« PreviousContinue »
Lokeis. 4. And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, that The Wil
man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of derness.
5. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and Jerusalem.
setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
thyself down Luke iv. 9. from hence :
For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over
thee, to keep thee:
time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
And Jesus answering said unto him,
mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the tania.
world, and the glory of them; Lekein, 5. in a moment of time $.
ותתאה האחרון ,superior est Deus primus עילאה ה רשון .David inferior
braicæ, vol. ii. p. 271. (f) In vol. i. p. 670, of the Horæ Hebraicæ-
ubique , . .
52 Those who reject the literal interpretation of the account
Luke iv. 6. And the devil said unto him,
QuaranMatt. iv.9. And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee,
tania. Lake iv.6. All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them :
for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will
I give it.
7. If thou therefore wilt worship me, Matt. iv. 9. if thou wilt fall down and worship me, Lake iv. 7. all shall be thine.
8. 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. Matt, iv.11.
Then the devil leaveth him,
departed from him for a season.
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 (Saravās), their accuser (o Alafolos), and their tempter (ο πειράζων).
Mark i. 13. And he was with the wild beasts ; and the angels mi- Quaran
tania. nistered unto him. Matt.iv. 11. and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him”.
54 In this bistory 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.xai ávayaywv, v. 5. and kai nyayev, v. 9. Whereas St. Matthew uses particles, which seem to fix his order; as, Tóte v.5 and #adiv, 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. Bt. 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, newran 753, says Schoetgenius. Horæ 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 13rael, but he will be a terror to all people who profess not the true religion. St. Matthew, therefore, seems to point out to bis Jewish readers, that Jesus, who was the true spiritual Messiah, first conquered all desire for the luxuries of Hfe--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 dis. tinction, 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. Ho 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.
št. Like 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 tbe 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 Gențilos esteemed the highest point of human happiness, universal dominion over all
MATT. iv, 1. and part of ver. 4. 6. 7. 10.
the kingdoms of the world. And, lastly, he was invited to throw
Quos inter Augustus recumbens
Carm, lib, iji. Od. 35.
Præsens divus babebitur
Carm. lib. iii. Od. 5.
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 Taoas taç baouleiaç Toũ koopov, (Matt. iv. 8.) be the correct reading; that it is rightly rendered, the kingdoms of this world, and that coosequently the corresponding phrase in St. Luke, ndoas rds baouleias rñs olkovnévns, (Luke iv. 5.) must have the same signification, and are not to be referred principally to the kingdoms into whicb Judea was at that time divided. The reading proposed by Michaelis in this passage appears conjectural, and Archbishop Lawrence has endeavoured to prove it
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live Quaranby bread alone, but by every word
tania. 6 -for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning tbce: 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 thoy were ended, he afterward hungered. 3 And the devil said unto him If thou be the Son of God
5 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 ndoaç raç baouleias ToŨ koopov. If we take this in a literal sense, the thing is impossible: if it was a mere illusion, there was no pecessity 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 3987, which signifies “ the land,” as well as the earth: or ban, which, as well as olkepévn, may denote the land of Palestine : or, thirdly, which is perhaps the most probable conjecture, it is not improbable that St. Matthew wrote *287 mgbron bo, that is, all the kingdoms of the Holy Land, and that the translator mistook 'ay for xax, which in the Septuagint is sometimes rendered by kóquos. It is even possible, as ay signifies literally beauty; and koguos has likewise this sense, that the translation in question was occasioned by a too literal adher. ence 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 ay is only used for Palestine in four instances, three times by Daniel, and once by Jeremiah, and each time metapborically, 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 kóduos, in the sense of “ the world," be put for xay, the proper meaning of which is an army, and which is only translated róquos by the LXX, when the host of heaven is mentioned ; or for ay, in its literal signi. fication of beauty, honour, and glory. But it is not necessary to interpret the word coguos, in the sense of “the world.” In Rom. iv. 13. the expression kanpovojov Tå kórus, is interpreted by Beza, of the land of Canaan; and Glass, in his Philologia