Part 53
(4.) They reproached him as to his moral character, for no other reason, but because he conversed, in a free and friendly manner, with his people, and went about doing them good. If he, at any time, accepted of the least common instances of kindness, or conversed with sinful men, with a design to promote their spiritual advantage, they revile him for it: Thus he says, _The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans, and sinners_, chap. xi. 19.
(5.) It was a matter of common discourse amongst them, that he was a deceiver of the people, though the evidence of truth shone like a sun-beam in every thing that he said and did; Thus it is said _There were much murmuring among the people concerning him; for some said, He is a good man, others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people_, John vii. 12.
(6.) Sometimes they were uneasy at his presence, and desirous to be rid of him, and his ministry. Thus the Gergesenes, because they had suffered a little damage in the loss of their swine, unanimously _besought him to depart out of their coasts_, Matt. viii. 34. Thus they knew not their own privilege, but were weary of him, who was a public and universal blessing to the world.
(7.) Many refused to give him entertainment in their houses, or to treat him with that civility, which a common traveller expects; which occasioned him to complain, that _the foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head_, chap. viii. 20.
(8.) At some times, even before his last sufferings and crucifixion, they attempted to take away his life, and thereby expressed the greatest degree of ingratitude and hatred of him. Their attempts, indeed were to no purpose, because his hour was not yet come: Thus, when he had asserted his divine glory, they not only charged him with blasphemy, but _took up stones to stone him_, John viii. 59. and even his fellow-citizens, among whom he had been brought up, and to whom he had usually _read_ and expounded the scripture, _on the sabbath-days_; these not only _thrust him out of the city_, but _led him to the brow of an hill_, designing to put him to death, by casting him down from it, but _he passed through the midst of them_, and for the present, escaped their bloody design: This was a more aggravated crime, as it was committed by those who were under peculiar obligations to him, Luke iv. 16. compared with 29, 30. Thus _he endured_, not only, as the apostle says, _the contradiction of sinners against himself_, Heb. xii. 3. but the most ungrateful and injurious treatment from those, to whom he had been so great a friend, which was a great addition to his sufferings, so that during his whole life, he might be said to have been, as the prophet styles him, _A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief_, Isa. liii. 3.
3. Our Saviour conflicted with the temptations of Satan: Thus it is said, _He was in all points, tempted, like as we are, yet without sin_, Heb. iv. 15. or, _He suffered being tempted_, chap. ii. 18. though we are not to understand by his being, in all points, tempted, like as we are, that he had any temptations arising in his own soul, as we have, from the corruption of our nature; for this would have been inconsistent with his perfect holiness; and therefore what the apostle says concerning us, that _every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed_, James i. 14. is, by no means applicable to him; but that he was tempted by Satan, is very evident from scripture. Some think, that Satan, was let loose upon him, and suffered to express his utmost malice against him, and to practise all those usual methods whereby he endeavours to ensnare mankind, in those remarkable seasons of his life, namely, in his first entrance on his public ministry, and immediately before his last sufferings; the former of these none deny; the latter some think we have ground to conclude from his own words, in which he says, _The Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me_, John xiv. 30. where it seems, that by the _prince of this world_, he means the devil, inasmuch as he is so called elsewhere, chap. xii. 31. as well as _the god of this world_, 2 Cor. iv. 4. _and the prince of the power of the air_, Eph. ii. 2. If this be the sense of our Saviour’s words, _The prince of this world cometh_, it is as if he should say, I expect that, together with my other sufferings, I shall be exposed to the last and most violent efforts that Satan will make. As he assaulted me when I first entered on my public ministry, so he will do it now I am about to close my work on earth: Then he endeavoured to ensnare me with his wiles; now he will endeavour to make me uneasy with his fiery darts. This was, as it were, _the hour_ of the powers of darkness: and we may suppose, that if they were suffered, they would attempt to discourage our Saviour, by representing to him the formidableness of the death of the cross, the insupportableness of the wrath of God due to sin, and how much it was his interest to take some method to save himself from those evils that were impending: Thus we may suppose, that our Saviour apprehends the tempter as coming: but we may observe he says, he _hath nothing in me_, that is, no corrupt nature, that shall make me receptive of any impressions, arising from his temptations. His fiery darts, though pointed and directed against me, shall be as darts shot against a rock, into which they cannot enter, but are immediately repelled.
But some think, that by _the prince of this world_, our Saviour does not mean the devil, any otherwise than as he instigated his persecutors to accuse, condemn, and crucify him; and that this is most agreeable to the words immediately foregoing, _Hereafter I will not talk much with you_, q. d. I have not much time to converse with you; for he who will betray me, and those that are sent to apprehend me, are ready to come; I must in a very little time, be accused and tried, and, as the consequence hereof, condemned, though they will find nothing in me worthy of death; I say, since it is questioned, whether this be not as probable a sense of this text, as that above mentioned, and therefore that this cannot be reckoned an instance of Christ’s temptation, which was more immediately from Satan, we shall pass it over, and proceed to consider that conflict, which, without doubt, he underwent with the devil, in his first entrance on his public ministry.
This we read of in Matt. iv. 1-11. and Luke iv. 1-13. And, because there is a small difference between these two evangelists, in the account they give of this matter, from whence the enemies of divine revelation take occasion to reproach it, as though it were inconsistent with itself, we shall briefly consider and vindicate it from calumny. We may observe, that Matthew says, _When he had fasted forty days, the tempter came to him_; whereas Luke says, _He was forty days tempted of the devil_; and Mark speaks to the same purpose, Mark i. 13. Matthew seems to speak of his temptations as at the _end of the forty days_; the other two evangelists intimate, that he was tempted more or less, all the forty days. There is no contradiction in these two accounts; Luke only adds a circumstance which Matthew omits, to wit, that Satan assaulted him with various temptations, all the time he was in the wilderness; whereas these, which are recorded by both the evangelists, were towards the end of the forty days.
Again, Matthew, speaking concerning the first of these temptations, introduces the devil, as saying to our Saviour, _If thou be the Son of God command that these stones be made bread_; whereas Luke speaks but of one stone; _Command_ that _this stone be made bread_. This seeming contradiction may easily be reconciled, by considering, that by these _stones_ in Matthew, may be meant one of these stones, which is a very common hebraism; as when it is said, that Jonah _was gone down to the sides of the ship_, Jonah i. 5. that is, one of the sides; and elsewhere it is said, that, when Christ was upon the cross, the _thieves_, which were crucified with him, reviled him, Matt. xxvii. 44. which hebraism Luke explains, when he says, _One of the malefactors_ railed on him, Luke xxiii. 59. So in this temptation, Satan pointing at some large stone, tempted him to turn it into bread; and Matthew intends no more, when he says, _Command that these stones_, that is, one of them, _be made bread_.
Again, we observe another difference in the account given by Matthew, from that given by Luke, respecting the order of the temptations. Matthew speaks of Satan’s tempting him _to fall down and worship him_, as the third and last temptation, which, as it is more than probable, it was; but Luke, inverting the order, lays down this temptation in the second place. However, there is no contradiction between these two; for the credit of an historian is not weakened, provided he relate matters of fact, though he does not, in every circumstance, observe the order in which things were done, especially when nothing material depends upon it; so that, upon the whole, the difference between the accounts of these two evangelists, is so inconsiderable, that it is needless to say any thing farther on that head. We shall therefore proceed to consider Christ’s temptation, as we find it here recorded. And,
1. We may observe the time in which he was exposed thereunto, to wit, immediately after his baptism, when he first entered on his public ministry, having but just before received a glorious testimony, by a voice from heaven saying, _This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased_, Matt. iii. 17. upon which it is said, _Then was he led into the wilderness, to be tempted of the devil_, or, as Mark farther explains it, _Immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness_, Mark i. 12. From whence we may take occasion to infer,
(1.) That God’s children have reason to expect, in conformity to Christ their Head, that, after extraordinary manifestations of divine love, they may sometimes meet with great temptations; so that, as grace is excited by the one, it may be exercised, tried, and the truth thereof more plainly evinced by the other; and, indeed, in us, there is a particular reason for it, which was not applicable to our Saviour, namely, that after great honours conferred upon us, when God is pleased to manifest himself to us, we may be kept, as the apostle says, concerning himself on the like occasion, from being _exalted above measure_, 2 Cor. xii. 7.
(2.) We may, from hence, observe, how Satan shews his malice and envy at God’s people, so that when they are raised nearest to heaven, he will use his utmost endeavours to bring them down to hell; and hereby he shews his opposition to God, by attempting to rob him of that glory, which he designs to bring to himself, by these extraordinary manifestations, as well as his people, of the blessed fruits and effects thereof, whereby he thinks to counteract what God is doing for them.
(3.) As our Saviour was tempted just before his entrance on his public ministry, we learn, from hence; that when God designs that his people shall engage in any great, useful, and difficult work, they are like to meet with great temptations, which God suffers that he may put them upon being on their watch, and fortify them against many other temptations, which they may expect to meet with, in the discharge thereof. Many instances of this we have in scripture; particularly in Moses, when called to go into the land of Egypt, Exod. iv. 1, 10, 13. and the prophet Jeremiah, when sent to a _people, whose faces he was afraid of_, Jer. i. 6, 8. Satan suggested several unwarrantable excuses, to discourage them from undertaking the work to which they were called.
2. The next thing to be observed is, the place in which Christ was exposed to these conflicts with the tempter, namely, the _wilderness_. It is not our business to enquire what wilderness it was, whether one of the smaller wildernesses in the land of Judea, or the great wilderness on the other side Jordan, since the scripture is silent as to this matter; though the latter seems more probable, since there are higher mountains in it than in the other; and we read, that that wilderness, in which Christ was tempted, had in it an exceeding high mountain, from whence the devil shewed him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them. There was in that wilderness mount Nebo, from the top whereof Moses took a view of the whole land of Canaan: But, passing by the consideration of the particular wilderness, in which Christ was tempted, we shall observe, that the place which providence designed for this conflict was a wilderness,
(1.) That he might fast during the time of his being there, that being a place destitute of necessary food: And this was ordered by providence, not only as a particular instance of his humiliation, but that Satan might, from hence, take occasion to suit one of his temptations to his condition, as being an hungred.
(2.) Another reason was, that being separate from all his friends and acquaintance, he might be neither helped nor hindered by them, that so Satan might have the greatest advantage he could desire against him, as solitude is a state most adapted to temptations; and consequently that his affliction herein, and the victory he should obtain, should be more remarkable: As none was with him to offer him any assistance, so none could take occasion to claim a part in his triumph over the adversary.
As to what is said, in the text, concerning his being _led by the Spirit, into the wilderness to be tempted_, we humbly conceive that it is the Holy Spirit who is there intended, as the words seem to import; for it would not be so proper to say, he was led by the impure spirit, the devil, to be tempted of the devil; and Luke says, that, _being full of the Holy Ghost, he was led by the Spirit_, that is, the Holy Ghost, with whom he was filled, _into the wilderness_, Luke iv. 1. Besides this, it doth not seem agreeable to the holiness of Christ, to suppose, that he went into the wilderness at the motion and instigation of the devil; for that would have been an unjustifiable action. We may lawfully go, in the way of temptation, when providence leads us there; but it is not lawful for us to go within the verge of Satan’s temptations, by his own instigation. And this seems farther probable, inasmuch as it is said, that, _after the devil was departed from him, he returned in_, or _by the power of the Spirit, into Galilee_, ver. 14. If he returned by the power of the Holy Spirit out of the wilderness, have we not equal ground to conclude that he was led by him into it at first.
But if it be said, that he did not go into the wilderness by the instigation of the devil, but was carried thither with violence by him: though this would clear our Saviour from the guilt of going by the devil’s persuasion in the way of temptation; yet we can hardly allow that God would suffer the devil to have so much power over Christ’s body, as to carry him where he pleased, by a violent motion.
If it be replied to this, that the devil might as well be said to carry him into the wilderness, as to take him up into the holy city, and set him upon a pinnacle of the temple, by a violent motion; in which sense some understand that passage in the second temptation, wherein it is said, that the devil did so, in ver. 5. what answer may be given to this, will appear from what may farther be said, when we speak of this temptation in particular.
3. We shall now consider the three temptations, mentioned in this scripture, which he was exposed to. And that,
(1.) More generally; and accordingly we may observe,
_1st_, That the two first of them were very subtil: so that some would hardly have discerned wherein the sin lay, had he complied with them; but that will be considered under a following head. We need only remark, at present, that herein the devil acted like a deceiver, and appeared to be, as he is elsewhere called, _The old serpent_. In the third temptation, he openly discovered his own vileness, and blasphemously usurped that glory which is due to God alone, when he tempted our Saviour to fall down and worship him.
_2dly_, In these temptations, he insinuates, that some advantage would accrue to our Saviour from his compliance therewith. This he generally does when he tempts us, wherein he makes an overture of some advantage which we shall gain by our compliance. The advantage he proposed, by the first temptation, was, that hereby he might prevent his starving with hunger. By the second, he proposed, that he might gain popular applause, by casting himself down from the temple, among the people that were walking near it, that they might admire him for his wonderful action; and, in both these temptations, he urges him to give a proof of his being the Son of God, by which means his doctrine might be more readily received. In the third temptation, indeed, the advantage is altogether carnal, and such as, had Satan considered the holiness of the Person he was speaking to, and his contempt of the kingdoms of the world, and the glory thereof, he might easily have supposed that our Saviour would have despised the overture, as well as abhorred the action.
_3dly_, We may observe, that in the second temptation, the devil refers to a promise contained in scripture, and so puts him upon that which carries in it the appearance of duty, namely, his depending upon the divine protection, in expectation that God would give the angels charge over him: but he quotes the scripture fallaciously, by leaving out a very material thing contained in it, _He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways_, Psal. xci. 11. whereby it is implied, that none have a right to depend on the divine protection, but they who are in the way of duty, which Christ would not have been, had he complied with this temptation.
_4thly_, Another thing we observe is, that our Saviour not only refused to comply with the temptation, in all these three instances, but he assigned a reason of his refusal, whereby it appears that he did this with judgment; and hereby we are instructed not only to refuse to comply with Satan’s temptations, but we should be able to give a reason of our refusal. And, as we farther observe, that our Saviour answers all these temptations, by referring to scripture, which he adhered to, as a rule to direct his conduct, and therein expressed the greatest deference to it: so he teaches us to do the same, as the Psalmist says, _By the word of thy lips I have kept me from the paths of the destroyer_, Psal. xvii. 4. it is by the _sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God_, that we _quench all the fiery darts of the wicked_, Eph. vi. 16, 17.
(2.) We shall now proceed to consider the three temptations in particular, together with our Saviour’s answer to each of them, and that in the order in which they are related by the evangelist Matthew, in chap. iv.
_First_, The first temptation was, that he would prove his being the Son of God, by commanding stones to be made bread. The subtilty of this temptation consists,
1. In that it seemed not only lawful, but necessary, for Christ, on some occasions, to give a proof that he was the Son of God; and his working miracles was the way by which this was to be done. And it would not seem, to some, unlawful for him to work a miracle in turning stones into bread, since we read, among other miracles, of his multiplying the loaves and fishes to feed the multitude; therefore why may he not produce bread, in a miraculous manner, as well now, as at any other time?
2. Satan puts him upon working this miracle, from a principle of self-preservation which is a duty founded in the law of nature, to supply himself with necessary food, being an hungred; and, if it was lawful for him to produce bread to feed others, was it not lawful to do the same for his own subsistence, especially since he was in a place in which food was not to be obtained by any other means?
3. He pretends to have a great concern for our Saviour’s welfare, that so he might not perish with hunger: thus he thought to gain an advantage over him, by a pretence of friendship, as he often does in those temptations he offers to us, to promote our own welfare by unlawful means.
Let us now consider wherein the snare lay, which our Saviour was thoroughly apprized of, and in what respects he would have sinned, had he complied with this temptation. This will appear, if we consider,
(1.) That it was not lawful for him to work a miracle to gratify the devil; and that for this reason in particular, because it would have been contrary to the general end and design of his working miracles, which was only for the advantage of his people, who are the proper subjects of conviction thereby; for him to work them with any other design, would have been to prostitute a sacred ordinance, or to apply it to whom it did not belong. When _the woman of Canaan_ came to him, beseeching him to work a miracle, in casting the devil out of her daughter; she being not a member of the Jewish church, or one _of the lost sheep of the house of Israel_, our Saviour tells her, _It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and cast it unto dogs_; and that he was not _sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel_, Matt. xv. 24, 26. that is, he was only to work miracles for the conviction of those who were the proper subjects thereof; and, doubtless, he would not have wrought this miracle at her request, had she not been a proper subject of conviction, which she was, as an elect person, though not by nature an Israelite. Now, to apply this to our present purpose, the devil was not a subject of conviction, and therefore Christ was not obliged to prove himself the Son of God to him; for which reason he would have sinned, had he complied with this temptation.
(2.) Had it been otherwise, it doth not seem necessary, at this time, for him to prove himself to be the Son of God, since that had, but a little before, been sufficiently attested, by a voice from heaven; and therefore to work a miracle to confirm it at present, would argue a disbelief of that testimony.
(3.) For Christ to work a miracle for his own subsistence, seems disagreeable to the main design of his working miracles, which, as was before hinted, was his people’s conviction that he was the Messiah; and therefore it does not sufficiently appear that he ever provided for the necessities of himself, or his family in such a way.[213] But suppose he had at any time, subsisted himself by working a miracle, it would have argued a distrust of the providence of God to have supplied his hunger, at present, that way; as though God, who had hitherto preserved him without food, could not have continued so to do, as long as he was in the wilderness. And it would also have been contrary to one design of his being led there by the Spirit; which was, that he might humble himself by fasting, as well as conflict with Satan’s temptations. Thus concerning the first temptation that was offered by the devil.
Let us now consider Christ’s answer to it. This is contained in ver. 4. _It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God._ The scripture here referred to, is in Deut. viii. 3. where we have the very same words; which, as they are applied by our Saviour to repel this temptation, imply in them two things: