TEMPTATION. 



of Chiift, or the inftrudioi. and confohtion of his difciples. 

 This objeaion IS ftrcnglhened, when we confider, that 

 Chrift mud have yielded vollmtarily to the mere motion and 

 iuftiRation of the devil, and have been acceffary to his own 

 dilhonour, danger, and temptation. His charafter muit 

 have been ratlur degrad.-d than exalted. The temptations 

 prefcnted to Chrift were fuch in their own nature as coukl 

 not afford evidence or excrcife of his obedience, nor of courle 

 fuitable confohtion or iifeful inftniaion to his foUowers, 

 under real and powerful trials. Moreover, it has been objefted 

 to the common opinion , that it afcribes to the devil the perform- 

 ance of the greatcft miracles, and of things not only preter- 

 natural, but abfurd and impoflible, for fuch we mull regard 

 his (hewing Chrift all the kingdoms of the world from 

 an exceedingly high mountain, and alfo whatever con- 

 ftitutes the glory and grandeur of its kingdoms. If we are 

 under a necefBty of deviating from a literal, and of adopt- 

 ing a {igurative intctpretation of the tranfaftion recorded in 

 th?8 hiftory, we are warranted in fo doing by other inftances 

 of a fimilar kind, that occur ui the facred writings. Thefe 

 writings relate things as aftually done, which neverthelels 

 were only tranfaftcd in a vilion. Cafes of this kind fre- 

 quently occur in fcripture ; for which we might refer to 

 Genefis, xxxii. 30. Hofea, i. and iii. .Teremiah, xiii. xxv. 

 xxvii. Ezekiel, iii. iv. v. vSt. Paul caUs his " being caught 

 up into the third heaven" and " into Paradife, a vifion and 

 revelationof the Lord." (zCor. xii. 1— 4-) In conformity 

 to thefe genera] principles, fome writers of eminene have 

 proceeded in forming their judgment concerning the tempta- 

 tions of Chrift ; and conftraincd by fuch objcftions as we have 

 already briefly ftated, they have abandoned the opinion that 

 thefe temptations are to be undcrftood as outward tranfac- 

 tions, inafmnch as the things therafclves were improbable, 

 and even imprafticable in their own nature ; and inafmuch 

 as the real performance could anfwer no valuable purpofe. 

 Calvin allows, in his note on Matt. iv. 5, that feveral cir- 

 cumftances in this hiftory agreed beft to a vifion ; and the 

 generality of later writers have admitted, that the devil's 

 (hewing to Chrift all the kingdoms of the world, and all 

 their glory, in a moment of time, was done by fome flfti- 

 tious fcenery, from a perfuafion, that it could not be done 

 in any other way. Hence it has been argued by others, 

 tliat if one of the temptations were prefented to Chrift in 

 ▼ifion only, why might not the two others be prefented to 

 him in the fame manner. Adverting to the hiftory itfelf, it 

 is alleged, that the text, inftead of pofitively and exprefsly 

 afferting that the temptation of Chiift was a real outward 

 triflfaftion, contains clear intimations, and even direiSl afler- 

 tions of the contrary'. Thus, in the pafl^age relating to the 

 exhibition of the kingdoms of the world, and all their glory, 

 in one view, and in a fingle point of view, the evangelift is 

 not fpeaking of the real fight of all thefe objefts j but he 

 muft defign to be underftood of what was inftantaneoufly 

 exhibited to the mind. Other plain intimations occur, that 

 Chrift's temptation is not to be underftood as an outward 

 traiifaftion ; and it is alleged by the advocates of this 

 opinion, that all the evangelifts who have mentioned this 

 affair, do, in cxprefs terms, affirm that it paffed fpiritually, 

 and in iiijion, or that it was merely an ideal or mental repre- 

 fcntation. 



Some of thofe bibhcal critics, who confider this hiftory 

 as a recital of vifionaiy reprefentations, maintain that thefe 

 vifions were framed by the devil, and that the temptations 

 are to be afcribcd to his immediate agency : thus denying the 

 power of Satan over the body of Chrift, and granting him 

 a nobler empire, a fovereign influence over the mind. Some 

 have indeed fuppolcd that Chrift's temptation was r.othing 



more than a bare meditation of our Lord upon fuch trials as 

 might polTibly be propofed by the great tempter of man- 

 kind. But it is ueedlefs to make any obfervations on a 

 view of the fubjeft, which is altogether unfupported by the 

 hiftory. 



Another opinion has been propofed by a very able 

 writer, in favour of which he has adduced a variety of argu- 

 ments, that have given fatisfaftion to many pcrfons who 

 have examined this fubjeft. Mr. Fsvmcr (in his Inquiry 

 into the Nature and Defign of Chrift's Temptation in the 

 Wildernefs) reprefcnts our Lord's temptation as befalling- 

 him while he was under a prophetic vifion, of which the 

 Spirit of God himfelf was the immediate and fole authoi. 

 Accordingly he confiders the temptation of Chrift, neither 

 as an outward tranfaftion, nor diabolical delufion, but as a 

 divine vifion. At the time when this event occurred, ouv 

 Saviour was aftually in the wildernefs, and therefore whei: 

 the evangelift fays, that " Jefus was led up of the Spirit 

 into the wildernefs," or as our author more literally renders 

 the words, " then was JeiJus brought (or carried) into the 

 v/ildernefs by the Spirit," he intimates, that into a wildernefs 

 our Lord feemed to himfelf to be carried, or thither he was 

 tranfported in vifion by a prophetic divine afflatus. The ex- 

 prcfhons ufed by the other evangelifts, Mark and Luke, are 

 faid to confirm the explication thus given of the language of 

 St. Matthew. Upon the whole, the meaning of the evan- 

 gelifts will be, " Chrift was brought into a wildernefs (not 

 merely under a divine direftion, but) under the full influence 

 of the prophetic Spirit, making fuitable revelations to his 

 mind, and giving him a view particularly of his future trials." 

 And thefe trials are defcribed as " temptations of the devil," 

 on account of the particular mode of their being revealed, being 

 couched under the figure of Satan coming to him, and urg- 

 ing temptations. Our author, proceeding to examine the 

 proper intention of this prophetic vifion, obferves, that the 

 feveral fcenes which it comprehends, though prefented to 

 Chrift in the form, and capable of anfwering the end, of a 

 prefent trial, were direftly intended as a fymbolical predic- 

 tion and reprefentation of the future difficulties of his office 

 and miniftry. The firft fcene in Chrift's vifion was proba- 

 tionary, ferving to difcover the prefent turn and temper of 

 his mind ; and alfo prophetical, having a reference to his fu- 

 ture miniftry, through the whole courfe of which he was 

 prefTcd with the fame kind of temptations, and refifted them 

 upon the fame principles. This part of the vifion, therefore, 

 conveyed this general inftruftion : " that Chrift, though the 

 fon of God, was to ftruggle with the affiifting hardfhips 01 

 hunger and thirft, and all the other evils of humanity, like 

 the lowefv of the fons of men ; and that he was never to 

 exert his divine power for his own perfonal relief, under the 

 moft preffing difficulties, or for the fupply of his moft urgent 

 occaCons ; but with rcfignation and faitTi to wait for the in- 

 terpofition of God in his favour." The fecond fcene of 

 this vifion was Jerufalern, the metropolis of Judea nnd the 

 feat of power ; it was the temple of Jerufalem, where the 

 Jews expeifted tlie firft appearance of their Mcffiah ; it was 

 the wing of the temple, the eaftern front of it, which com- 

 manded a view of the worfhippers below. From this errii- 

 nence Chrift is required to throw himfelf down, in a depend- 

 ence upon the divine proteftion, that fo his miraculous prc- 

 fervation might give evidence of his divine miflion, ai.d in- 

 duce the numerous worfhippers, who were eye-witneffes of it, 

 to acknowledge him immediately as the Mefliah, viCbly de- 

 fcending from heaven, in a manner agreeable to the expefta- 

 tion of the Jews. Such was the propofal, and the temptation 

 was powerful. The principle upon v/hich he rejefted it was, 

 in its fpirit and meaning, this : " the Scripture forbids us 



to 



