires greater diligence, or more conftant attendance, Alt. 20. 28. ad fin, and fince the second Epiftle finds Timothy at the fame place, and engaged upon the fame works, as shall ap pear, when we argue for his refidence at Ephesus. Beza tranflates repas, permaneres, which is fuller to prove fixation, then either remain or abide, for they do not neceffarily require long continuance, but to permane exacts conftant attendance, and a through discharge of all the trufts of an imployment.Thus the word era fignifies in this very Epiftle to Timothy, 1Tim. 5.5, 6. Now he that is a widow indeed, and defolate, continueth (iv) in fupplications and prayers night and day; but he that veth in pleasure, &c. Where we may obferve the word both to be be extended to conftancie, the widow indeed continueih in prayer nal word ren Thirdly, The word nani here used, (exáo σi, or I befought thee) doth primarily, properly, and moft ufually fignifie 3. The origito exhort and give a charge, but more rarely to befeech in any dred befought, Idoneous Author: A truth well known to our Interpreters, and primarily figaccordingly they often render it exhort. Thus, among other nifies to explaces, in 1 Pet. 5. 1. The Elders that are among you I exhort, (aexa) In this text, as well as in that of Timothy, the speech is directed by an Apoftle to Church-Officers, and I fee no reason befides the Tranflators pleasure, why (exani) was not rendered exhort, in both places. I 1 tive beseech 4. Where 'tis rendered befeech, it notes intreaty conjoyned 4. When 'tis with authority, concerning most important duties,duties which rendered bemust be done, and by no means neglected by the befought per- feech, it notes fons, Eph. 4. 1. I therefore the prisoner of the Lord, befeech you (a- an authoritaexuun) that ye walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye are called: ing. Will any one imagine this to be an occafional requeft, becaufe the word befeech is ufed? What can be either a more worthy and ferious matter for a preachers earneft exhortation, or for a peoples conftant imitation? Thus alfo 2 Cor. 5. 20. Now then we are Ambaffadors for Chrift, as though God did befeech you (waenHan) by us, we pray you in Chrifts stead, be ye reconciled unto God. Well was it for S. Paul, that there who fuch acute men as Smellymnuus, the Wight and London-Minifters, in the Churches of Ephefus and Corinth, otherwife he had foon heard from them, that if thofe duties of walking worthy of their calling, and being reconciled unto God, were not temporary and tranfient things,not re H quiring |