Luke iv. 6. And the devil said unto him, Quaran And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, tania. 7. If thou therefore wilt worship me, Matt. iv. 9. if thou wilt fall down and worship me, Luke iv. 7. 8. Matt. iv. 11. Luke iv. 13. all shall be thine. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Then the devil leaveth him, And when the devil 53 had ended all the temptation, he of which (the Roman empire,) was then at the height of its The temptation of Christ, as well as that of our first parents, 63 The Evil Spirit in this temptation is called by the three names, which unitedly characterise him as the destroyer of man. He is at once their enemy (Earavãç), their accuser (ò Aaboλoc), and their tempter (ο πειράζων). Mark i. 13. And he was with the wild beasts; and the angels mi- Quarannistered unto him. 54 Matt.iv. 11. and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him “. In this history of the temptation, St. Matthew's order is, 1. Command that these stones be made bread. 2. Cast thyself down from the temple. 3. I will give thee all thou seest from this bigh mountain, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.-St. Luke's order is, the first temptation the same as St. Matthew; the third temptation is placed by him for the second, and the second for the third. But St. Luke does not affirm this order. He has only kai ávayayov, v. 5. and kai ñyayev, v. 9. Whereas St. Matthew uses particles, which seem to fix his order; as, TÓTE v. 5 and réλw, v. 8. Le Clerc says, Hoc repugnantia haberi non potest, cum neuter evangelistarum profiteatur se hâc in se ordinem temporis accurate secutum. Newcome's Notes to his Harmony, p. 6 fol. edit. Dublin. 1778. Possibly the reason of the difference in the order of the account of the temptations given us in these two Evangelists, may be in some measure ascertained from a consideration of the respective causes for which they originally composed their Gospels. St. Matthew wrote for the Jews of Judea. The title of king was the most usual name given to the Messiah by the Jews. Vulgatissimum est hoc nomen Messiæ, quem Judæi ubique vocant, won, says Schoetgenius. Hora Hebr. vol. i. p. 13. and instances abound through his book. But he was not only considered as king of Israel, but king over all the world. Thus we read (Zohar Genes. fol. 128. col. 509. ad verba, Genes. xlix. 11. ex versione Sommeri, p. 96, apud Schoetgen. vol. ii. p. 688-9.) So the king Messias will shew favour to Israel, but he will be a terror to all people who profess not the true religion. St. Matthew, therefore, seems to point out to his Jewish readers, that Jesus, who was the true spiritual Messiah, first conquered all desire for the luxuries of life-He then refused to declare himself by any useless though stupendous miracle, the expected king of Israel, by proving himself, at an unfit time, and in an unsuitable manner, the Messiah they expected: for his course was that of toil and suffering, of neglected and lowly poverty and scorn, till the time came for the establishment of his spiritual kingdom. In repulsing the third temptation, he shewed his contempt of all worldly power, and wisdom, and distinction, till the promised period when the converted Heathen should be given him for his spiritual inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for his spiritual possession. The Evangelist thus preserves the climax. He ascends from one gradation of virtue to another, and shews how our Lord, by resisting the tempter, attained to that height of excellence which ought to impress the mind with the greatest veneration. St. Luke wrote for the Gentiles of Achaia. He places before them the same triumph of Christ, and teaches the same doctrine; that he conquered the desire of the pleasures of this life, the love of temporal dominion over the world at large, and all the dazzling glories and triumphs to which that dominion led. But he teaches this doctrine in the manner the most likely to impress the minds of his Gentile readers; for which purpose he changes the order to preserve the appropriate climax, and the gradation of the power of the temptation. Christ conquered the desires of the appetite: this was the first temptation. In the second he was offered that which the Gentiles esteemed the highest point of human happiness, universal dominion over all tania. MATT. iv. 1. and part of ver. 4. 6. 7. 10. 1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness. the kingdoms of the world. And, lastly, he was invited to throw himself from the pinnacle of the temple, and to receive at once all those divine honours which the Heathen paid to their gods, for such a demonstration of divine power would have been immor. talized, and would have placed him above all their other deities. It is well known in what high estimation temporal ambition and sovereignty were at that time held by the unconverted Pagans. The well known compliments which Horace, in various passages, pays to Augustus or the Quos inter Augustus recumbens Carm. lib. iii. Od. 35. Præsens divus habebitur Carm. lib. iii. Od. 5. were not merely expressions of flattery which had only a highly courtly meaning: but they may be considered as conveying the real opinion which the Heathen world entertained of those who obtained universal empire; they esteemed such as gods, and actually, as all ancient history proves, paid them homage, and offered sacrifices to them, and to their statues, as to Gods. St. Luke, therefore, represents our Lord, not only as rejecting the sovereignty over the world, but as refusing to obtain, by a mere exertion of his power, all the glittering homage, and flattering pomp, attendant on such an elevation. This, in the opinion of a Heathen, would be the highest test of virtue. The inference in both instances would be the same; he who performed all the great works recorded in the Evangelists, alike contemned and declined those objects, which, in the opinion of both Jew or Gentile, were the most highly to be prized and valued. From the narrative of the temptation they would learn that Christ was the Lord and giver of greater and more estimable blessings than the luxuries, the honours or the most enviable distinctions and advantages of this life. They would infer that his kingdom was a spiritual kingdom, and to be obtained at the sacrifice of all worldly enjoyments. With him the brightest jewels of a diadem were repentance and faith-the highest honours a broken and contrite beart-and his greatest glory to do the will of his Father who was in heaven, and to receive the submission, the love, and affection of his subjects. Thus will the accounts of the two Evangelists be reconciled. Both relate the same facts-both enforce the same doctrinethe order is different, because each considered the opinions and modes of thinking prevalent among those they addressed, and were anxious to impart the greatest weight to their doctrine. It will be observed, that this interpretation is submitted to the reader, on the supposition that the popular interpretation of the πάσας τας βασιλείας τοῦ κόσμου, (Matt. iv. 8. be the correct reading; that it is rightly rendered, the kingdoms of this world, and that consequently the corresponding phrase in St. Luke, πάσας τὰς βασιλείας τῆς δικουμένης, (Luke iv. 5.) must have the same signification, and are not to be referred principally to the kingdoms into which Judea was at that time divided. The reading proposed by Michaelis in this passage appears conjectural, and Archbishop Lawrence has endeavoured to prove it Quarantania. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live Quaranby bread alone, but by every word 6 for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 7 Jesus said unto him 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. LUKE iv. part of ver. 2. 3. 5. 9. 2-and when they were ended, he afterward hungered. 3 And the devil said unto him If thou be the Son of God5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world 9 And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down. unfounded. It is however so curious, that I shall append to this note both the remarks of the learned German, and the objections of his critic. The reader will then be able to decide. Michaelis is labouring to prove that the Gospel of St. Matthew was composed in Hebrew, and derives one argument in support of his opinion, from Matt. iv. 8. The tempter conducts Christ to the top of a lofty mountain, and shews him πάσας τὰς βασιλείας TOU KOGμov. If we take this in a literal sense, the thing is impossible: if it was a mere illusion, there was no necessity for ascending a lofty mountain. Here then, it appears, that some word was used in the Hebrew original, which was capable of more than one translation: : perhaps, which signifies "the land," as well as the earth: or ban, which, as well as oikeuέvn, may denote the land of Palestine: or, thirdly, which is perhaps the most probable conjecture, it is not improbable that St. Matthew wrote arm mabao ba, that is, all the kingdoms of the Holy Land, and that the translator mistook ay for xay, which in the Septuagint is sometimes rendered by rooμos. It is even possible, as y signifies literally beauty; and rooμog has likewise this sense, that the translation in question was occasioned by a too literal adherence to the original. Now all the kingdoms which existed in Palestine in the time of Christ, could be seen from the top of Mount Nebo. St. Matthew, therefore, meant all the kingdoms of Palestine, which his translator converted into all the kingdoms of the world. Marsh's Michaelis, vol. iii. pt. 1. p. 155. Archbishop Lawrence contends, however, that there is no adequate proof that the Gospel of St. Matthew was compiled in the Hebrew language, and that no arguments can, or ought to be, founded on conjectures of this nature. In reply to this remark of Michaelis, he observes that is only used for Palestine in four instances, three times by Daniel, and once by Jeremiah, and each time metaphorically, as the pleasant or agreeable land; and that the seventy do not thus translate it either literally or metaphorically: and it is not likely that an appella. tion of this peculiar description would have been adopted in a plain narrative. Neither could κóoμoç, in the sense of "the world," be put for xay, the proper meaning of which is an army, and which is only translated roopog by the LXX, when the host of heaven is mentioned; or for ax, in its literal signification of beauty, honour, and glory. But it is not necessary to interpret the word koopos, in the sense of "the world." In Rom. iv. 13. the expression Anpovopóv rẽ kóσμë, is interpreted by Beza, of the land of Canaan; and Glass, in his Philologia tania. CHAPTER II. From the Temptation of Christ, to the commencement of his SECTION I. Further testimony of John the Baptist. JOHN i. 19-341. Julian Pe- 19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent Bethabara. riod, 4739, priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art end of the year. Vulgar Era, 26. thou? Sacra, expressly limits its meaning to denote the land of Ca- 1 Michaelis and Lightfoot begin this part of the history at Having now been inaugurated by the waters of baptism, the In support of the doctrine of the atonement, there is more |