f-

foT" We founding if a College. ir^iftisfZolcrrvjP

-Y^ILE«¥]MH¥EI^S2inf-

A N

INQUIRY INTO THE
NATURE and DESIGN
O F
Christ's Temptation

IN THE

WILDERNESS.

The Third Edition, with Additions.

By HUGH FARMER.

LONDON:
Printed Tor J. Buckland, in Pater-nofter Row.
[Price Three Shillings and Sixpence.]

t iii ]

THE
PRE FACE.
tfHE various expojitions hitherto
-*¦ given of our Saviour s temptation
in the wildernefs, being attended with
confderable difficulties \ any modefl at
tempt to difcover and eftablifh one lefs
exceptionable, may hope to be received
with candour. How far the author of
the following Jheets may have fucceeded
in fuch an endeavour, is fubmitted to
the judgment of the pub lick. His mo
tives, he perfuades himfelf, are right,
however he may have failed in the
execution of his undertaking.
Many former writers upon this fub-
jetl, have reje&ed the literal fcheme,
and have ajferted it to be a diabolical
virion, or illujion ; but no?ie of them
which have fallen under the author s
notice, have conjidered it as a divine
A 2 viiion :

[ iv ]
vifion a : the want of which has pre
vented a difcernment of the wife and
benevolent intention of thefe vijionary
fcenes, as Jymbolical predictions andre-
prefentations of the principal trials and
difficulties attending Chrijl's publick
minifiry. 'Thefe are the peculiar points^
which the prefent performa7ice endea*
vours to efiablifj.
But though the interpretation here
advanced be new a, which may be a fuf-
ficient reafon for fubmitting it to pub
lick examinatioii ; yet unlefs it appears
to have it's foundation in truth, and to
fet an obfcure part of the evangelical
hiflory in a lefs exceptionable, more
ufeful and honourable light, the author
wifhes it may be rejeSled.
He will only add, that if the prin
ciples, upon which this interpretation is.
founded, are jujl, they are applicable
to various pajfages in the Old Tefta-
ment, and may enable us to obviate
the objections, to which the literal con*
Jlruffion of them is liable^
» See the Inquiry, Seft. II. p. 42, note r.
Walth3mftow, T H T?
June 23, 1761, * *1 **t.

C v ]

THE
CONTENTS. SECT. I.
O TAT ING the objections again/1 the com-
¦ monly received interpretation of the hiftory
of ChrijTs temptation, as a narrative of out'
ward tranfaStions.
This interpretation
I. Is unfui table to the fagacity and policity
of Satan ; becaufe his perfonal appearance could
ferve only to fiuflrate his intention, p. 3. (and
he^ did 7iot appear under any borrowed form,
either human or angelic, p. 4, note b.) This
obfervation applied to thejirjl temptation, p. 7 ;
to the fecond, p. 8 ; to the third, p. 11. The
devil was not doubtful whether jefus was the
Mefjiah ; nor would a doubt of that kind account
for his tempting Chrijl in an open manner, p. 1 3,
note \
II. Afcribes to Chrift a conduSl inconfftent
with the dignity and fanblity of his charaSler,
p, 14; deftroys his merit in refifling the temp
tations propofed by the devil, p. 17 ; and re-
prefents him as fetting a dangerous exatnple to
his followers, 16, 20, 21. The reafons com^
A 3 monly

[ vi ]
monly afigned for Chrift's fubmitting to be
tempted by the devil in the manner generally
Juppojed, examined, p. 1 7. The firfl reafon, ib.
the fecond, p. 20.
III. Afcribes to the devil the performance of
the great efl miracles, p. 22; the power of
a fuming a vijible form, ib. of conveying men
through the air, ib. and of fhewing them (not
a Jingle country only, but) all the kingdoms of
the world, p. 25, in a Jingle infant of time,
p. 29. The devil could not take Chriji to the
wing of the fewijh temple without a miracle,
p. 23, note c. The abfurdity of afcribing to
the devil the power of performing any miracles,
p. 29. Archbipop Seeker's folution of this ob
jection, p. 3 1 , note °.
IV. Afcribes to the devil the performance of
things abfurd and impojfible, fuch as fhewing
Chrifi all the kingdoms of the world from ait
exceeding high mountain, p. 32. In what cafes
we are to have recourfe to a figurative Jenje in
the interpretation of Scripture ; and how we are
to dijlinguifh what is to be literally, and what
figuratively underfiood, p. 33. Vfions or re-
prejentations made to the mind of a prophet,
related in Scripture as outward tranfaSlions,
p. 34. clhe reajon of this aJJigned,Y>'25' He™
to dijlinguifh the narrative of a vifion from that
of an outward occurrence, p. 37. Chrifi' s
temptation could not be an outward occurrence,
P-38- V. Is given up in part by tho/e who defend it,
p. 38. VI. Is

[ vii ]
VI. Is inconfifient with the letter of the text*
p. 40. SECT. II.
Shewing that Chrifi' s temptation was not d
diabolical vijion, p. 42.
Le Clerc and all Jornier writers, whether
they Juppojed Chrifi' s temptation by the devil td
be a vijion or not, did equally refer it to the agency
of that evil fpirit, ib. note '. The fuppojition
of Chrifi 's temptation being a diabolical vijion i
in one view preferable to the common hypothefis,
p. 43 ; but in all other refpecvs liable to equal or
greater difficulties, p. 45. The right under -
flanding of Chrifi' s temptation, the Jullefi con-<
futation of both thefe fchemes of interpretationi
p. 50. That the temptation of Chrifi was not a
mere meditation of our Lord upon fuch trials as
might poffibly be propofed to him by the great
tempter of mankind, p. 50, note bi
SECT. III.
Explaining the true nature of Chrifi 's temp
tation, p. 51.
Since it was neither an outward iranfaclion,
nor diabolical illufion, it mufi be a divine vifioiii
This argued from Mat. iv. 1. Then was Jefus
led up of the Spirit into the vvildernefs. Thefe
words do not mean, that Jefus went into the
wildernefs in perfon at this time, he being per-
finally there already, p. 52. The d'fiferent ex-*
plications of thefe words given by the advocates
of the common hypothefis confidcred, p< 55. The
words ought to be rendered, Then was Jefus
brought into a wildernefs (<jto tS ¦s-v;uV.a1©j)
A 4 by

I vlii ]
by the Spirit, p. $•/. The Spirit denotes mi~
racidous gijts in general, p. 59, a prophetic illu
mination in particular, p. 61, and revelations
in the way of vijion, ib. In this lafi Jenfe oj
the phraje, Chrifi was brought into a wildernefs
by the Spirit, p. 61. The evangelifi is not
Jpeaking oj any one wildernefs in particular,
p. 62. The foregoing explication of St. Mat
thew's language jujhfied by the uje of the fame or
fimilar language in the prophet Ezekiel, jrom
whom it appears, that to be brought to a place
by the Spirit, does not denote any real local re
moval, but being tranfported to that place by
mental reprefentation, or in vijion, p. 64.
The language of St. Mark, ch. i. 12, The
Spirit driveth him into a wildernefs, exprejfes
a divine agency upon the mind of Chrifi, and
naturally conveys to us an idea of a prophetic
rapture, or extacy, during which he thought
himfelf tranfported into a dreary wildernefs,
p. 68. What St. Mark means, when he fays,
Jefus was there in that wildernefs forty days,
p. 70.
St. Luke's account explained, Jefus being
full of the Holy Spirit was brought into a
wildernefs (h rS •amu/.xalj) by or in the Spirit,
ch. iv. 11. p. 72. In the Spirit, denotes a
prophetic afflatus or infpiration, p. 73. and
therefore Chrifi was not brought into a wil
dernefs in perfon, p. 74. The phraje, in the
Spirit, is frequently applied to revelations in the
way of vijion, or of prophetic Jcenery and repre
fentation, p. 75- Such language common in the
5 age

[ > J
Age of infpiration, p. 79. The Scripture fome*
times diflinguifhes between an extacy and a vifion,
p. 80, note k.
Chrifi was brought or carried into a wil
dernefs by a divine afflatus in a prophetic vifion,
that he might be tempted by the devil, and he
was Jo tempted during his vifion ; and therefore
what is called his temptation by the devil, was
a divine vifion and revelation, the efi'ecl of that
prophetic afflatus he was now under, and it's
declared intention, p. 80. All the parts of the
temptation, as well the fiveral propofals made to
Chrifi, as the different fcenes prefented to him,
were merely ideal and vjionary, p. 82. The
prejence and agency of Satan were not real, but
apparent, or a part of the prophetic fcenery :
and the hifiory reprefents Satan as coming to
Chrifi, and tempting him, and removing him
from one place to another, becaufe the vifion
confified of a reprefentation of Satan as appear
ing and ailing in this manner, and it was ne-
ceffary the fcenes fhould be defcribed juft as they
were reprefented to Chrifi, p. 85. Our Lord
was in the wildernefs when the temptation ended
as well as when it began, p. 82. Of the devil's
departing from Chriff, and doing it for a
feafon, p. 88. The fiveral evangelifis who re
late Chrifi 's temptation, reprefenting it as a
divine vifion ; their authority may be added to
the other arguments before urged a^ainfl it's
being either an outward tranjattion, or an illufion
oj Satan, p. 90. The hifiory not a con fu fed
mixture of Jad7s and viflons, ib. note *. Chrifi' s
vifion

t x J
vifion or revelation continued through the entire1
Jpace of forty days, ib.
SECT. IV.
Pointing out the proper intention of Chrifi 's
prophetic vifion ; and fhewing, that the fiveral
fcenes which it contains, though prejented to him
in the form, and capable of anfwering the end
of a prejent trial, were directly intended as a
jymbolical prediction and reprej'entatw?i of the
principal trials and difficulties of his publick
minijlry, p. 92.
Four preliminary objervations.
1.) Chrifi was liable to temptations, p. 93.
2.) This vijion might poffibly contain a prejent
trial, p. 95. In a vifion, the prophet had the
regular exercije of his underfianding, ib. and
was affected with the Jcenes of it in the fame
manner as if they were realities, ib. This
jhewn in fiveral inflances, particularly in the
cafes of Abraham and Peter, p. 98.
3 .) This vifion was directly defigned as a pre
diction and Jymbolical reprefentation of the
temptations of Chrifi s future minijlry, p. 101.
This is argued Jrom the prophetic and Jymbolical
nature of vfions in general, ib. and the perfect
correfpondence between the figns in this vifion,
and the things they fignificd and reprtjented,
p. 102.
4. J Such Jcenes as this vifion contains, whe
ther confidered as probationary or prophetical,
might be prefented to Chrifi by a divine hand,
without any unworthy imputation upon God,
p. 103. The

[ xi ]
The account here given of Chrifi 's tempta
tion, both as a prejent trial and as an emblem
and prefiguration of his future conflicts, jufiified
by a difiinct and particidar examination oj its
Jeveral Jcenes, p. 106.
Ift. fcene. In this, Chrifi is tempted by the
devil to turn filones into bread, to Jatisjy his
hunger : which was dejigned to- fljew, that he
was to ft ' niggle with all the hardfhips of poverty,
and the other evils of humanity, but never, not
even on the moft preffing occafions, to exert his
miraculous power j'or bis own perfonal relief,
p. 106.
Ild. fcene. In this, Chrifi is tempted by the
devil to cafi himfielf down from a wing of the
temple at Jerufalem ; to fhew, that he was not
to expofe his perfon to danger without neceffity,
from a confidence in the divine protection ; and
that he was to avoid an ofientatious difplay of
his divine powers, without fiiffering others to
prefcribe to him, what miracles jhould be wrought
for their conviction, p. 115.
Hid. fcene. In this, Chrifi is tempted
with the offer of all the kingdoms of the
world and all their glory \ to fall down and
worfhip the devil ; to Jhew, that he woidd be
called upon, in confequenc? of the mfiaken notions
of his countrymen concerning the MeJJiah's king
dom, to proflitute himfslf, with all his divine en
dowments, to the Jervice of Satan, for the
fake of worldly advancement, or in order to afcend
the throne c/Tfrael, and to fipread his conquejls
over all the heathen nations, p. 97.
5 The

The peculiar propriety of this vifion,^ confidered
as a reprefentation of the difficulties of his office
and minijlry, at this feafon, p. 129.
SECT. V.
Three objervations upon the Jore going account
of Chrifi 's temptation, p. 133.
1.) It obviates all the objections made to the
common interpretation, and jufiifies the wifdom
of God in this difpenfation, p. 133.
2.) It exalts the character of Chrifi, and
confirms our faith in his divine miffion, p.
J37- 3.) It affords ample confolation and infiruc-
tion to his difciples, under thofe manifold and
great temptations, with which they may be called
out tofiruggle, p. 143.
APPENDIX I.
/CONTAINING Jar t her objervations upon
^ the Jubjebt of the preceding Inquiry, and an
anjwer to objections, p. 148.
I.
Dr. Clarke's and Dr. Benfions Jolutions of
the difficulties attending the hifiory of Chrifi' s
temptation confidered, p. 149. Remarks on a
paffage of Dr. Macknight, who pleads, that
the literal fenfe of the hifiory of Chrifi' s temp
tation is agreeable to the common agency of evil
fpirits, p. 1 Si ll. The

[ xiii ]
II.
The allowing Chrifi' s temptation to be a vifion,
will not affect the hifiory of his miracles, or any
other parts of Scripture which ought to be under-
fiood literally, p. 159. III.
This vifion s containing Juch reprejentations of
the power of the devil in making Chrifi an offer
of the world, as are not agreeable to his real
nature -, no objection to the divinity of the vijion,
p. 163. The images in divine vifions have often
no correjponding objects in nature, or exact ex
ternal archetypes, but are always proper Jymbols
of what they are deflgned to reprefent, ibid.
IV.
New proofs of the prophetic and jymbolical
nature oj vifions in general, in order to confirm
the main principle oj the Inquiry, viz. that the
vijion of which it treats, was a prediction and
emblem of the principal temptations of Chrifi 's
minijlry, p. 168. V.
How Jar, and in what Jenfe, this vifion con
tained a prejent trial, p. 172. The objections
to this view of it do not affect its main inten
tion, ibid. VI.
Why the perfonal appearance of the devil to
our Lord, would have been improper upon the
common hypothefis concerning his temptations ;
and yet his apprehended prefience proper , fuppofing
them to be a divine vifion ; and why the confide- rations

[ xiv ]
rations which diminijh the force of the fecond
temptation in particular, upon the former fuppo-
fition ; do not affect it upon the latter, p. 176.
VII.
The offer of all the kingdoms of the world,
which the devil made to Chrifi in the third
temptation, might appear real in the vifion,
though it could not have donefo in other circum-
flances, p. 180.
J VIII.
How far the mind of a prophet was pafilve,
and how Jar it was free, during a vifion,
p. 183.
V IX.
The Inquiry, by Jreely urging the objections
againfi the literal fienfe of Chrifi' s temptation,
gives no advantage to infidelity, p. 185.
APPENDIX II.
sf Paraphrafe upon St. Matthew's account
•**¦ of Chrifi s temptation, agreeable to the
foregoing interpretation of it, p. 189.

ERRATUM.
The reader is defired to blot out the parenthefis, and the
words included in it, p. 4, note >>, line 1.

AN

i| K H K K ?| ff *j&
1 1 & n & s sec jbc f T
*P 3HC M M « 3HE « M

A M

INQUIRY

INTO t h

Nature and Design of Christ's
Temptation in the Wildernefs.

Mat. IV. i— ii.
I i Then was Jefus led up of the Spirit intd
the wildernefs, to be tempted of the devil.
2. And when he had fafied Jorty days dnd
forty nights, he was afterwards an hungred.
3. And when the tempter came to him, he
Jaid, If thou be the Son of God, command that
thefe fiones be made bread.
4. But he anfwered and faid, It is written,
Man fhall not live by bread alone i but by every
word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
5. Then the divil taketh him up into the holy
city, andfetteth him on apinnacle of the temple,
B 6, And

[ * ]
6. And faith unto him, If thou be the Son of
God, cafi thyfelf down : for it is written, He
Jhall give his angels charge concerning thee, and
in their hands they jhall bear thee up, lefi at any
time thou dafh thy foot againfi a fione.
7. J ejus Jaid unto him, It is written again,
Thou Jhalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
8. Again, the devil taketh him up into an ex
ceeding high mountain, andfheweth him all the
kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them :
9. And faith unto him, All thefe things will
I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worjhift-
me. 10. Then faith Jefus unto him, Get thee
hence, Satan : for it is written, Thou jhalt
worfhip the Lord thy God, and him only jhalt
thou Jerve.
1 1 . Then the devil leaveth him, and be-?
hold, angels came and minifiered unto him. See
likewife Mark i. 12, 13. Lukeiv. 1 — 13.
ff%£$y\ H E dete&ion of error being a
nag *j^ O
6 T S great help towards the difcovery of
3&&&JNf truth ; it will be proper, before we
attempt to fettle the true nature and defign
of ChrihVs temptation, to confider what ob
jections lye againfi the feveral explications,
which have hitherto been given of this part
of the gofpel hifiory. Should thofe objections appear

t 3 ]
appear to be juft, we mail, at leaft, fee the
neceffity of looking out for fome new inter
pretation. SECTION I.
IT has been generally fuppofed, that the
evangelical hifiory of our Lord's tempta
tion is to be underftood, as a narrative of
outward tranfaclions : that the devil tempted
Chrifi in perfon, appeared to him in a vifible
form, fpoke to him with an audible voice,
and removed him corporeally from one place
to another : which opinion feems liable to
the following, amongfl other objections.
I.), It is unfuitable to the fagacity and po
licy of the evil fpirit. " Why the devil
" would at all affault our Lord, and what
" advantage he could poffibly hope to gain
over him" a, has always been acknowledged
to be a great difficulty, by the advocates of
the common interpretation. But this diffi
culty is greatly increafed by a circumftance,
which they generally overlook, viz. the
manner in which, on their hypothefis, the
devil propofed his temptations to our Saviour.
For this hifiory, if underftood of outward
occurrences, manifeftly fuppofes, that the
* See Dr. Clarke as cited in the appendix, N*. I.
B 2 tempter

I 4 ]
tempter came to him in perfon; and ap
peared before him in a vifible form, and
under his own proper character. It repre-
fents him as acting under this charader, ..by
propofing and urging temptations, fuch \as
could proceed from none but an evil being.
Now with what profpedt of fuccefs, could
he tempt our Lord, if he thus expofed him-
felf to open view ? By a perfonal and un-
difguifed appearance, he can never hope to
prevail over the feebleft virtue. It is gene
rally admitted, that, to fucceed againfi frail
mortals, he has recourfe to Jecret Juggeftions,
fuch as they do not diftinguifh from the
natural and genuine offspring of their own
minds : and thus conceals the hand which
offers the temptation. Could he then expect,
that the illuftrious perfonage, whom he ac
knowledges as the Son of God, and who had
been fo lately proclaimed by a voice from
heaven as fuch, and who was filled with the
Spirit without meafure, fhould comply with
his temptations, notwithftanding his appear
ing to him in perfon, fo as to be certainly
known and diftinguifhed under his proper
character" ? If
t> To evade this difficulty, (which molt perfons have felt,)
fome have conjectured, that the devil now appeared under
feveral borrowed characters and forms ; and by this impofition upon

[ 5 ]
If we proceed to examine the particular
nature of Chrift's fucceffive temptations, it
will
upon our Saviour, hoped the more eafily to convince him of
the innocence and reafonablenefs of his propoials, and to
deceive him into a compliance. The late very learned
Archbifhop of Canterbury in particular maintains, " that
" the devil did not appear what he was, for that would
" entirely have frustrated his intent." Serm. Vol. II. p. 1 14.
Dr. Chandler likewife fays, " that the devil appeared pro-
" bably not as him/elf, that would have been at once to have
" prevented the effeCt of his temptation." Serm. Vol. III.
p. 178. Both thefe writers imagine, that the devil, when he
came to Chrift in a vifible form, aflumed the refemblance of
a good angel. (Chandler, p. 177, 178. Seeker, p. 113.)
Many others have conjeCtured, that he appeared before
Chrift in the form of a man. Conjectures are to be regarded,
according to the degree in which they are reafonable or
plaufible. If they are merely arbitrary, and made from ne-
ceffity, or becaufe men can not get over a difficulty without
their affiftance ; and efpecially if they are not only ground-
lefs, but in any degree improbable ; they ought not to be
received, and fhould be regarded only as confeffions of the
diftrefs of thofe who have recourfe to them. With regard to
the particular conjectures in queftion ; it is natural to a/k,
What foundation is there for them ? Where do we read of the
devil's appearing to Chrift either as a good man, or as a
good angel, or under any other difguife ? Is there any one
circumftance of the hiftory, that favours the fuppolition of
his appearing before Chrill under a borrowed character ? If
there be no foundation for this conjecture, it muft be confi
dered as arbitrary, and made- from neceffity alone. Farther,
it is not only unfupported by the hiftory, but contradicted by
many circumftances of it, and is highly improbable in itfelf.
How could the devil hope to deceive our Lord, by trans
forming himfelf into an angel of light, when his very tempt
ing him to idolatry, was an evident demonftration of his,
being a fiead of hell I Orj how in this cafe could he hope to
B 3 pafs

will appear yet more incredible, that -they
fhould be propofed to him with any profpect of
pafs for a good man ? Could he even tvifh that Chrift mould
miftake him for a man ; when it muft have made his prorflife
of univerfal empire appear ridiculous ? With regard to pur
Saviour ; is it likely, that he confidered any one of the
temptations, and leaft of all the laft, as proceeding from any
good being, whether human or angelic ; when he rejeCted them
all as evil and impious in their very nature, and the laft with
the higheft deteltation ? Is it not, on the contrary, more
likely that Chrift afcribed thefe temptations to fome evil
being? This conclufion, which is fo probable in its own
nature, is confirmed by the hiftory ; which reprefents
the tempter as appearing and aCting under his proper cha
racter ; and confequently without afFeCting any difguife.
And inftead of giving any the leaft intimation of Chrift's
being ignorant >vho it was that tempted him ; the hiftory
even reprefents Chrift as knowing him, and, as occasion.
required, calling him by name, Get thee behind me, Satan,
Luke iv. 8, This wa6 faid in anfwer to the fecond tempta
tion, according to the order of St. Luke, who, though we
allow he has perphaps negleCted the true order, would not
have done it, if thereby he had led us into an error with
regard to our Saviour, and reprefented him as knowing the
tempter fooner than he really did. The gentlemen whom we
oppofe, univerfally allow, that Chrift knew who propofed the
third temptation ; and this, if ic does not create a prefumption
that he knew him fooner, certainly deprives them of the bene
fit of their conjeCturt, where they moft want it, in accounting
for that temptation.
The foregoing objections conclude with peculiar force
againft the two eminent writers mentioned at the beginning
of this note. Dr. Chandler acknowledges, " that Chrift
" was folicited to fin, and to crimes of a very heinous nature,"
p. 176, 2oz : '« that in the firi! temptation, he well dif-
'* cerned the treachery of the devil's counfel," p. 193, and
that the imfoflor was detecied, p. 196. With regard to
the fecond temptation, he affirms, «< that Chrift underftood •* the

[ 7 ]
pf fuccefs, in the manner plainly implied in
the literal fcheme of interpretation. In the
firft temptation, in which he is folicited tq
turn ftones into bread ; nothing is promifed
on the part of Satan to gain Chrift's confent -,
|br the miraculous ad he was prompted to
perform, depended entirely upon the exer-
" the defign of the devil's fuggeftion, and the fallacy of his
" argument ; and that he was tempted to an aCt of real in-
" faience and impiety, of criminal prefumption and folly,"
p. 209, zio, zi 1. And Dr. Seeker fays, with regard to the
fame temptation, " Chrift clearly difcerned the intention of
" the tempter," p. 116. Concerning the third temptation,
Dr. Chandler juftly obferves, " The prefent fuggeftion was
" an a£t of immediate impiety againft God," p. 221, 222.
And at this time, according to Dr. Seeker, p. 119, Chrift
" told the hypocrite," (meaning the devil) " he knew him
" well for the adverfary of God." Now what end could it
anfwer for the devil to appear under any difguife before
Chrift, who fo well knew his proper character in the very
firft temptation, as well as in every fucceeding one »
Why did he perfonate a good angel, when openly tempting
Chrift to Jin, and making undifguifed proposals to commit,
what appeared to Chrift, and could not but appear to every
one, the moft audacious and fhocking aCt of impiety ? Surely
if the devil had aflumed the difguife of a celeflial fpirit, he
would have taken better care to preferve that character, than
to demand for himfelf the worlhip due to God alone. In
a word, the fuppolition of the devil's appearing before Chrift
as a good angel, is not only deftitute of every fhadow of
fupport, but highly abfurd in i felf, and repugnant to the
hiftory. I only add, that if the devil had difguifed himfelf
with the view here fuppofed, thefe temptations would have
been trials rather of the underflanding, than of the heart, or of
our Lord's piety and virtue ; the former of which is very
different from the fcripture idea of temptations.
B 4 tion

[ 8 ]"
tion of his own power. Indeed, fo far as
this miracle was proper to fatisfy Chrifl's
hunger, it feems to carry its own inforce-
ment. But certainly he would not be the
more, but the lefs, ready to fatisfy his
hunger by this means, upon the open appli-i
cation of an implacable enemy, and a fiend
pf hellc. This was a circumftance, that
could anfwer no other end, than to create
a prejudice againfi the propofal, and furnifh,
a reafon for rejeding it. Now could the
devil intend to defeat his own temptation ?
In the fecond temptation, (here, as in the
fequel, I follow the order of St. Matthew,)
the devil urges Chrift to throw himfelf head--
long from the fummit of the temple at Je-
rujalem. In this, as in the former cafe, he
does not undertake to do any thing himfelf
for the honour or fervice of Chrifi -, and yet
folicits him to follow his diredions. How-r
ever, there is this difference in the two
cafes i. in the former, the thing itfelf which
' This reafoning has lately received the fanciion of a writer
pf diftinguifhed learning and abilities. For fpeaking of Da
vid's numbering the people, he fays, If the devil had bid him
do it, J f'ippofe he might have feen the cloven foot, and vjoulj
fcarce have followed the meafure for the fake of the advifer. Dr.
Chandlers Review of the hiftory of David, p. 235. This
reafoning concludes more ftrongly in the cafe of Chrift, than
in that of Da-id, becaufe the devil is not fuppofed to have
appeare4 in perfo^n to the latter.
was

[ 9 ]
was advifed, might have been the means of
his fupport ; in the latter, it might have if-
fued in his deftrudion. Should it be urged,
" that if Chrifi had thrown himfelf down
from the top of the temple, and been pre-
ferved unhurt ; his miraculous prefervation
would have been an atteftation to his charac
ter as the Son of God :" I admit, that the
propofal in this view of it, was in itfelf very
alluring. But under the peculiar circum-
ftances here attending it, the devil could
fcarce hope to fee it embraced. The infe
rence drawn from Ch rift's miraculous prefer
vation, muft be very uncertain upon the
common hypothefis, which admits, that the
devil did by his own power remove Chrift
corporeally from the wildernefs to the top of
the temple *. For what greater power could
be neceflary to the prefervation of Chrift, in
throwing himfelf down from that eminence j
than the devil is fuppofed to have exerted in

d Thus Grotius in particular compares this cafe to that of
Philip, who was caught away by the Spirit from, the eunuch
to Azotus. On Mat. iv. 5. he fays, ^a.pa,\a,u.Cdpe<, ut
Philippum Dei Spiritus ACts viii. 39, And DoCtor Benfon
affirms, (Life of Chrift, p. 35.) that the devil hurried Chrift
through the air, and carried him from the voildernefs to the
temple. Some however underftand the word, Ta.faKci./^Cdv&,
in this place, in a different fenfe. See below, p. 15, note ',
and p. 23, note c, raifing

r 10 j
railing him to* it ? How then could it have
been more certainly concluded from hence,
that Jefus was the Son of God ; than that
the devil was fo too, had he thought fit to
make the pretention ? Befides, if Chrift had
cafl himfelf down from the temple ; the
devil, who was prefent, and had (as is gene
rally fuppofed) now affumed a vifible form,
might have done the very fame thing : and
thus their refpedive claims, whatever they
had been, would have flood upon a level..
What inducement then could Chrift have for
a compliance with the propofal fuggefted ?
would he be difpofed to gratify Satan, by
doing an ad at his mere motion ? it is abfurd
to fuppofe it. Was' he to acquire any glory
or advantage to himfelf ? no ; on the con
trary, he muft have incurred the infamy of
having entered the lifts with the devil, with
out acquiring any fuperiority over that pri
soner of hell : which muft have been a
powerful motive to a refufal, rather than a
compliance.
e Accordingly Dr. Seeker, (Serm. Vol. II. p. 116, Ii7y>
very confiftently with his alferting that the tempter conveyed
Chrif through the air to one of the battlements of the temple,
allows that he had hereby lhewn himfelf qualified for fo noble
a miracle as that of his prefervation, in eafe he had throwo
himself down from thence.
With

[ II ]
With regard to the third temptation, ufu-
ally accounted the greateft of all, the offer
of the kingdoms of the world with all their
glory : it feems as little to deferve the name
of a temptation, as that we laft confidered.
The great prophet of the Chriftian church
could not be ignorant, that the father of lies,
whatever he might boaft, had no power to
difpofe of the empire of the world ; and that
the mofi High rules in the kingdoms of men, and
gives them to whomfoever he will1. Nor can it
be pretended, that Chrift was ignorant by
whom this temptation was propofed, what
ever was the cafe with regard to the others .»
for in his reply he calls him Satan s. So
that were we to allow b, that the devil, by
affuming the appearance of a good angel,
hoped to deceive Jefus ; yet he was cer
tainly miftaken in his meafures ; Jefus knew
who he was, and confequently that he had
no power to beftow what he fo liberally
promifed.' Now the largeft offer which can
1 Dan. iy. 17.
1 See above, p, 4. note b,
*• According to the conjectures of Dr. Doddridge, Dr. Mack-
night, and many others.
1 " Jefus knew the devil well for the adverfary of God,
•who had granted to no created being, ptuch left to him, the
honours, or the authority, nuhich he claimed. Seeker's Serm,
Vol H.p. 119. AndDr. Chandler, (Serm. VoL IH.p.218,222.)
though he thought the devil's offering Chrift the throne of
IfrseJ

[ 12 }
ean be conceived, is the offer of nothing, if
he who makes it, be unable to make it
good : and if he is known to be fo, by the
perfon to whom it is made, the offer will
be deemed an infult, rather than a tempta
tion, and will provoke either fcorn or re-
fentment. Could the devil then hope by
fuch contemptuous treatment, to engage the
"Son of God to liflen to his accurfed councils,
and to feduce him to an ad of the higheft
difhonour to his heavenly Father, fuch as
no one can think of without horror ; the
falling down and paying divine homage to
this infernal fpirit ?
If the foregoing refledions are juft ; the
common explication of this hifiory gives fuch
an account of Chrift's temptations, of the
two laft efpecially, as is fubverfive of their
main intention ', difarming them of all in
ducement to a compliance, and even fur-
nifhing the ftrongeft motives for rejeding
them. All the ufe I would make of thefe
refledions in this place, is to obferve, that
this interpretation reprefents the old ferpent
as ading quite out of charader : inafmuch

Ifrael, and the kingdoms of the neighbouring nations, was
worthy his craft and fubtikty ; yet tells us that Jefus let him
know, that the power he claimed of difpofng the kingdoms of the
earth was vain and presumptvous.

[ 13 ]
as it fuppofes him to be as perfedly void of
policy, as he is of goodnefs ; and that he
ufed the leaft art and addrefs in propofing
and inforcing his temptations, in a cafe, in
which the greateft would have been in-
fufficient to infure his fuccefs k. It is more
material to obferve, II. That
k Our learned divines, in order to account for the devil's
aflaulting our Lord with any hope of fuccefs, generally
fuppofe, that he was fomewhat uncertain whether our Lord
was indeed the Meffiah ; and admit, that unlefs the tempter
had been in doubt as to the charatler of Jefus, it is not to be
imagined he Jhould have attempted to feduce him at all.
Dr. Macknigbt's commentary, andDr. Clarke, Vol. I. ferm. 93.
It is not, I hope, inconfiftent with the deference due to thefe
gentlemen, to obferve, 1. That upon the common hypothefis
concerning this temptation and the author of it, there is no
reafon to believe he was ignorant or doubtful who Jefus was.
If the devil is well acquainted with the fcriptures, and parti
cularly with the an dent prophecies concerning the Meffiah ;
if he knew all the wonderful circumftances which accom
panied the birth of Jefus, and was fo lately a witnefs to the
teftimonies born to him from heaven, both by the defcent of
the fpirit, and by the voice which proclaimed him the Son of
God ; he could not but know with certainty who Jefus was.
This Dr. Lightfoot has fully proved, in his firft volume,
p. 503. fol. edit. Accordingly thefe words which introduce
two of his temptations, do not exprefs doubt, but affurance,
If thou be, that is, feeing thou art, (or inafmuch as thou art)
the Son of God. It is here taken for granted, that Jefus was
the Son of God ; and his being fo, is the very reafon by
which the devil urges him to comply with his propofals :
" Since you are the Meffiah, it is fit you lhould aCt as fuch,
" and exert your divine power in turning ftones into bread,
" and in flying down from the temple." Thus, as Dr. Light-
font obferves (ubi fupra) the word if is ufed in the fpeech of
7 Lamech

[ n 1
II.) That this explication is very ill calcu
lated to promote either the honour of Chrift,
or the inflrudion and confolation of his dif-
ciples. Scarce can we preferve upon our
minds a fufficient reverence of the fandity
and dignity of the Redeemer, when we
behold him in fuch familiar conference with,
and under the power of, ' an unclean fpirit ;
Lamech, Gen. iv. 23. If Cain fhall be avenged feven fold,
which was with Lamech a thing undoubted. He who defires
the fulleft evidence that & and &yt are frequently affirmative
particles, may confult Locke and Doddridge on Ephef. iii. 2.
Peirce on Col. i. 23. and Taylor on Rom- viii. 9. but efpecially
Noldii Concordant. Partic. under the correfpondent Hebrew
particle DN which is often rendered certe, omnino, quia, quan-
doquidem, quod. Even Dr. Macknight himfelf, who in p. 64
of his Commentary (fecond edition) urges thefe words, If
thou be the Son of God, cafi thyfelf down from hence, in iupport
of the devil's being in doubt as to the character of Jefus,
does in p. 66 explain them in their true fenfe, though it
fubverts his own hypothefis: SINCE thou art the Son of
God, thoufhouldfi cafl thyfelf down.
2. Were we to allow, that the devil was in doubt who
Jefus was, and that otherwife he could not poffibly have hoped.
to gain any advantage over him ; this will not account for
his propofing his temptations in an open and vifible manner ;
nay, it proves that this manner ought of all others to have
been moft carefully avoided, becaufe the leaft likely to
fucceed. For certainly the ftrongeft temptations of the.
devil are thofe wherein he leaft appears. I am not therefore
fo happy as to be able to acquiefce in the explication, thefe
gentlemen have given of the motives, which induced the
devil to undertake this temptation ; becaufe in the method
he took, he could have no expectation, nor fcarce a thought, of
fuccefs ; at leaft, he could not have taken a more likely
method to mifcarry,
who

[ is 1
who at pleafure tranfports l his fovereign and
his judge from place to place, raifes him to
the moft confpicuous ftations to expofe him
to publick derifion, and wantonly and arro
gantly propounds to him one foolifh enter-
prize after another ra. It fills us with horror as
1 Thofe who are of opinion, that the devil did not tranfport
Chrift through the air, but only led him on foot, from place
to place, (fee below p. 23, notec.) would, I Ihould think, find
it difficult to account for Chrift's fuffering himfelf to be led
to the temple, (where the Jews always reforted) and back
again through the ftreets of Jerufalem, in fuch company.
Could the inhabitants have been witneffes to a light fo won
derful and fo horrible, and yet take no notice of it? Would
not their feeing Chrift in company with the devil, at the very
'firft opening of his minifiry, before he had afforded them any
Evidences of his divine million, and while they were ftrangera
to his genuine character; have neceffarily made even upon
honeft minds ftrong impreffions to his difadvantage ? Would
not fuch a fight at this* feafon efpecially, have raifed fome
fufpicion of his being an aifociate and confederate with the
devil? Now would Chrift unneceffarily create a prejudice
againft himfelf in good minds, or give any occalion to his
enemies to blafpheme ? Without any fuch ground for the accu-
fation, as his being feen in familiar conference with demons,
his enemies afcribed his cure of demoniacs to the affiftance df
the prince of demons. But the very fuppolition of Chrift's
fuffering himfelf to be led about by the devil, in places of the
moft publick refort, and of the moft facred nature, for no
imaginable end whatever ; . does fo Ihock the human imagi
nation, that one would think there could be no occalion to
confute it. There would be fcarce decency, in expofing it
as it deferves.
ra It has indeed been faid, " that it was no more unworthy
the Son of God to undergo the affaults of evil fpiriis, than
to fuffer indignities and death from the hands of wicked
7 " men"

t 16 ]
as well as aftonifhment, to conflder farther",
that during all this tranfadion, Chrift muft
have yielded voluntarily to the mere motion
and infligation of the devil. For, though it
was by the Spirit of God that he was carried
into the wildernefs, yet it was by the devil
that he was conveyed from thence to the
temple, and placed upon it's battlements j
a moft dangerous and formidable eminence" !
And therefore as the devil could have no
power over our Lord, unlefs by his free
confent, Chrift muft have been acceffary to
his own difhonour, danger, and temptation ".
Such
men." But by partaking of fielh and blood, he became liable
to the latter, and nothing but a miracle could have faved hint
from them. But with regard to the former, it is certain,
that fuch affaults of the devil as thefe are fuppofed to have
been, are not the lot of humanity. Befides, the moft im
portant ends of Chrift's coming into the world, required his
fubmiffion to death ; but no valuable end whatever was
anfwered, by his putting himfelf entirely into the power of
the devil, in the manner here pretended.
» Some parts of the temple (being built upon the edge of a
rock, under which was a valley of a prodigious depth) were of
fo vaft a height, that it was impoffible to look down without
making the head to fwim ; nor could the fight reach to the
bottom; as we learn from Jofephus, Antiq. Jud. 1. 15. c. 11.
§5- • Should it be faid, that Chrift had an order from God, to
fuffer himfelf to be brought into this dangerous fituation ; the
affertion could not be proved from the text. Nor is it likely
any fueh order was given ; becaufe no good end could be an
fwered by it. Chrift might be carried into the wildernefs to
be tempted of the devil ; but not that he might, in any
raeafure,

t 17 ]
Such a condud as this would have been the
more unworthy of him, as no good end
could be anfwered by it, either with refped
to himfelf or his followers. His own cha-
rader would have been degraded, rather
than exalted. The temptations themfelves
to which he was expofed, were very far from
carrying any force ; as was obferved above :
what extraordinary merit then, nay, what
virtue in the loweft degree, could there be
in refifling them ? And if there was no
proper temptation prefented to Chrift, none
that could ferve as an evidence or exercife
of his obedience ; what fuitable confolation
or ufeful inftrudion, under real and powerful
temptations, can his followers derive from
this hiftory ?
What has been already offered under this
and the foregoing heads, will enable us to
form a right judgment concerning the reafons
commonly offered, for Chrift's fubmitting
to be tempted by the devil, in the manner
here fuppofed. z. 'It has been, I think,
generally afferted, that the apoftle exprejsly
afligns this as one reafon, that hereby he
jneafure, yield to his temptations. Neverthelefs, this would
have been the cafe, had Chrift yielded to the perfuafions of
the devil to accompany him to different places, in order to
his. being tempted.
C might

[ If J
might * be made like unto his brethren, and
become a merciful and faithful high priefi,
for in that he himjelf has fuffered, being
tempted, he is able to fuccour them that are
tempted. Dr. Chandler * thinks the hiftorjr
of our Saviour's temptation is evidently re
ferred to in the following paffage : He was
in all points tempted like as we are, yet without
fin". It is impoflible here to forbear ob-
ferving, how ready all men are, at leaft occa-
fionally, to be governed by the found, rather
than the fenfe of Scripture : for it is manifeft
that the apoftle in thefe paftages, refers to
thofe temptations and fufterings to whieh
the Hebrew Chriftians were expofed by
their new profeffion. To encourage then!
under thefe trials, he properly reminds
them, that Chrift had been exercifed with
the very fame, called out to ftruggle not
only with all the common difficulties of hu
man life, but alfo with the fevereft perfec
tions. In this refped, there was a real re-
femblance between his cafe and their's.
And this is the fubjed of the apoftle's?
difcourfe. That he does not refer to Chrift's
temptation in the wildernefs,. is farther evi-
P Heb. ii. 14 — 18.
1 P. 175. Compare Dr. Seder, p. no,
» Heb. iv. 15, dent

t '9 J
dent from hence, that by undergoing that
temptation he was not made like unto his
brethren, nor tempted like as we are. The
moft learned advocates of the common hypo*
thefis contend, " that this temptation was
" extraordinary in it's nature," and carried
on in an open manner3. " The tempter,"
fay they, " came to Jefus in a vifible form :
" a thing, which we have neither any reafon
" Jrom hence to jear will ever be our own cafe,
" or to believe is ever the cafe of other common
" men '." They likewife affert, that when
we are tempted by invifible powers, the
temptations zxzfecret ", and not dijlinguifh able
by us Jrom thoje which arife of themfelves in our
own breafis*. Now, if we are not tempted
as Chrift was in the wildernefs, according to
the common explication of this hiftory ; then
the fitnefs or neceflity of his being made like
unto his brethren, is moft improperly urged
as a ground or reafon for his being fo
tempted y.
3 Dr. Chandler, p. 176, 177,
' Dr. Seeker, p. 113.
11 Dr. Chandler, p. 18;, 197.
x Dr. Seeker, p. 107.
r See Sed. IV. N°. 1. It is very remarkable, that there
ihould be no reference at all in any part of the New Tefta-
ment to Chrift's temptation in the wildernefs ; if it be, what,
according to the received interpretation, it certainly was, the
moft aftonilhing and miraculous event which ever befel him.
C 2 2. A

r 20 ]
2. A farther reafon affigned for his fub-
mitting to be tempted in the manner be is
generally fuppofed to have been in the wil
dernefs, is, that his example might be a
complete pattern of every virtue. But ac
cording to the common explication of Chrifl's
temptations, they did not difplay any of his
virtues to advantage, as we have already
proved j nor was his behaviour under them.
proper for the imitation of his followers.
For if the devil's bringing him into circum-
ftances of danger, and placing him upon the
brink of a ftupendous precipice, from whence
he was to be inftigated to throw himfelf
down, and from whence, indeed, it was
difficult not to fall ; if this could not have
been efFeded without his free confent and
choice, his example may be injurious, rather
than beneficial, to fuch creatures as we are,
who are more likely to preferve our inno
cence, by flying from temptation, than by
incountering it; and who are accordingly
warned, never voluntarily to rufh upon it,
but, as far as we are able, to prevent it's
approach. Can it then be conceived, that
Chrift, if he knew the devil, would fuffer
himfelf to be tranfported by him to a fcene
of the greateft danger, whereby he would
enervate all his exhortations to caution in

declining

I 21 ]
declining it, and more efpecially that ex
cellent maxim, delivered on this very occa-
fion, Thou jhalt not tempt the Lord thy God,
which he might have inculcated to much
greater advantage, by refufing to have left
the wildernefs ? If Chrift was ignorant who
his companion was, as fome endeavour to
perfuade us j would he go along with a
firanger, go with him in queft of tempta
tions, and run into the way of them ? There
are many who contend for the literal inter
pretation of this hiftory, from a regard to
the honour of Chrift, and to the benefit of
his difciples ; whereas in truth it is equally
injurious to both, and fubverts the very
foundation on which they reft, the ftrength,
and reality of thefe temptations. And fup-
pofirig the temptations to have been real and
powerful, the condud here afcribed to
Chrift is not calculated for the imitation or
inftrudion of his followers z. III. It
* Dr. Seeker, p. no, thinks it may be faid very fafely,
that, for any thing we know, it might behove Chrift, — to give
the enemy all advantages and opportunities, in order to make his
defeat more confpicuous. But may ic not be faid, both with
more fafety and more probability, that it did not behove Chrift
to give the devil any advantage, that fo his example might
be inftruitive to thofe who are required to watch and pray
that they enter not into temptation, and forbidden to give
Satan any advantage ? In reality, no advantage was given to
ihe devil, by Chrift's allowing himfejf to be affaulted by him
C3 «>

C 22 ]
III.) It is a farther objedion to the
common opinion, that it afcribes to the devil
the performance of the greatefl miracles.
(i.) It fuppofes that the devil, by nature a
fpiritual and invifible agent, has a power of
affuming at pleafure a corporeal or vifible
form % and of fpeaking with an audible
voice; though there is no more ground from
experience, (our fole inftrudor in the efta-
blifhed laws of nature,) to afcribe this power
to the devil, than to afcribe life to the ina
nimate, or fpeech to the brute creation ; and
though the fcripture reprefents the ap
pearance or vifion of a fpiritual being as an
inconteftable miracle : for Zacharias was
ftruck dumb for not giving credit to fuch an
evidence of a divine interpofition \ (2.) It
fuppofes farther, that the devil has a power
of conveying men from place to place, and
that he did adually exert this power over
in the manner commonly fuppofed ; and confequently no
peculiar honour could refult from his victory over him. The
very fuppofition of Chrift's giving the enemy all advantages,
in order to make his defeat more confpicuous, implies his
knowing who he was ; which at once difarmed his tempta
tions of all their power.
a It has been taken for granted by Dr. Seeker, Dr. Chandler,
and other learned writers, that the devil has this power ; but
this point has never been proved ; nor do I remember that
any one of them has ever attempted to prove it.
" Luke i. 20. his

[ 23 1
his great Lord, by tranfporting him through
the air % from the wildernefs to the fummit of
c I here argue on the fcppoiition, that the devil did not
lead Chrift on foot from place to place, but conveyed him
through the air ; becaufe the advocates of what is called the
literal fcheme generally fuppofe this to have been the cafe.
Dr. Chandler, (p. 212.) indeed, andfeveral others plead, that
the word, vrttpaKa.iJLCa.iiei, imports no more than to conduil
a perfon, or to take him with us as a companion ; (in which
fenfe it is ufed Mat. xvii. 1.) and that there was no miracle
performed on this occafion, the devil only going before
Chrift, and either perfuading or conftraining him to follow.
Thefe gentlemen, however, feem to me to miftake the argu
ment. For, I apprehend, thofe who hold that the devil
conveyed Chrift through the air, do not ground their opinion
on the meaning of tra^aKaySAvei, {which certainly can
never determine the manner in which Chrift was taken to the
wing of the temple,) but on the circumftances of the hiftory,
which, to their apprehenfion, require this interpretation.
Whoever carefully confiders the matter, will fopn fee that it
was impoflible the devil fhould take Chrift to the top of the
Jewiih temple without a miracle. It appears by the defcrip-
tion given of the temple by Jofephus, (Antiq. 1. 15. c. 11.
$ 3, 5. and B. J. 1. 5. c. 5.) and from fome paffages from
Other Jewiih writers, (cited by Dr. Whitby on Luke xxii. 52.)
that it was fo encompafled by walls, and fo conftantty
guarded, that all accefs to it was impracticable, but by fuch
perfons, and under fuch conditions, as the law allowed.
Now by law, no foreigner could pafs the iirft inclofure or
court under pain of death ; the Jev:ifh people could not pafs
the fecond ; the priefts alone could enter the third. The
temple itfelf was within this court ; from which Chrift was
excluded, not being a Jewiih prieft. As to the devil, thofe
who know under what different difguifes he impofed upon
Chrift, (fee above p. 4, note b) can with equal certainty in
form us by what ftratagems he might advance forward to the
temple. Chrift, however, in whom there was no guile, could
not have, been permitted to follow. With regard to the
C 4 temple

[ 24 ]
of the Jewifh temple j and from thence to
the top of an exceeding high mountain. But
temple itfelf, properly fo called ; on the top of it there were
fpikes, with Jharp points, to prevent fo much (is a bird from
refting upon it. The wings of the temple ftretched out on
•ither fide, at the eaftern front of it, which was by far the
moft magnificent, and commanded a view of the entire body
of worfhippers. Thefe wings were twenty cubits higher
than the temple ; the height of the temple being ioo cubits,
and the height of the '/lipvytov 120 cubits, at the top of
which, the hiftory (according to the common interpretation)
affirms, the devil did fet our Saviour. That the word tf]ipvytw
denotes the wing (not the pinnacle) of the temple; that moft
valuable expofitor Dr. Lightfoot long fince obferved, (Works
Vol. II. p. 130.) And his opinion was adopted by the
learned Dr. Prideaux, (Conned. Vol. I. p. 200.) and lately
by Dr. Benfon, (Life of Chrift, p. 35.) Thefe circumftances
ferve to (hew, that the devil could not lead Chrift on foot to
the top of one of thefe wings of the temple, in the manner
fome alledge; but muft (if he placed him there at all) have
carried him through the air, or afforded him fome other
miraculous affiftance: (unlefs they can fuppofe, that the devil
firft applied for leave to the officers and guards of the temple ;
which was very unlikely to have been aflced, or obtained, or
paffed over in filence.) And as the facred writers were well
acquainted with all thefe circumftances, they could never
defign to affirm, that the devil did what they knew was im-
poffible to be done. Dr. Macinight (to avoid this difficulty)
maintains, that it was from the battlement of one of the cloyfters,
that the devil defired Jefus to throw himfelf down ; and he
affirms (but without producing any authority) that the people
were at liberty to walk on the roof of the cloyfters. This laft
affertion feems to me fomewhat improbable, both becaufe
the cloyfters were facred buildings ; and becaufe no fuch
liberty as the doftor fpeaks of, was allowed even with regard
to common houfes, to which no peculiar reverence was due. For
the door which opened upon the roof was conftantly kept
ftut, to prevent their domeftic animals from daubing the
1 terrace,

[ 25 ]
But this could not have been done, but by
repeated difplays of a power truly mira
culous, and even equally ftupendous with
that by which Philip was tranfported from
Gaza to Azotus* ; and by no means inferior,
as was obferved above, to that which would
have been neceffary to the prefervation of
Chrift, had he thrown himfelf down from
the temple, in proof of his being the
Meffiah c ; though his anfwer implies, that
his prefervation muft have depended on the
interpofition of God, whom it was not
lawful to tempt. (3.) It fuppofes, that the
devil having placed Chrift upon an exceeding
terrace, and thereby fpoiling the water which fell from thence
into the cifterns below the court : and the flairs which con
ducted to the roof were not placed on the outfide of the houfe,
but either in the porch, or at the entrance into the court;
and confequently ftrangers could not have accefs to them
without the confent of the family. See Dr. Shaw's travels as
cited by Dr. Macknight in his Harmony, part I. p. 123. 2d. ed.
But whether the people were at liberty to walk upon the
roofs of the cloyfters, is a point of no importance, becaufe
the evangelifts "are not fpeaking of any of the cloyfters, not one
of which was called the wing of the temple. The word /spo>
is ufed with great latitude in the Gofpels, (Mat. xxi. 12.
ch. xxiv. 1. Mark xi. 11, 15, 17.) -fo as to include the
temple and all the buildings and courts belonging to it : and
the part of the i=p6v here fpecified, was the ixlspvytw orwing\
/o called, becaufe like wings it extended itfelf in breadth on
each fide, far beyond the breadth of the temple.
* ACts viii. 39, 40.
« See Dr. Seeker, cited above, p. 10. note e. high

[ 26 J
high mountain, could from thence fhew him
all the kingdoms of the world f. Now there
being
f Some learned perfons fuppofe that the fhewing here
fpoken of, relates rather to defcription, than by ocular light.
Dr. Chandler, p. 215. and Heuman, Diff. Sylloge, torn. 1. p. I.
Diff. 7, cited by Dr. Seeker, p. 118. But there could be no
more occafion to take Chrift to an exceeding high mountain,
in order to (hew him the kingdoms of the world by defcription,
than St. Paul could have had to carry the Corinthians to an
exceeding high mountain, in order to fhew them a more excel
lent way, viz. that of charity, (1 Cor. xii. 31.) Dr. Mack-
night, being fenfible on the one hand, that a real fight of all
the kingdoms of the world from any high mountain what
soever, is an impoffible thing ; and being willing on the
other, to refer this article of the hiftory, to what Chrift faw
with his bodily eyes ; would reftrain the profpeCl to the land
ofpromife. So this author, and Dr. Chandler likewife (p. 214.)
think the word x.'ocr[jiaf is ufed Rom. iv. 13. The promife that
he fhould be heir of the WORLD, was not to Abraham or to
his feed through the law, but through the righteoufnefs of faith.
Some plead, that Koff/uo; (ignifies the Roman empire: and
there are many who underftand it in this hiftory fometimes of
Judea, and at other times of the Roman empire, juft as fuits
their purpofe. In anfwer to which I obferve, 1. No oneinftance
has hitherto been produced, in which noo-po; (ignifies only
one particular country. It may indeed be applied to the Roman
empire ; becaufe this empire was confidered and fpoken of as
comprehending in it all the countries and kingdoms of the
world. This application of the word therefore will not
anfwer the purpofe for which it is urged. That in the
paffage cited above from St. Paul, it can not be reftrained to
the land of Judea, is evident from the occafion on which it
is ufed. For the promife referred to by the apoftle, is that
whereby Abraham was made the father of all them that believe,
though they be not circumcifed, and are fcattered all over the
world, ver. 1 1. And it is for this very reafon, that Abraham
is called the heir of the world; becaufe believers of all nations
1 of

[ 27 ]
being no mountain upon the face of the
earth, which commands the view of every part
of the world, Gentiles as well as Jews, were to have him for
their father, and inherit the bleffing of ju Mi fi cation by faith.
To confine the word k'oo pot here to Canaan or to any one
country, is to deftroy the whole reafoning of the apoftle, which
is manifeftly defigned to fliew, that Abraham was to inherit
a feed out of all nations. 2. If fome inftances could be pro
duced in which the word x.'oo'fji.af was applied to one particular
country, yet it could not be ufed in this confined fenfe in the
hiftory of Chrift's temptation. For it is not faid, the devil
fhewed Chrift the world, but all the kingdoms of the
world: a phrafe that cannot be limited to the narrow terri
tory of Canaan, which at the time of Chrift's temptation was
no kingdom at all. Judea was now a province of the Roman
empire, an appendage of the province of Syria. See Luke iii. 1 .
3. Nay, were we even to admit, that the land of promife
alone is here referred to ; this could not be (hewn to Chrift
from any mountain, but by a miracle. Far the land of
promife, in it's largeft fignification, reached, (as Dr. Macknight
obferves, p. 67.) from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean, eaft
and weft, and from Egypt on the fouth, to beyond Sidon north
wards : an immenfe traCt of country, which no mountain
commands, and which no human eye can take in. And yet
the doCtor adds, All thefe the devil pointed out to Jefus in
the temptation, taking particular notice of their glory, that is,
their great and opulent cities, their rich fields, their hills covered
with wood and cattle, their rivers, &c. It was JEHOVAH
who (hewed Mofes all the land, or enabled him to take
a more diftinCt profpeCt of its feveral quarters, than his own
unaffifted fight would have permitted him to do. Deut. xxxiv. 1.
Upon what grounds can we afcribe to the devil this prero
gative of the eternal Deity ? Laftly, it was abfolutely im-
poffible that the devil (hould (hew Chrift the land of promife,
to its utmoft limits on every hand, (and (till more impoffible
that he (hould (hew him the whole world,) in a moment of
time : a circumftance entirely dropt by Dr. Macknight in his
firft edition, and left unexplained in the fecond. This
omiffioa

[ 28 ]
part of it, (or indeed of any fingle kingdom
of it j ) and if there were, no human eye being
ftrong enough to take in the profped ; the
fhewing Chrift all the kingdoms of the
world, had it been poffible, could have been
effeded only by a miracle j by a miracle a
thoufand times greater in it's own nature,
than that performed by God, when from
mount Nebo he fhewed Mofes the narrow ter
ritory of Canaan6? Befides, the devil fhewed
Chrift not only all the kingdoms of the world,
but alfo all the glory of them ; that is, b the
wealth and treafures of their fubjeds, and
whatever conflitutes the fplendour and mag
nificence of their fovereigns, imperial robes,
and crowns, and thrones, and palaces, and
courts, and guards, and armies : which muft
all have been produced into view, and
omiffion is the more to be lamented, as our ableft com
mentators, and the chriftian world in general, have thought
themfelves under a neceffity of receding from the literal fenfe
of the hiftory in this article, very much on account of this
circumftance. (See below, p. 38, 40 ) — "With regard to the
reafon which the doCtor affigns for afferting a real fight of the
kingdoms of the world, viz. the devil's carrying our Lord up
into an exceeding high mountain, to view them ; it would equally
prove that it was really, and not in vifion, that St. John was
carried away to a great and high mountain, in order to his
being fhewn the holy Jerufalem. Rev. xxi. 10.
s Deut. xxxiv. 1.  3.
k Compare Gen. xxxi. 1. ch. xiv. 13. 1 Chron. xxix. 25.
2 Chron. xxxii. 27. If. Ixi. 6. exhibited

[ 29 ]
exhibited in a manner proper to ftrike the
imagination, and fire the paffions. And what
ftill increafes the miracle, all thefe numerous
objeds, as well as the whole exterior furface
of the globe, the devil muft have fhewn to
Chrift at one view, and in a fingle inftant of
time'. Suppofing this to be poffible, it is
one of the greatefl miracles we can conceive.
But it feems very unreafonable to afcribe to
the devil the power of performing any mi
racles ;
1 iv riyi/.n %poeK, in an inftant, or point of time. Luke iv. 5.
The word, ^iy^ri, is taken from a mathematical point, and
is ufed to denote the moft minute aad indivifible part of dura
tion, fuch wherein we can conceive no fucceffion, or which
takes up the time of only one idea in the mind. See Erafmus
and Cafaubon on Luke iv. 5. Vatablus likewife, and
Grotius and Beza, and all the belt judges of the Greek lan
guage, render the phrafe to the fame effeCt, in punBo temporis.
This rendering is very agreeable to all the antient verfions,
except the Syriac. Dr. Chandler was too well lkilled in the
Greek language not to acknowledge, (p. 215.) that Chrift's
profpecJ of all the kingdoms of the world and the glory thereof,
whatever it was, was inftantaneous. Neverthelefs, according
to his account of it, it was no otherwife inftantaneous than all
other profpeCts are : for he fays, it offered itfelf to his view, as
foon as ever he was in the ftation fixed on for that purpofe, and
could furvey the fever al objeds that were around him. Nay,
according to this learned writer, (p. 216.) Chrift had no
profped at all of far the greater part of the kingdoms of the
world, but only « defcription of them ; the devil at the fame
time pointing to the fittuation of fuch as were too diftant to be
feen, and fucceffively informing him what kingdoms lay to
wards the eaft, what in the fouth, what in the weft, and laftly,.
what towards the north. Thus by Chrift's feeing a very
little, as foon as he could furvey it ; by hearing a great deal
about

[ 3° 1
racles ; inafmuch as even good angels (who
cannot be fuppofed to have a more limited
fphere of adion, than thofe accurfed fpirits,
who are referved in chains of darknefs to the
judgment of the great dayk,J never perform
any miracles at their own pleafure ; never
appear to men, and remove them from one
place to another, as they fee fit themfelves ;
nor do they ever gratify them by fuch mar
vellous and magnificent profpeds as thofe,
which, it is here fuppofed, were fhewn to
Chrift. Befides, the allowing a miraculous
power to the devil, deftroys the credit and
ufe ' of miracles, and contradids fuch decla-

about the reft which he did not fee ; and by being gradually
informed in what quarter of the world it lay ; by this long
feries of events would this gentleman account for it's being
faid, that the devil (hewed Chrift all the kingdoms of the
world in an inftant.
fc 2 Pet. ii. 4. Jud. 6. SeeDifiert. on Miracles, p. 151.
1 Miracles are always reprefented in Scripture as in them
felves decifive and abfolute demonftrations of the divinity and
fole dominion of Jehovah, and as an immediate divine
teftimony to his meffengers. Exod. iv. 5 — 9. chap, vii. 5, 17.
ch. viii. 10, 22. ch. ix. 14, 16, 29. ch. x. 1, 2. ch. xi. 7.
ch. xiv. 4, 18. Deut. iv. 34 — 39. 2 Sam. vii. 22 — 24.
Numb. xvi. 28 — 30. John v. 36, 37. ch. xi. 41, 42.
ACts ii. 10. Mat. xii. 28. John x. 24, 2-, 36-  38.
ch. xiv. 10, 11. Heb. ii. 4. I Cor. ii. 4, 5. This view
of miracles is utterly inconfiftent with the fuppofition, that
evil fpirits poffefs the power and liberty of performing them.
.See Differt. on Miracles, ch. 3. feCt. 5, 6. rations

t 31 ]
rations of fcripture, as confine m them to the
Deity, either operating immediately by him
felf, or by the inftrumentality of fuch beings
as ad by his commiffion. Indeed, fuch a
power could not confift with the regular
courfe of nature, and the eftablifhed order of
providence, which would fufter from it per
petual interruptions". And it is abundantly
confuted by the experience of near fix
thoufand years ; there not being one well
attefted example of the exercife of it, from
the beginning of the creation to this day \
IV.) It
m Both prophecies and miracles are abfolutely appro
priated to God : He only doeth wonderous works, Pf. lxxii. 1 8.
Pf. Ixxxvi. 10. Exod. XV. n. He revealeth fecrets, and
inaketh known what Jhall come to pafs. Dan. ii. 28, 29, 47.
Idolaters are challenged to juftify their worftiip of idols, and
the idol' gods themfelves to give proof of their divinity, by
fuitable difplays of power or knowledge, If. xii. 21 — 24.
ch. xiii. 8 — 13. ch. xliv. 7. ch. xiv. 20,21. ch. xlviii. 3.
And if invifible evil agents had (as fome have fuppofed) fup-
ported the claims of the heathen deities : this would have
been the very fame thing in appearance, and with regard to
all the mifchievous confequences attending it, as if the;
heathen deities had themfelves interpofed in ftipport of thofe
claims. Differt. on Mir. p. 240.
" The fcripture very rationally reprefents the whole courfe
of nature as univerfally and invariably fulfilling the will of
God, as fixed by his decree which Jhall not pafs away, as
governed by his laws which Jhall not be broken, by laws which
he has eftablijhed for ever and ever : which muft therefore be
unalterable by any authority, but his who at firft ordained
them. Pf. cxlviii. 6.
p Some perhaps may think this reafoning fufficiently
anfwered, by faying with Archbilhop Seeker, (Serm. Vol. II.
P- HJ-)

[ 32 3
IV.) It is a ftill greater objedion to the
common opinion, that it afcribes to the devil
the performance of things not only preter
natural, but abfurd and impoffible. Such
we muft reckon, his fhewing Chrift all the
kingdoms of the world from an exceeding
high mountain : for the earth being of a
fpheroidical figure, what fingle mountain can
command a view of all the parts of it, of
p. 113.) The whole life of Chrift was fo full of wonders, that
the hiftory of his temptation is perfedly agreeable to the reft : and
we muft either queftion all, or no parti From the gofpel we
learn (not indeed that the whole life of Chrift, but) that the
period of his public miniftry was full of wonders, or of
aftonifhing miracles, which he performed in his Father's
name, and in atteftation of the divinity of his million. Many
illuftrious teftimonies were alfo born to him by the Father at
his baptifm, his transfiguration, and his crucifixion. With
refpeCt to thefe wonders, it may be truly affirmed, we muft
either queftion all; or no part : for they are all fupported by
the fame teftimony ; and are equally credible in their own
nature, being calculated to anfwer one common end, and
referred to one adequate caufe. But the hiftory of Chrift's
temptation, according to his Grace's interpretation of it, is
fo far from being perfectly agreeable to thefe wonders, that
nothing can be imagined more repugnant. For if the devil
can perform noble miracles, which is what his Grace (Serm.
p. n6, 117.) infers from this hiftory, then miracles are not
works appropriate to God, nor decifive teftimonies of a divine
miffion. The doCtrine therefore advanced by this eminent
writer, is a contradiction to the whole tenour of the Jewiih
and Chriftian Revelations, and even fubverfive of the evi
dence on which they reft. If we do not queftion, and even
rejeCt his doCtrine, how can we receive that of the infpired
prophets, viz. that God alone doeth wonders ; or allow the
divinity of their miffion r thofe

[ 33 1
thofe in particular which are oppofite to each
other ? The fun itfelf, at it's immenfe
height above the loftieft mountains of our
globe, commands and enlightens at once,
only a fingle hemifphere. Could the devil
then from one point of view, fhew Chrifi:
not only the entire circumference of the
globe, but aifo whatever conftitutes the glory
and grandeur of it's kingdoms ; and fhew
him fuch infinitely numerous objeds, in fi-
tuations fo diftant, and fo oppofite, not gra
dually and fucceffively, but in one and the
fame inftant of time ? This does not feem
fo properly a miracle, as an abfurdity and
contradidion, fuch as is not the objed of any
power. Now in the interpretation of fcripture, it
is a rule allowed by all, and fuch as ought
never to be forgotten, that we are to have
recourfe to a figurative fenfe, whenever the
nature of the thing will not admit a proper
and literal one ; and that to diftinguifh what
is to be literally, and what figuratively un
derftood ; depends on a previous knowledge
of the fubjed. Thus when we read of the
eyes, ears, hands of God j all allow thefe to
be figures ; reafon as well as revelation
affuring us, that God is a fpiritual incor
poreal fubftance. And there is juft the fame
D neceffity

[ 34 I
neceffity for receding from the literal fenfe of
the paffage under consideration, if it implies
manifeft and palpable contradidions.
It is the more neceffary in the interpreta
tion of the facred writings, to make the ab-
furdity of the literal conftrudion, a reafon for
adopting a figurative one ; as they are allowed
by Chriftians to have God for their author.
If it be a jull obfervation, " that what God
*' fays muft be true ;" it is no lefs certain,
*' that whatever is falfe and abfurd can never
" have been fpoken by God." And there
fore if any thing of this kind is afferted by
the interpreters of his word, we may be very
fure they miftake it's meaning.
We are likewife to confider, that it is very
common in the facred writings on other occa-
fions, to relate things as adually done, which
yet were only tranfaded in a vifion. And
lome.times, perhaps, the fcripture relates
vifions or reprefentations made to the mind
of a prophet, as if they were outward tran-
fadions, without giving exprefs notice to the
contrary p ; any more than they do, when they
p Many learned writers have attempted to (hew, that
Hofea' s marrying Corner, and taking to himfelf children of
whoredom, ch. i. and iii;  that Jeremiah's putting a linen
girdle upon his loins, going to Euphrates, and hiding it in
the hole of a rock, ch. xiii ; his carrying a wine cup from
God up and down to all nations, and caufing them to drink
i it:.

[ 35 1
<hey introduce a metaphor, a parable or
allegory. Nor need we wonder to find
vifions
it, ch. xxv ; and his putting yokes upon the necks of feveral
.kings, ch. xxvii.  and that Ezekiel's eating a roll, ch. iii ;
his taking a tile, poilrtraying the city of JerufaleM upon it;
and laying fiege againft it; ch. iv ; and his (having his head
and beard with a barber's rafor, ch. v ; learned writers have
attempted to (hew, that thefe and many other aCtions afcribed
to the antient prophets, were only imaginary and fcenical ;
and that narratives of this kind are to be underftood as a
hiftory only of prophetic vifions, though it be hot politively
faid, (as thefe writers apprehend,) that the things related
were no where performed but upon the ftage of fancy. See
Mr. John Smith's feleCt difcourfes, p. 220  229. and
Maimonides, Mor. Nev. P. U. c. 46. We may well allow,
that all thefe things, or mod of them, were tranfaCted only
in vifion ; not merely becaufe we hereby avoid the incon
veniences attending the literal interpretation ; but alfo becaufe
the lively reprefentation of thefe things in vifion, conveyed
the fame inftruCtion, and anfwered every purpofe as well as
the real performance of them could have done.
I would only add, that perhaps Jacob's wreftling with the
angel, the night in which he prayed fo earneftly to be deli
vered from the hands of his brother Efau, and his prevailing
in the combat, in token of the efficacy of his prayer with
God, and of the confequent victory he was to gain over his
brother,; this might be done in a prophetic virion, and yet
the defign of it be fufficiently anfwered. Jacob's lamenefs
(like Zacharias's lofs of fpeech after his vifion in the temple,
Luke i, 22.) lafted but for a time, (for he came fafe and
found to a ciiy of Shechem, Gen. xxxiii. 18.) and ferved to
convince him of the divine original of this vifion ; and con
fequently to reprove his doubts, and to raife and confirm his
faith in God. Certainly a fpirit has not fiefti and bones, fo
as to be laid hold of by man : nor could Jacob intend to be
literally underfto'odj when he fays, he had feen God face to
face, Gen. xxxii. 30. The expreffion itfelf imports, that ha
D 2 was

[ 3« I
vifions related as fads; inafmuch as thef
pafs for fuch in the mind of the prophet.
The reprefentation is fo ftrong.and lively,
that he cannot diftinguifh a vifion, or fcenes
difcerned only by the mind, from outward
objeds which are feen with the bodily eye j
and is affeded by the former in the fame
manner as he would have been by the latter.
St. Paul calls his being caught up into the third
heaven, and into paradife, a vijion and revela
tion of the Lord"1-, but fuch were the im-
preffions which it made upon him, that he
could not determine With certainty, whether
this happened by a literal and corporeal
tranflation, or only by a mental reprefenta
tion r. Befides, in this and the like cafes,
a lively
was favoured with a vifion of God, a clear revelation of his
will, and the manifeft tokens of his peculiar prefence. The
learned and worthy Bilhop of Carlifie, Dr. E. Law, in his
Confiderations, p. 75,. 76. 5th edit, has taken notice of
leveral revelations made' in vifion, though not diftinguiihed
from real faCts : which may ferve to confirm what is ad
vanced here.
1 2 Cor. xii. 1. '4.
r This feems to be his meaning, when fpeaking of his
being caught up to the third heaven, he fays, whether in the
body, or whether out of the body, I cannot tell. 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3.
When an angel prefented himfelf to Peter in prifon ; fmote
him on the fide ; caufed the chains to fall off from his
hands ; and bad him arife quickly, gird himfelf, bind on his-
fandals, throw his mantle round him, and follow him out ;
(all which he accordingly, did;), it is faid, that he wift not
that.

I 37 I
a lively exhibition of certain images before
the mind produces the fame effed with the
fight of their correfponding objeds ; and
tranfadion s upon the ftage of fancy anfwer
the fame end as a real performance. For
thefe reafons, the relation correfponds to
the apprehenfions of the prophet, while the
appearances are placed before his mind ; and
though thofe appearances are fiditious, yet
neither the credit of the hiftorian, nor the
ufe of the relation are impaired.
Nor does it hereby become difficult to
diftinguifh fidion from fad*, while the
nature
that it was true which was done by the angel ; but thought he
faw a vifion ; ACts xii. 7 — 9. He underftood the nature of
vifions, having been favoured with them, ch. x. 10 ; and
yet at firft he could not determine, whether what now hap
pened to him was a real faCt, or a vifionary reprefentation,
and he rather thought it was the latter. It is evident from
hence, that all thefe faCts might have been tranfafled only
upon the mind and imagination of the apoftle ; that the
reprefentations of a vifion are as clear and lively, as objeds
that lye open to the fenfes ; and that it is difficult to dillin-
guifh between them, by the bare impreffion made at the
time, however other circumftances might afterwards enable
men to do it.  There will be farther ufe made of this ob
servation, SeCt. IV. No. z.
. 5 The obfervation which follows, is defigned to vindicate
the fcripture, on the fuppofition that it does not at every turn
give exprefs notice, that what it relates as matter of faCt, is
nothing more than the hiftory of a vifion. But perhaps 'the
context, or fome declaration of the facred penman, would
generally prevent a miftake, no lefs than the nature of the
D 3 things

r 38 ]
nature and fcope of the relation fufficiently
afcertain what it, is. If the occurrence be
poffible and probable, fo as to admit, and the
manifeft intention and other circumftances
of it require, a literal conftrudion ; it would
be very abfurd to have recourfe to any other.
Whereas on the other hand, if neither the
nature of the things themfelves which are
related, do admit, nor the defign of them re
quire, a real performance ; it would be
equally unreafonable not to look put for fome
figurative interpretation.
If we proceed by thefe rules in forming our-
judgment concerning Chrift's temptations, we
muft conclude, (unlefs the objedions here
urged againft them are capable of receiving a
juft folution,) that they are not to be under
ftood as outward tranfadions ; inafmuch as
the things themfelves were improbable, and
even impradicable in their own nature ; and
inafmuch as the real performance could
anfwer no valuable purpofe.
V.) It isneedlefs topurfue this fubjed, and
to fhew by a long train of confequences,
what abfurdities follow from the literal con
ftrudion of this paffage ; fince fuch as are
things related. In fome particular cafes, as in that of St. Paul,
mentioned above, it might be a matter of no importance to
be determined, even with regard to the prophet himfelf,
whether the objeds prefented to him were real or imaginary. -
more

[ 39 ]
more obvious carry almoft univerfal con-
vidion, and force even thofe to depart from
the letter, who have been moft inclined to
adhere to it, and beft able to defend it.
Calvin \ though he does not abfolutely de
termine the matter, was of opinion, that
feveral circumftances in this hiftory agreed
beft to a vifion. And the generality of later
writers do readily admit, that the devil's
fhewing Chrift all the kingdoms of the
world, and all their glory, in a moment of
time, was done by fome fiditious fcenery14;
from a perfuafion, as they frankly acknow
ledge, that it could not be done in any other
manner. But if one of the temptations was
prefented to Chrift in vifion only ; why
might not the two others be prefented to him
in the fame manner ? It offers no greater vi
olence to the text, to recede from the literal
conftrudion in all thefe inftances, than in one.
Moft of the reafons afligned for doing this in
part, extend equally to the entire narrative.
r See his note on Mat. iv. 5.
" Some indeed, and particularly our famous countrymen
Hugh Broughton, (fee Wolfius on Mat. iv. 8.) and Milton, (fee
Paradife Regained, B. 4. 1. 40.) fuppofe that the devil
(hewed our Saviour all the kingdoms of the world by the help
of optic inftruments : but it is more generally aflerted, that he
did it either by vifionary impreffions upon his mind, or by
external reprefentations to his fight.
D 4 Nay,

[ 4° J
Nay, i't is apparently unnatural and' arbitrary*,
not to put the fame conftrudion upon the fe-
veral parts of the fame relation ; but to under
ftand one part of it according to the letter,
and the other in a figurative fenfe. If there
fore there be a neceflity, a neceffity fo evident
'and cogent as not to be denied by learned and
candid adverfaries, for departing from the
literal interpretation with regard to one of the
temptations ; the uniformity of the hiftory
obliges us to do the fame with regard to the
reft. The foregoing confederations would require
us torejed the common explication of Chrift's
temptation, even though it had been related
(as we have hitherto fuppofed, but not admit
ted,) altogether as a plain matter of fad, and
we had been left to conftrue it merely by the
nature and intention of the relation. Never
thelefs this is far from being the cafe : for
VI.) The text itfelf, (on the letter of
which the common hypothefis refts as it's
fole foundation,) inftead of pofitively and
x This is acknowledged by the candid and judicious Spsn-
heim, (Dubia Evangel, pars in. dub. 55. p. 247.) a very
able advocate for the literal interpretation, Caufce etiam nihil
eft cur interpretum quoriindam opinioni fubfcribamus, qui
primam tentationem realiter & hiftorice contigifle arbitrantur,
poiteriores duas in vifione duntaxat, eadem enim & uniformis
Tationis contextura utrobique reperitur. exprefsly

I 41 1
exprefsly afferting, that the temptation of
Chrift was a real outward tranfadion, contains
clear intimations, and even dired affertions,
of the very contrary.1 Thus when it is faid,
in the fore-cited paffage, that the devil
fhewed Chrift all the kingdoms of the world,
and all their glory, in one view, or in a fingle
point of time ; the expreffion itfelf fufficiently
intimates, that the evangelift is not fpeaking
of the real fight of all thefe objeds. For
were there any mountain which commanded
fo extenfive a profped, Chrift muft have
changed his pofition, and gradually turned
himfelf round in order to take a diftind view
of the feveral parts of it ; or had all the parts..
in a miraculous manner been placed before his
bodily fight, he muft have furveyed them in
fucceffion, one after another. The evangelift,
therefore, muft certainly defign to be under
ftood of what was inftantaneoufly exhibited
to his mind. Other very plain intimations,
that Chrift's temptation is not to be under
ftood as an outward tranfadion, will be pro
duced in the third fedion. There likewife
we fhall attempt to fhew, that all the evan-
gelifts who have mentioned this affair, do, in
exprefs terms, affirm, that it patted Jpiritually
and in vifion, that it was merely an ideal or
mental reprefentation. And if this point
fhould

F 42 ]
fhould be made good, it will be allowed that
the very letter of the text, inftead of fup-
porting, confutes the common interpretation.
Before we proceed to the confideration of this
point, it will be proper to take notice,
SECTION II.
THAT there are fome, who, allowing
that the whole of this hiftory is to be
underftood as a recital of vifionary reprefenta
tions, contend that thefe vifions were framed
by the devil, and that the temptations are to
be afcribed to his immediate agency y. This
r That thofe who formerly held the temptations of Chrift
to be a vifion or fcenicat reprefentation, did not therefore
maintain it to be a divine vifion, (whatever fome of late have
fuggefted to the contrary ;) appears by their writings. The
queftion concerning Chrift's temptations, which had been
agitated before the publication of the ift edition of this
Inquiry, was this, Were they propofed to him outwardly, or in the
way of vifion ? Thofe who aflerted that all, or any of them
were iupernatural vifions, afcribed them to the devil, no lefs
than thofe who believed them to be outward tranfaClions,
The learned Spanheim (Dubia Evang. pars tertia, dub. 55.
p. 240, 241.) ftates the point in difpute in the following
manner: Quseri enim poteft, nee fine caufa, an de hiftorid
hie agatur, an de vifione, & utrum externo congreflu adortus
fuerit Chriftum tentator, an potius Chrifto in vifionem & ec-
ftafin rapto fpecies ejufmodi duntaxat objeCtae fuerint a ten-
tatore ? He knew of no third opinion, for he adds, Duplex
hie eruditorum fententia. And in the fequel he argues
againft the temptations being vifions, becaufe it derogated
from the dignity of Chrift, to allow, that the devil could ad
upon his mind or imagination, and deceive him by various fiditious
reprefentations.

C 43 1
This interpretation, it muft be confefled,
has one advantage above the former, that it
does
reprefentations. This fubjeCt, fo far as concerns the removal
of Chrift from place to place, was afterwards difcufled by
that prodigy of learning, S. Bochart, who ftates the contro-
verfy in the following terms ; Utrum fcilicet Chriftus reipjd,
an vero imaginatione tantum, a Diabolo in montem, tempJique
pinnaculum, fuerit tranllatus, Oper. Vol. I. p. 942. ed.
Lugduni Batav. 1712. And in the following pages he preffes
his opponents, as Spanheim alfo had done, with the diffi
culties of their avowed principle, that the devil deceived Chrifi
in vifion. Moft of our modern writers affert, that it was the
devil who made a vifionary reprefentation of all the kingdoms
of the world to Chrift. And very lately Mr. Mafon (in a
fermon upon Chrift's temptations in the wildernefs, publilhed
in the 2d volume of the Proteftant Syftem, 1758.) undertook
to (hew, that the whole of what is related, in the hiftory was
riot-real fad, but pafTed in a trance, dream or vifion. He
affirms after others, that the phrafe, in thefpirit, here (ignifies,
in a Jpiritual manner, as he thinks it does in John vi. 63. and
alfo in Ezek. xxxvii. 1, where the prophet fays, he was
carried out in the Jpirit, not really, but in imagination only,
(mente non revera) or in vifion : (compare Bochart, v. i_
p. 954 ) At the fame time, like all others who aflerted the
temptations of Chrift to be vifions, he did not refer them to
God, but maintained that the devil painted and exhibited
the fcenes here defcribed, and ftrongly prefented them, not
to the fenfes, but imagination of our Lord. See p. 308, 311,
314, 315, 317.
Since the publication of the ill. edition of this Inquiry,
fome have thought, that Le Clerc believed this to be a divine
vifion, merely becaufe he was once inclined to think it a
<vifeon. And very happy, I acknowledge, would it have
been, if (what I efteem) the true opinion concerning Chrift's
temptations, could have boafted ib great a patron, whofe
same could not have failed procuring it a general attention,
and doing it much honour. But we have already (hewn, that
thofe who believed the temptations of Chrift to be vifions, did
never

C 44 I
does not deftroy the uniformity of the hiftory,
nor reprefent the evangelifts, as blending to
gether,
never afTert their divinity, but on the contrary took it for
granted, that they were framed by the devil, whofe agency
the hiftory was thought to affert in the ftrongeft manner, and
which the principles of Le Clerc did not at all incline him to
call into queftion : for a vifion is only one fpecies of miracles,
and he always taught that the devil may perform true miracles.
See his note on Exod. vii. 11. What Le Clerc controverts,
is juft the fame with what others had done before, Whether
what the devil faid and did to our Saviour, was faid and done
to him when awake or afleep ; whether this was an outward
tranfaftion in the day time, or only a mental reprefentation in
a dream or vifion. When he publilhed his ift edition of
Hammond, he rather inclined to this latter opinion ; for he
begins his note on Mat. iv. i , with faying, What is here
related (i. e. Chrift's being led up into the wildernefs to be
tempted of the devil) may more fafely be conceived to have hap
pened to Chrift in a vifion or dream than really, or in the out
ward manner related in the hiftory. In his 2d edition he
retraCis this opinion, and afferts, PofTunt hasc interdiu con-
tigeffe, et a vigilante Chrifto vifa, audita & diCta ; adding,
itaque nihil eft cur ad fomnium confugiamus. All his doubt
was about the manner in which Chrift was led and tempted by
the devil; and he no more denied the devil's agency, while
he thought this happened to Chrift in a dream, than when he
afterwards admitted that it might happen to him when
awake. The objedlon-s which he once made to the literal in
terpretation, and afterwards overcame, farther (hew this to
be the cafe. His firft ohjeCtion is to the devil's being per
mitted to carry our Saviour through the air. To deftroy the
force of this objection, Whitby (on Mat. iv. 8.) very perti
nently afks, Looks it not far more odd, to give the devil power
ever the phaksie of our Lord to raife fuch imaginations in him,
end fuggeft fuch dreams to him, than barely to give him that
power over our Lord's dody, which neither did nor could do him
any hurt. And Le Clerc's fecond objection alfo, which is
drawn from the impoffibiliiy of (hewing Chrift from a mountain
1 all

[ 45 1
gether,indifcriminately, ideal and real objeds.
Neverthelefs, in all other refpeds it feems li
able
all the kingdoms of the world and all their glory in a moment
of time, if he was awake, though he fays, it might be done
in a dream ; plainly admits the devil's power to (hew Chrift
the profpeCt in queftion in his deep : a thing judged by him.
to be no way impoffible. Having folved, to his own fatis-
faCtion, thefe two objections againft the literal interpretation,
he thought there was no reafon for departing from it ; as
appears from his words cited above. So that he never dif-
puted any thing but the manner in which the devil tempted
Chrift. And confequently he could not have the leaft idea of
the fcenes here deicribed, as being (what it is attempted in
the Inquiry to (hew they are) a divine revelation and Jymbolical
predidion of the temptations of Chrift's future minifiry. Had he
believed God to be the author of this vifion ; he would natu
rally, when he was explaining the ufe, which, he tells us,
Chrift might make of it, have faid fomewhat about it's wife
and benevolent intention : whereas he fays nothing more on
this head, than what all do who afcribe the temptations to
the devil, which he might as juftly have faid, if he believed
the devil tempted Chrift in a dream. Even when he explains
the phrafe, t/Vo ts truivfjutjo;, of the fpirit, he attempts to
ftiew, juft as Mr. Mafon and others who afcribe this vifion to
the devil do, that it imports only in ffiritu, that is, fpiri-
tually, mentally, or with refpeCt to the mind ; (fee his Harmony
on John iii. 5,) and, as he afterwards explains it, in vifion or
imagination, in opposition to an outward tranfadion. Nay,
though here in confirmation of this meaning of the phrafe,
he refers to paiTages which defcribe divine vifions,
(Ezek. ii. 2. ch. iii. 12. Rev. i. 10. Ezek. xl. 2. Rev. xxi. 10.)
he makes no more ufe of them to prove the vifion in queftion
to be divine, than thofe who believed it to be a diabolical
one, who likewife appeal to thefe paffages. And if the
phrafe does import no more, than what both he and they fay it
does ; this alone will not enable us, to determine who was the
author of this vifion. Upon Le Clerc's and their principles,
this muft be determined by other circumftances, either by
fome

[ 46 ]
able to equal, or even to greater difficulties
than the former. Thofe
fome additional words, as in Ezek. xl. 2. " the vifions of
" GOD," and ch. xxxvii. 1, " the Spirit of the Lord;" or
by the connection, which in the cafe before us was thought,
in the moft exprefs manner, to refer to the devil, every thing
faid and done to our Saviour. And it could be with no other
view, than to exclude the agency of God, and to leave room for
admitting the agency of the devil, that Le Clerc joins with thofe
who confidered this as a diabolical vifion, in underfianding
the phrafe with fo much latitude, as pojfibly importing only in
general, mentally or in vifion ; which allowed it's application
to any vifion, whoever was the author of it, whether a good
or evil fpirit. The proper proof of the divinity of this vifion,
arifes from a different interpretation of this phrafe, as com
prehending in it the idea of a divine afflatus and infpiration 5
which the author of the Inquiry has endeavoured to (hew it
does. This different condud in Le Clerc and him, proves
their views to be different.
For thefe reafons, 1 think, the world has not been miftakenj
in ranking Le Clerc amongft thofe who believed the agency
of Satan in tempting Chrift, though he difputed the manner in
which it happened. Dr. Whitby in particular had no con
ception that he denied, or that any one elfe could poffibly
deny, the agency of the devil on this occafion. For in his
anfwer to Le Clerc^ after citing the paffages which defcribe
the devil as removing Chrift from place to place, and after
wards departing from him, he alks, Muft not thefe words un
avoidably import, that either the devil did really thus tempt
him, or elfe did frame this vifion in his brain ? It is plain that
Dr. Whitby, than whom no commentator difcovers a mora
extenfive acquaintance with books, had never read of any wh»
allowed thefe fcenes to be vifionary, and at the fame time
afcribed them to God.; and that he would have pronounced
fuch an opinion a moft flagrant contradiction to the hiftory,-
which afcribes all to the devil. If Le Clerc had entertained
this opinion, he certainly would have attempted at leaft to
remove fo obvious, and, in Whitby's judgment, fo unanfwe^

I 47 1
Thofe who will not believe, that the devil
could convey Chrift, really and corporeally,
from one place to another through the air ;
do neverthelefs admit, that he could raife in
able a difficulty. His taking no notice of it, is a farther
proof, that his fcheme was not liable to it. In a word,
thofe, who fince the publication of the ift edition of this
Inquiry, reprefeht Le Clerc as aflerting the divinity of this
vifion, not only put a new and unheard of fenfe upon his
words, but fuch as, to my apprehenfion, they are not capable
of bearing.
N. B. The ill edition of Le Clerc's Hammond was printed
in 1698, and the 2d in 1714. In this interval, Dr. Whitby
publilhed his Commentary. Whether Le Clerc's change of
fentiments is to be afcribed to Whitby's reafoning, I know
not ; but it is certain the former does not complain of being
mifreprefented by the latter. I will only add, that Olearius,
in his Obfervationes Sacra; ad Evang. Matthsi, having ranked
Le Clerc amonglt thofe who aflerted Chrift's' temptation to be
a vifion ; Le Clerc in his account of that author, (Bibliotheque
Ancienne et Moderne, Tom. II. p. 349, 350, 35 1.) declares,
that he had never adopted the fentiments of thofe writers,
having only judged it better, to underftand the temptation as
a vifion, than to allow) that the devil carried Chrift through the
air ; that he had never denied, but on the contrary had main
tained, (both in his Pneumatology and his Logic,) the power
of devils over corporeal fubftances ; but was now of opinion,
that the text in the original imported nothing more, than
that the devil led or conduded Chrift. Though Le Clerc had
occafion thus accurately to defcribe and diftinguifti the
different fentiments of divines on this fubjeCt, he never drops
the leaft intimation, that either himfelf or others had ever
aflerted the divinity of this vifion. Nor have I been able to
di (cover any traces of this opinion in any writer. Whether
Chrift's being tempted by the devil, paffed in vifion or not, the
reality of the agency is the fame, on either fuppofition, fays
£p. Warburton, Serrn. Vol. III. p. 220. Chrift

i 48 ]
Chrift a falfe perfuafion that he was thu9
tranfported by him. They are cautious
indeed how they afcribe to the devil a power
of ftrengthening the bodily fight, that it
may reach diftant objeds; yet readily fup-
pofe him capable of placing before the ima
gination fcenes of beauty and grandeur, and
of caufing it to miftake thefe fhadows for
realities. Thus while they deny the power
of Satan over the body, they grant him a
nobler empire, a fovereign influence over the
mind. Nay, to admit Satan to be the author
of vifionary reprefentations, is to allow him
no inconfiderable influence over our corporeal
as well as mental faculties; if it be true, as
many authors affert, that in a vifion the fenfes
themfelves are bound up, and the exercife of
the bodily organs is fufpended, at the time
that the mind miftakes thofe images which
are placed before it, for real outward objeds.
Thus this opinion grants a more aftonifhing
extent and grandeur to the empire of Satan,
than the former.
But does reafon inftrud us, that the gra
cious Parent and Guardian of mankind would
entruft their inveterate enemy with fo dan
gerous a power over them as this; and
hereby, in effed, commit them, foul and
body, into his hands ? Does experience teach us,

[ 49 3
us, that the devil does in fad exercife fuch
power over the human race ? moft certainly
it teaches no fuch dodrine. And if this be
a power which the devil never exerts ; upon
what grounds can we maintain that he
poffeffes it ? Divine revelation does not run
counter either to reafon or experience. As
it afcribes all miraculous operations in ge
neral, fo vifions "' in particular, to God as their
author; interpofing either immediately by
himfelf, or by his angels, thofe adive mi-
nifters or fymbolical reprefentations of his
peculiar providence. It is needlefs to en
large under this head; inafmuch as the ar
guments urged under the former ', againft the
fuppofition of the devil's pofTeffing a miracu-
culous power over the bodies of men, conclude
more ftrongly againft his pofTeffing fuch a
power over their minds and bodies too.
I fhall only add, that did the devil really
poffefs the power, which, in contradidion to
reafon, experience and revelation, fome are
difpofed to allow him ; how incredible is it,
that it fhould ever have been exerted upon
the Son of God ? Can we believe, that this
* See Gen. xviii. l, 2. ch. xxviii. 12 — 22. ch. xxxi. 11.
ch. xxxii. 1, 2, 24 — 30. Jolh.v. 13 — 15. 1 Kings xix, 11, 12.
ACts x. 3, 11 — 19. ch. xxvii. 23. and the books of Ezekiel,
Daniel, and Revelation.
» Se£l. I. N°. 3. p. 22—31. E divine

[ 5° )
c'livine perfon was not only expofed to the
fuggeftions and ftratagems of Satan, but
overcome by them ; that he was poffefled
and feduced as well as affaulted by the devil,
and adually brought under the power of his
infernal delufions ? The very thought of this
ftrikes the mind with horror ! It approaches
to blafphemy !
But if the account hereafter to be given of
the divine original and benevolent intention
of Chrift's temptation, fhall appear to be juft,
it will afford the ftrongeft confutation of this,
as well as of the foregoing, interpretation.
It is a deference due to prevailing opinions,
not to rejed them without affigning the
reafons. And without exploding the old, no
new hypothefis can hope to be received, or
even to be examined. It was expedient,
therefore, previoufly to propofe and confider
the objedions, which may be raifed againft
the two" different explications of Chrift's
tempta-
b There is indeed a third account of Chrift's temptation by
the devil, which neither admits the perfonal prefence of this
evil fpirit, nor any reprefentation of him ; and fuppofes
Chrift's temptation by him to be nothing more than a bare
meditation of our Lord upon fuch trials as might poffibly be
propofed by the great tempter of mankind. But if there was
neither a real nor vifionary appearance of the devil, and he
was not prefent with Chrift in any fenfe whatever; why does
the hiftory affirm, that Chrift was led into the wildernefs to be
tempted by him ? Why does it farther reprefent the tempter as
coming

[ 5i ]
temptation, which have hitherto generally
prevailed. And the obvious difficulties at
tending both, will at leaft ferve to juftify us,
in proceeding to enquire,
SECTION III.
HETHER the text itfelf does not
lead us to a very different interpreta
tion, and reprefent the temptation of Chrift
as befalling him, while he was under a pro
phetic vifion, of which the Spirit of God
himfelf was the immediate and fole author.
This, perhaps, is no more than what follows
coming to Chrift ; Jpeaking to him ; receiving anfiwers from
him ; conveying or conduding him iuto the holy city ; fetting him
upon a pinnacle of the temple ; taking him to an exceeding high
mountain ; from thence Jbewing him all the kingdoms of the
•-.¦:orld ; ":d (till carrying on a converfation with him, till at
length he is commanded by Chrift to leave him, and is faid to
leave him accordingly ? Does this language import nothing
more, than that Chrift meditated on thefe things ? Does the
Scripture on any other occafion relate mere meditations as
outward occurrences ? Is there any manner of proof, that it
does fo in the cafe before us ? Can any (imilarphrafeology be
produced from any good author ? The hypothefis we are
examining is as deftitute of all rational intention, as it is of
all evidence. For what good end could be anfwered either
by meditating on events that could not be expeCted to happen ;
or by relating fuch meditations as events that had aCtually
happened ? In a word, this hypothefis feems to me, equally
groundlefs, ufelefs, and unnatural ; and ferves only to (hew,
how ready perfons of reflection were to run to any refuge,
rather than acquiefce in either of the foregoing interpre
tations, E 2 neceffarily

[ 5* I
neceffarily, from what has been already fug-
gefted. For if the temptation of Chrift is
neither to be underftood as an outward tran
fadion, nor diabolical delufion, it muft have
been a divine vifion. And that it was fo,
may, I apprehend, be fairly argued both
from the exprefs letter of the text in the
three evangelifts, and from feveral circum
ftances of the narrative.
St. Matthew, after relating the defeent of
the Spirit of God upon Jefus at his baptifm,
adds, Then was Jefus led up of the Spirit into
the wildernefs c.
It is generally fuppofed, that thefe words
affert, u that Jefus now went into the wil
dernefs in perfon, under a divine guidance."
But with what propriety could it be faid, trfat
Jefus went into the wildernefs in perfon at
this time, when he was,there already? It
was in the wildernefs that John exercifed his
miniftry ; and he baptized our Saviour there d.
Nor
c Mat. iv. i.
d Some eminent writers, I acknowledge, feem to think,
that the wildernefs was neither the fcene of John's miniftry,
nor confequently of our Saviour's baptifm. Dr. Clarke in
particular, ip his paraphrafe on Luke iii. 2, 3. fays, " John
" having hitherto lived privately in the wildernefs, was com-
«' manded of God to enter upon his public miniftry, and begin
" to pieach to the people. Accordingly, leaving the wildernefs,
" he went and preached in all the country about Jordan."
L- Clerc tranflates this paffage in the following manner : La
' parole

[ 53 ]
Nor did our Saviour quit the wildernefs in the" '
interval between his baptifm and his temp-»
tatiom
parole de Dieu fut addreflee a Jean fils de Zacharie dans le
defert. II alia enfuite par tout le pais, qui eft le long du
Jourdain. According to this explication of the language of
St. Luke, John had left the wildernefs before he baptized
Jefus. In order to form a true judgment concerning the fcene of
John's miniftry, it will be proper to examine the account given
of it by all the four evangelifts. St. Matthew, (ch. iii. i, 3,
5, 6.) affirms, that he came preaching in the wilderness
of Judea. He lik°wife obferves, that Ifaiah defcribed him as
the voice of one crying in thewilderness. And then in
confirmation of what he had advanced, adds, Then went out to
him Jerufalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about
Jordan, and vjere baptized of bim in Jordan. Now, if Jordan,
that part, at leaft, of this river, in and near which John
exercifed his miniftry, was not in the wildernefs, why does
the evangelift fay in fo emphatical a manner, that he came
¦preaching in the wildernefs I And why does he reprefent his
baptizing in Jordan, as an accomplilhment of Ifaiah's pro
phecy, which determined his miniftry to the wildernefs ?
The fame obfervation may be made on the language of
St. Mark, ch. i. 2, 3, 4, 5. He here takes notice, that
it vjas written in the prophets, The voice of one crying in the
•wildernefs. With a manifeft view, to (hew the conformity
between this prediction and the baptift's miniftry, he fubjoins,
John did baptize in the wildernefs, and preach the baptifm of
repentance And there went out unto him all the land of Judea,
and they of Jerufalem, and wet call baptized of him in the river
of Jordan. Dr. Clarke himfelf, in his paraphrafe on thefe
words, favs, " A great number of people reforred into the
" wildernefs to John, and were baptized by him in the river
" Jordan" It is indeed felf-evident, that he mentions
John's baptizing in Jordan, as an illuftration and proof of
what he had before aflerted, that he baptized in the wil
dernefs. St. Luke, whofe account of this matter we are next
to examine, has not given the leaft hint of John's leaving the
E 3 wildernefe,

[ 54 1
tation. For it appears by comparing the
feveral evangelifts together % that Chrift had
but juft left the banks of Jordan, and there
fore was ftill in the wildernefs, at the very
wildernefs, when he began to exercife his miniftry. On the
contrary, he fixes the fcene of it to the wildernefs. The
word of the Lord, according to this evangelift, (ch. iii. 2, 3.)
came unto John in the wildernejs. And he came into all the
country about Jordan, preaching the baptifm of repentance. As
it is written in the book of the vjords of Ifaias the prophet, Jay ing,
The voice of one crying in the vjildernefs. Now, could St. Luke
confider the country about Jordan, where John preached and
baptized, as being out of the wildernefs, when he tells us that
his preaching and baptizing in that country verified the
prediction of Ifaiah concerning his exercifing his miniftry in
the wildernefs ! This evangelift well knew, that the wildernefs
was the fcene of John's miniftry :*for he (ch. vii. 24.) as well
as St. Matthew (ch. xi. 7.) reprefents Jefus as faying to the
people concerning the baptift, What went ye out into, the
wildernefs to fee ? In the Gofpel of St. John we are told,
that the forerunner of Jefus baptized in Bethabara, (ch. i. 28.)
a public paffage over the river Jordan, on it's eaftern fide;
and likewife at Enon, near to Salim, on it's weftern fide,
(ch. iii. 23.) But thefe places come within the defcription of
the country about Jordan, which, we have feen, lay in the
wildernefs : a name which the Jews gave to a country that
was but thinly inhabited, Joftiua xv. 61, 62. (as is obferved
by Schmidius and Whitby on Mat. iii. i.) This evangelift
(ch. i. 23.) reprefents the baptift as applying to himfelf the
prophecy of Ifaiah, (ch. xl. 3.) I am the voice of one crying in
the wildernefs. Nov/, if the fcene of John's miniftry, and the
place in particular where he baptized, was the wildernefs, (as
all the four evangelifts affert;) then it was here that he
baptized JefiM. We are indeed exprefsly told; that Jefus was
baptized of John in Jordan, Mart i. 9. compare Mat. iii. 13.
Luke iv. 1. And Jordan, we have feen, or that part of this
river where John baptized, was in the wildernefs..
e Mat. iv. 1. Mark i. 12. Luke iv. 1. time

C 55 ]
time that (according to the common hypo
thefis) he is faid to have been led into it.
Now does it not found very harfh, to fpeak
of any one as going, or being led to a place^
where he is already ?
With a view to folve this difficulty, fome
have affirmed, " that as Chrift was before be
low in the wildernefs, upon the banks of
Jordan, he might, when he returned from
that river, be faid, without any impropriety,
to be led up into the wildernefs, that is, to
fome higher part of it." That the banks of
Jordan were, in many places, lower than
the adjacent wildernefs, we are not back
ward to allow. But that this was the cafe
in that particular place where Jefus had been
baptized, is a point that can not be proved.
And even if it could be proved, it would
not account for the language of the evan
gelift : for Jefus had quitted the place where
he had been baptized f, and was returning to
Galilee, before he was led up into the wil
dernefs. The expreffion therefore, whatever
it means, can not refer to the fuppofed height
of the wildernefs in that particular place above
f Jefus returned from Jordan, and was led by the fpirit into
the wildernefs, Luke iv. i. This language neceffarily
implies, that Jefus was not upon the banks of Jordan, but
was returning to Galilee, before he was led by the Spirit into
the wildernefs.
E 4 the

[ 5° 3
the banks of Jordan8.  Others propofe a
different folution ; affirming, " that Chrift
" was now hdfarther into the wildernefs, and
" into fome more horrid part of it." It does
not however appear, that this explication of
the word in this place, is warranted by the
fimilar ufe of it in any other place of the
New Teftament. Nor does it fuit with the
occafion of it's being ufed here. Jordan,
in which Jefus was baptized, was in the
heart of the wildernefs ; and he could not
with any propriety be defcribed as being
led farther into it, when he was at no great
diftance from that river, which we have feen
he was not, when he is faid to have been
led into the wildernefs. — A ftill different in
terpretation has been propofed, to the. follow
ing effed : Jefus, being baptized of John in
the Wildernefs, returned into Galilee, but was
Jed BACK AGAIN into the wildernefs.
But the hiftory, inftead of affirming, that
Jefus returned into Galilee,, only fays, He
returned from Jordan *, the phce of his
baptifm. And St. Mark1", after relating the
S Nor do any of the other evangelifts, any more than
St. Matthew, refer to the circumftance under confideration,
viz. the fuppofed height of the wildernefs above the banks of
Jordan. St. Mark fays, Jefus was driven into the wildernefs .-
St. Luke, that he was led into the wildernefs.
* Lukeiv. i. h Mark i. ii, 12. divine

[ 57 )
divine teflimony born to him there, adds,
And IMMEDIATELY'1 (confequently
while he was yet in the wildernefs, and not
long after he had quitted the banks of Jordan)
the Spirit drive th him into the wildernefs.
From hence it follows, that as Chrift had
not yet left the wildernefs, he could not be
faid to be led back again into it. This inter
pretation therefore muft neceffarily be re
ceded. With refped to the two former,
they, without accounting for the ufe of the
word in queftion, admit it as a fad, that
Chrift was adually in the wildernefs, at the
very time he is faid to be led into it. Now,
this being allowed, it may very naturally be
concluded, that the- evangelift can not be
here fpeaking of Chrift's being led, literally
and corporeally, into the wildernefs ; but of
his being conduded thither in fome different
fenfe and manner.
Having affigned obvious reafons for rejed-
ing the feveral foregoing explications of the
language of St. Matthew, I fhall now propofe
that which appears to me to be it's true
meaning. His words, literally rendered,
are as follow k : Then was Jefus brought l (or
carried)
k Tots o 'Isiitxc st'r«%9n e*t inv \eYi(J.oy Ctrl n ttv'.vy.a]®".
Mat. ivr. i.
1 d-.'i/Br, brought. By this word is ivdyu frequently
tran dated in the New Teftament. They brought (Jytiyafoi) him

[ 58 3
carried) into a wildernefs m By THE SPIRIT.
The Spirit here fpoken of, can be no other than
him to Jerufalem, Luke ii. 22. They brought (dvnyetW him
into the upper chamber, ACts ix. 39. Intending to bring him
forth (amtyafSv) to the people, ch. xii. 4. When he had
brought (dva.ya.fai) them into his houfe, ch. xvi. 34. In the
fame manner the word might have been rendered in the
following paflages : The devil taking him up (dva.ya.fav, bring
ing him) into an high mountain, Luke iv. 5. They led (dvnyafov,
brought) him into their council, ch. xxii. 66. They offered
{dvnya-fov, brought) facrifi.e unto the idol, ACts vii. 41. To
Iring up Chrift again (dva.ya.feiv, to bring) from the dead,
Rom. x. 7. That brought again (0 dva.ya.ftoi', who brought)
from the dead, Heb. xiii. zo.  'kvdyoy.<t,i is by gramma
rians rendered fuftollor, tollor ; and is very often applied to
the launching and failing of a (hip, that is, to it's being
lifted ofF from the ftrand, and borne or carried aloft upon the
water. They launched forth, (dviiy$n<t*.v) Luke viii. 22.
After we had launched, (as cPs lyiviTO iva.yffivtu n^a,i,)
Afts xxi. 1. We fet forth, {dvi^nytAv,) v. 2. We launched,
{dvityQipiv) ch. xxvii. 2. When we had launched from thence
{dvcfxfiivTic) v. 4. This word istranflated loofed, ch. xiii. 13.
ch. xvi. 11. ch. xvii. 21. It is rendered, failed, ch. xviii. 21.
ch. xx. 3, 13. And in ch. xxvii. 12. ch. xxviii. 10, 11. de
parted, though here alfo it might have been, with equal
propriety, rendered, launched or failed. The fame ufe of the
word is common in Heathen writers.
m Though « if»[j.©-, when applied to one particular wil
dernefs, as that of Judea or Arabia, for example, is properly
rendered, " the wildernefs," (Mat. iii. 1. John iii. 14.) yet
Schimidius (on Mat. iii. 1.) very juftly obferves, Interdum
etiam indefinite notatur talis locus quicunque, ut Mat. iv. 1.
ch. xxiv. 26. Mar. i. 12, 13. Luc. iv. 1. ch. viii. 29.
ch. xv. 4. Aft. xxi. 38. Apoc. xii. 6, 14. ch. xvii. 3.
Et licet articulus aliquando additus inveniatur : non tamen
certum individuum loci turn denotat, aut certam eremurn :
fed quamcunque fane, cujufcunque traftus eremurn, non tam
ab aliis eremis, quam ab aliis illius traCtus locis diftinCtam ;
ubi
i

[ 59 ]
than the Spirit of God, with which he was
filled at his baptifm \ Now, by the Spirit
which Chrift received at his baptifm, we are
to underftand, as all allow, the extraordinary
gifts and powers beftowed upon the great
prophet of the Chriftian church, to furnifh
him for the execution of that office, with
which he was *at this time invefted. In this
fenfe our Saviour ufes the word, when he
applies to himfelf that prophecy of Ifaiah,
libi nee nomen eremorum eft additum, nee exquirere illud
opera; admodum eft pretium. Sufficit nos fcire, eremum ibj
quandam, non alterius fpeciei locum denotari. Similis eft
ratio Matth. xvii. 15. risAAa'.is tc'itrlet eis to true, ko.i
<ssoXh.dt.ii; &< to uJVp. Non quod notetur certus numero
ignis, aut certa numero aqua. Sed indefinite, quicunque
ignis, & qusecunque aqua. Ideo Marcus ix. 22. fine arciculo
effert, /.ri ih ¦aru? ''i£a/\i, ncu. eis vS'j.Ta. In the paffage
before us therefore, ii Ipnu©- ftiould be rendered " a wil-
" dernefs," or a wild and defert place, inhabited rather by
wild beafts than men.
n This appears from the manner in which the evangelifts
conned the account of Chrift's temptation with that of his
baptifm ; and from the diltinCtion they make between the
Spirit by which he was conveyed into the wildernefs, and the
tempter. The former is exprefly called by St. Luke the Holy
Spirit, ch. iv. 1. Jefus being full of the Holy Spirit, returned
from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit (that is, the Holy Spirit
before-mentioned) into a'vAldernej's. Accordingly, the Syriac
veifion of uVi t~. ¦-veiv/jicn<&, is rendered a Spiritu fanCti-
tatis ; and the Perfic, a Spiritu fanCto. With refpeft to this
phrafe, Beza on Mat. iv. 1. obferves, Si libeat dvaipoodv
articuli fervare, vertere licebit, ab eo Spiritu ; ut de eodem
illo Spiritu hie agi conftet cujus paulo ante mentio faCta
fuerat. i.e. de Spiritu fanCto.
The

[ 60 ]
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, becaufe he
hath anointed me to preach the Gofpel to the
poor0. And again, when he fays, If I cafi
out demons by the Spirit of God p. In the fame
fenfe the word is ufed by John the Baptift,
when he faid concerning Chrift, God giveth
not the Spirit by meajure unto him q ; and alfo
when he delivered the following prophecy
concerning him, which received it's accom-
plifhment on the day of Pentecoft, He fhall
baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and with
fire'. When the apoftle John fays, The Holy
Spirit was not yet given, becauje that Jefus
was not yet glorified5, he plainly refers to that
moft plentiful donation of miraculous gifts,
which was wifely referved till Chrift's afcen-
fion into heaven, when it was moft wanted
to atteft and propagate the Gofpel. It was
with an exprefs reference to thofe extraordi
nary endowments which the apoftles were
encouraged to exped, that Chrift faid to
them after his refurredion, Receive ye the
Holy Spirit '. Te Jhall receive power, after
that the Holy Spirit is come upon you : and ye
• Luke iv. 18.
? Mat. xii. 28. Compare ch. i. 18. Luke xi. zo.
t John iii. 34.
» Mat. iii. n. Compare ACts i. 5. ch, ii. 3.

John vii. 39.
John xx. 22.

fhall

[ 6r ]
Jhall be witneffes unto me u. Many other
paffages might be added ; but it is unne-
ceffary to cite them at large *.
And as the Spirit frequently denotes mira
culous gifts in general ; fo it often expreffes
a prophetic illumination in particular, a divine
agency on the mind revealing new truths
to it, or making fome difcovery of the will
of God. It was revealed unto him by the
Holy Spirit r, by the agency or illumination
of the divine Spirit. Holy men of God fpake
as they were moved by the Holy Spirit z, by a
divine afflatus and infpiration. Being fent
forth by the Holy Spirit * : were Jor bidden of
the Holy Spirit* ; in both thefe places the
Holy Spirit denotes a prophetic revelation c.
This phrafe is applied to revelations in the
way of vifion, or fight; as will be fhewn at large
below, when we come to examine the mean
ing of the correfpondent phrafe in St. Luke"1, and
u Afts i. 4, 5, 8.
* Ads ii. 1 — 4, 14—18, 33, 38. ch. iv. 8, 21. ch. vi. 3.
ch. viii. 15, 17, 18. ch. x. 44,45,47. Heb. ii. 4. 1 Pet. i. 12.
See alfo Numb. xi. 29.
y Luke ii. z6. vtro n t?viuf/.dl@- tb dyix.
z 2 Peter i. 21. Ctrl wsi/juaj©- dy'ia.
2 ACts xiii. 4. uno TS tanviAa\@- <k dy'ii.
b ACts xvi. 6. vwo m dy'tx tivivfid]©-.
c See alfo ACts viii. 29. ch. x. 19. in which places the
fpirit denotes an afflatus or revelation of the Spirit.
d The uVo t« ¦unto/jol©- of St. Matthew is equivalent to
the kv tu tavivpcfli of St. Luke; and therefore if this latter be,

[ 62 ]
and fome fimilar expreffions in the prophet
Ezekiel ; where being taken up by the
Spirit*, denotes a prophetic fcenery and re
prefentation. Now if Chrift was brought
into a wildernefs, by the Spirit, in the fenfe
of the phrafe here explained, that is, by a
prophetic illumination, by revelation, in a
vifion ; St. Matthew cannot be underftood of
his being conveyed there corporeally and per-
fonally, but fpiritually and mentally. To this
fenfe of the phrafe, the connexion neceffarily
leads ; and this, the circumftances of the
hiftory evidently require. For this alone
removes the objedion againft the literal con
ftrudion, juft now taken notice of. Though
it could not with any propriety be faid, that
Chrift was at this time carried into the wil
dernefs in a corporeal manner, in which
fenfe he was there already : yet there is no
thing improper in faying, he was now con
veyed into a wildernefs in a fpiritual manner,
in vifion or mental reprefentation, by the
infpiration of the Spirit of God.
To fome it feems ftrange, " that Chrift
" fhould be brought into the wildernefs by
" the Spirit, or by vifionary reprefentation,
be, (as we (hall (hew it is,) expreffive of a divine vifion, the
former muft be fo too.
e Ezek. iii. 12, « if

[ 63 ]
'* if he was there before in perfon ; or that
u he fhould be in the fame place, at the
" fame time, both really - and in vifion."
This objedion is entirely obviated by the
tranflation given above of the words of
St. Matthew, who fays, <c Jefus was brought
" (not into the wildernefs, but) into a wil-
" dernefs by the Spirit," without referring
to any one particular wildernefs. The place
therefore where Chrift really and perfonally
was, has no relation to that which was the
fcene of his vifion. But if you chufe to
adhere to the common tranflation of the ori
ginal word, and affirm that it means the
wildernefs, you will not prejudice the inter
pretation here given of the phrafe, by the
Spirit k ; but only make it fo much the more
neceffary to underftand it as expreffive of
a vifion or fpiritual rapture ; it being im-

1 For a prophet may be brought by the Spirit into the very
fame place where he was before in perfon ; that is, the fcene
both of his vifion and of his perfonal prefence may be the
fame. Of this we have an example in the cafe of Ezekiel,
ch. iii. n, 15. ch. xi. 24, 25. which will be cited below.
We might therefore without the leaft prejudice to our argument
grant, that the place where Chrift was in perfon, where he con
tinued forty days, and from whence he returned into Galilee,
was the external archetype of the chief fcenes of Chrift's pro
phetic vifion. But there is no neceflity, nor indeed any fort of
reafon, to make this conceflion ; becaufe the evangelift is nof
(peaking of anyone wildernefs in particular. poffible,

poffible, for the reafon juft now affigned,
to interpret it in another fenfe.
The fenfe here affixed to the language of
St. Matthew, may be juftified by the ufe of
the fame or fimilar phrafes, in other pafTages
of Scripture. The prophet Ezekiel was carried
away to Babylon, with many other of his
countrymen, in Jehoiachin's captivity ; and
the prophetic fpirit came upon him, when he
was amongft his fellow-exiles by the river
Chebar, in Mefopotamia. Here, as he informs
us, he received revelations from God by
vifions : The heavens were opened, and I faw
vifions of God. The word of the Lord came unto
me ; and the hand of the Lord was there upon
me1. After this general declaration, he goes
on to defcribe the cherubims and other fcenes
of his vifion, in the fame manner as if they
had been objeds of his bodily fight. I looked,
and behold, a great whirlwind came out of the
north, a great cloud, &c. When I faw it ft he
appearance of the likenefs of the glory of the
Lord) I fell upon my face \ And the fpirit
entered into me, when he fpake unto me, and
fet me upon my feet, that I heard him that
fpake unto me1. When he received new
s Ezek. i. — 3. compared with 2 King. iii. 15.
h Ezek. i. 4, 28.
5 Ezek. ii. 2. which is thus rendered by the 70, Ka) maSsv
Ir ipi <nrviv/j.a, koa d/iXaC't (At, koa lEfUp'i [At, kcu Irticri
l>.% \m\ ii' •s'aS'a.s p\s, ». 7. A. vifions

I 65, ]
Vifions and revelations from God, fudh as
were particularly defigned for the admonition
bf his fellow-exiles ; this new prophetic
fcene is defcribed in words, which literally
import a local tranflation, which there is not
the leaft reafon to fuppofe ; for the prophet,
at the time he is reprefented as conveyed to
thofe of the captivity, was already amongft
them in perfon : Go, get thee to them of the
eaptivity.— Then the Jpirit took me up, and I
heard behind me a voice of a great rufhing. — •
So the fpirit lifted me upi and took me away,
and I went in bitternejs, in the heat of my
Jpirit, but the hand oj the Lord was firong
upon me \ In the fequel of thefe prophecies,
we find Ezekiel carried to Jerufalem, there
fhewn the idolatries committed by the Jews
within the precinds of the temple, and em
ployed in digging in the walls of it, as if he
had been adually in that place; notwith-
ftanding thefe feveral occurrences, however
related as corporeal adions and motions^
were undoubtedly tranfaded in Vifion only;
for he was now at Babylon. The hand of the
Lord fell upon me, the Spirit lift me up between
the earth and the heaven, and brought me in
the vifions of God to Jerufalem, to the door
of the inner gate that looketb towards the
* Ezek. iii. u, 12, 14.
F North i

[ 66 j
North, &c '. When a new fcene at Jerufalem
was placed before his imagination, it is faid,
The fpirit lift him up, and brought him to the
place it was defigned to reprefent"1. After
this he is defcribed as carried back again into
Chaldea, from which place he had not, during
thefe fucceffive fcenes, been abfent in perfon :
The Spirit took me up, and brought me in vifion
by the Spirit of God into Chaldea, to them of the
captivity ; fo the vijion which I had feen went
up Jrom me. Then I Jpake unto them of tbe
eaptivity, all the things that the Lord had
fhewed me \ Upon another occafion be tells
us, The hand of the Lord was upon me, and
carried me out in (or by) the Spirit of the Lord,
and fit me down in the midfi of the valley which
was full of bones ; though what follows is
nothing more than the narrative of~a vifion °.
And we find him once mere carried to Jeru-
Jalem, without ftirring from Chaldea: The
hand of the Lord was upon me, and brought me
thither. In the vjions of God brought he me
into the land oj Ifrael, and jet me upon a very
high mountain p. From thefe feveral pafTages
it appears, that to be brought or carried from
1 Ezek. viii. i— 10.
m Ezek. xi. 1.
" Ezek. xi. 24, 2j.
./ Ezek. xxxvii. 1.
? Ezek. xl, 1, 2. ©ne

t 67 ]
biie place to another, in the vifions oj God*, of
(which is a phrafe of the like import) in or
by the Spirit r ; does not denote any real local
removal, but the being tranfported from one
place to another, by way of mental lively
reprefentation, under the power of a divine
trance or extacy : and that in this fenfe, a
perfon may be faid to be carried to the very
place, where he already was perfonally and
corporeally, if it becomes the fcene of his
prophetic vifion ; or to be returned to that
place, though he had never quitted it in the
Ordinary fenfe of that expreffion, if it becomes
the fcene of new vifionary reprefentations;
Which, as we obferved before, are related as
fads, becaufe they appear as fuch to the
XT . prophet.
* Notwuhftanding the pofitive declaration of the prophet,
that in the forecned paffages he is only reciting vifionary re
prefentations; and the obvious abfurdities attending the con-
rary fuppofition : yet have many contended d ]ocal
tranflation o Ezek.el, either in the body or out of it, fij
Chaldea to Jerufalem, and for the reality of the fcenes and
tranfaazons which he defcribes. But the authors o the
Vmverjal Htftory, Vol. IV. p. I96_,98> (gvo_ ed_ f h
ZonZ"' ^^P^fcribedV kekiel, ha^no
proportion, as to it s mealures, with that of Solomon ; and
Se bwurina rp ic,or emb,e,naticai °"e' Which —
exilted but in this prophecy. What end then could be an-
either in his body or out of it r The fcenes were a 1 painted
upon his imagination. pamtea
C^ ^^ -ph,rafeS' '* the **>" f G< ™* in or byXbe
Spsnt, are equivalent, will appear by comparing the fc^al
paffages from Ezekiel cited above. As to the phjfe, the hand '

[ 68 ]
prophet. We cannot therefore be at a lofs,
to underftand what St. Matthew means',
when he tells us, that Jefus was led up or
brought into a wildernefs by the Spirit. Into a
wildernefs he feemed to himfelf to be carried,
thither he was tranfported in vifion, by a
prophetic divine afflatus.
The expreffions ufed by the evangelifts
Mark and Luke, confirm the explication
of the Lord, it expreffes only a divine agency in general, not
themodeofit. Compare I Kings xviii. 46. 2 Kings iii. 15.
s It has been aflerted, that the language of Ezekiel is a
direCt defcription of vifions, which that of the evangelifts is
not. But whoever will compare the Septuagint verfion of the
paffages cited from the prophet Ezekiel, with the language of
the evangelifts, will find a remarkable correfpondence between
them, fuch as may farther ferve to juftify our explaining the
latter by the former. Thus Exekiel's faying, wvtvua nyayi
ixf, ch. viii. 3. ch. xi. 1. correfponds to di-n^Sn v<ao tb?
•^rviijy.HLTOi, in St. Matthew. And the iv 'TrviC/j.a.-ri ill
Ezekiel, ch. xxxvii. 1. as it expreffes the fame thing with
St. Matthew's v-xb t» T"-vya.jou fo it anfwers to St. Luke's
iv ta 'Ttvivfj.a.n, cited below, p. 72, note *. There is no
material difference between the u.v--\a£'i of Ezekiel, ch. iii. 12.
ch. ii. 2. ch. viii. 3. ch. xi. 1. and the iraoa-hai/Qdvi* of St.
Matthew, ch. iv. 5, 8. The words, dveyayuv and tiyayit,
ufed by St. Luke, ch. iv. 5, 9. in the paffages parallel to the laft
cited ones from St Matthew, correfpond to nyayi, eio-iiyayi
and itt'iyayi in Ezekiel, ch. viii. 3, 14. ch. xi. 1. ch. xxxvii. 1.
ch. xl. 3. Now if the language of the evangelifts be the
fame with that of the prophet, it certainly calls for a like
conftruCtion with that ; efpecially as the (tile of the new
teftament is allowed to correfpond to the Greek verfion of the
old. And confequently the language of the one is no lefs
expreffive than that of the other, both of a prophetic impulfe
and infpiration of the Spirit, and of the particular mode of that
ihfpiration, which was by vifion, as diftind from every other
fpecies of revelation. here

[ 69 j
here given of the language of St. Matthew.
Mark fays ', Immediately (after the defcent of
the Spirit at his baptifm) the Spirit, (or ac
cording to Beza's ancient manufcript, the
Holy Spirit) driveth him (or, cafleth him out ")
into a wildernefs. Thefe words are very
improperly referred to Chrift's being driven
by the Spirit into the wildernefs, corporeally
and perfonally ; becaufe we have fhewn,
that he was perfonally there before this im-
pulfe of the Spirit. They clearly exprefs
a fupernatural and divine agency upon the
mind of Chrift ; and therefore naturally and
neceffarily convey to us the idea of a pro
phetic rapture, trance or extacy, during
which he thought himfelf tranfported into
a dreary wildernefs. The language of St.
Mark perfedly correfponds with that or*
St. Matthew ; there being no difference be
tween faying with the former, Jefus was
' Chap. i. 1 2.
" The original word, \yX:'i >.At, is' applied very frequently
to defcribe Chrift's expulfion of demons. Vid. Mat. viii.
16, 31. ch. ix. 31, 34 ch. x. 1, 8. Mark i. 3.1, 39,
ch iii 15. Luke xi. 14 ch xiii. 32. The word, however,
does not always exprefs force and violence ; nor is it neceffary
that it (hould do fo, in order to juftify the application here
made of it. For in defcribing Ezekiel's vifion, ch. viii. 3.
ch. xi. 1 . ch. xxxvii. I . the Septuagint fays, the Spirit i'lyayi
led him, or i^tiyayk led him out ; which laft expreffion comes
very near that of the evangelifts, according to the fenfe in
which \x,Gd\\ti is ufed John x. 4.
F 3 driven

t 7« ]
driven or cafi out by the Spirit, and faying:
with the latter, that he was brought or.
carried by the Spirit ; the meaning of which
has been already explained. By comparing
together the feveral pafTages of Ezekiel cited
above, it appears, that when he fays, the
Spirit brought or carried him, he means the
fame as when he fays, he was broiight or
carried in the Spirit ; a phrafe unqueftionably
defcriptive of a prophetic vifion.
To this explication of the language of
St. Mark, it may be objeded, " that if by
the Spirit's driving Jefus into a wildernefs,
he means, that the Spirit drove him there
mentally and in vifion, that is, into an
ideal wildernefs ; it will be difficult to
reconcile this with what follows in the
next verfe, which feems to refer to a literal,
one, And he was there in the (or that) wil
dernefs forty days tempted of Satan, and was
with the wild beafls." It is, without
doubt, of one and the fame wildernefs, that
St. Mark fpeaks in both thefe verfes. And
were we to grant that this wildernefs was a
real one, and that Mark and the other
evangelifts fpeak of Chrift's being led or
driven into it perfonally and corporeally, it
may neverthelefs be true, that his temptation
was a mere vifion ; if thefe phrafes, the
Spirit,

[ 7i ]
Spirit, in and by the Spirit, import in this
hiftory, as they certainly do elfewhere, a
miraculous impulfe and illumination of the
Spirit, difcovering new truths to a prophet,
revealing Juture events, and exhibiting jcenes
and appearances before his imagination. On
this fuppofition, the meaning of the evan
gelifts will be, " Chrift was brought into
" a wildernefs" (not merely under a divine
" diredion, the phrafes import much more
" than this, 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 \"
But St. Mark is to.be underftood as fpeaking
only of an ideal wildernefs, that wildernefs
into which Jefus was driven by the Spirit,
or which was the fcene of his prophetic
vifion. This is what is fpoken of in the
twelfth verfe ; and moft probably therefore
in the thirteenth. The evangelift may very
naturally be explained in the following
manner : " No fooner did the Spirit defcend
" upon Jefus at his baptifm, than by his
" infpiration he was carried into a frightful
x Thefe trials, it will be (hewn below, 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 urging temptations.
F 4 " defart

[ 7* 3
ff defart in a prophetic trance or vifion. In,
f this fituation, and in this ftate, he re?
f mained for forty days, during all which
" fpace, he was, according to his own ap?
f prehenfion, affaulted by the temptations
?? of Satan, and expofed to danger from the
" fiiryof wild beafts y." This interpretation
feems to agree beft not only with the language
of St. Matthew, but with that of St. Luke
alfo, which we now proceed to examine.
This evangelift fays, that Jefus being Jull
oj the Holy Spirit, (as St. Stephen ' alfo is faid
to be, when he had a divine vifion) was led,
(brought or carried) into a wildernefs by (or in J
the Spirit *, that is, by that prophetic Spirit,
with whofe gifts he was filled at his baptifm,
y The circumftance of his being with the wild beafts,
rather confirms, than deftroys the opinion of his being in the
wildernefs in a ftate of trance, which deprived him of all
power of felf-defence, and which made it as abfolutely
neceffary that he (hould, during the continuance of that ftate,
which lafted forty days, be miraculoufly protected from wild
beafts, as that he (hould be miraculoufly fupported without
food. * ACts vii. 55. He being full of the Holy Ghoft, (i. e. under
it's miraculous energy and illumination) looked up fiedfafily
into heaven, &c.
* hy-]o kv 7e trvtvua']i, he was carried in or by the Spirit,
Luke iv. 1. This anfwers to dvhyfjn iVi :« ¦av-vfj.a]©-,
in St. Matthew. Every argument therefore urged above to
ellablilh the fenfe of the latter, is alfo applicable to the
former.

[ 73 J
and in the power of which he returned infg
Galilee*, that he might preach the Gofpel,
and confirm it by miracles. There being here
a manifeft reference to the extraordinary gifts
of the Holy Spirit, the words, in or by the
Spirit, like thofe of St. Matthew cited above,
muft be defigned to exprefs his miraculous
agency, or a prophetic afflatus and illumination :
which is a fenfe they often bear in other
pafTages of Scripture. David, we are told,
in Spirit % or by the Holy Spirit d, called the
Meffiah his Lord ; that is; he did this by a
prophetic impulfe of the Spirit. To Jpeak
myfieries in the Jpirit ' ; to pray with the
Spirit ; to fing with the Spirit f, is to fpeak,
pray and fing in the exercife of a fpiritual
gift, or under a miraculous illumination and
influence of the Spirit. In this fenfe the
phrafe is ufed, when it is faid of Simeon,
that he came into the temple by the Spirit %.
He came there under the powerful infpira-
tion of the prophetic Spirit, of which he
gave proofs by the teftimony he bore to
Jefus, and the predidions he delivered con
cerning him. The meaning therefore can
not be, that he came to the temple only by
k Luke iv. 14. c 'Ec •avivu.cfji, Mat. xxii. 43.
* 'Ec la 'sviviJ.dJt tu dy'iv, Mark xii. 36.
e 1 Cor. xiv. 2. f Ver. 15.
i 'Ev tu Wiuy.dji, Lukeii. 27. a divine

t 74 ]
a divine direction h. To mention one inftance
more ; St. Paul went to Jerufalem bound in
the Spirit ', that is, afTured by the Spirit of
prophecy, or by the predidions of infpired
men, that the Jews would bind him there.
For it is added k, The Holy Spirit (by the
mouth of divinely infpired prophets) wit-
nejfeth in every city, Joying, that bonds and
afflictions abide me\ So familiar was this
language with the Jews as expreffive of in-
fpiration, that a perfon thought to be infpired
by a demon, was defcribed as one in an
unclean Spirit m. Now if St. Luke only
aflerts, that Chrift was carried into a wil
dernefs by a fupernatural illumination of the
underftanding, or the infpiration of the Spirit
of prophecy ; you can never infer from hence
that he was carried thither in perfon \ As
* See Luke ii. 25.
* T<y mvz\>iJ.tt\i, ACts xx. 22.
k ACts xx. 23.
1 Compare ACts xxi. 4, where we are told, that fome faid
to Paul through the Spirit (J'td rS •3ri/sJ//tt]o©") that is, by the
infpiration of the Spirit of prophecy, that he fhould not go up to
Jerufalem, if he tendered his own liberty. For the Holy
Spirit faid, (by Agabus the prophet) The Jews at Jerufalem
will bind him, ver. 1 1 .
m 'Ev -ssvivy-dlt dKa.6dfjo.', Mark v. 2. Eflay on Demo
niacs, p. 100.
n Of Simeon it is faid, he came, (which expreffes his own
perfonal agency in coming) into the temple by the Spirit. But
of Chrift it is not faid, he came or went into a wildernefs, but
that he was brought or carried thither in or by the Spirit ;
3 which,

[ 75 3
As the phrafe, in the Spirit, is expreffive of
a prophetic afflatus and illumination in ger
neral, fo it is applied particularly to reve
lations received in the way oijvifion, or em-?
blematic reprefentations of things fuper-
paturally imprefTed upon the prophet's ima
gination. An eminent critic ° has obferved,
" that thofe two different manners of ex-
" preffion, which we now ufually call literal
" and figurative, were in the Jewifh language
" frequently denoted by the words fiefh and
'* Jpirit. Thefiejh, fays our Saviour, profiteth
" nothing; the words that I Jpeak unto you,
f they are Jpirit, and they are lije f. His
" meaning is, he intended not to be under-
f flood literally, but figuratively. To be
'.' therefore, or do any thing in jpirit, fig-
" nifies being or doing that thmg figuratively,
f* in the Jpiritual or moral, in the religious
" or in the ebfiracl fenfe, in oppofition to
" the grofs and more literal meaning, in
" which the fame words may at other times
(f be underftood." This obfervation is ap-
which merely expreffes a divine agency upon his mind. As
many as are led (dyovlai, aded) by the Spirit of God, they are
the fons of God, Rom. viii. 14.
* Dr. Clarke, Serm. 46. Vol. I. p. 286. fol. ed.
v John vi. 63. plicable

[ 76 ]
plicable to many pafTages of Scripture % and
ferves to fhew in general, that the fame
phrafe may have different fenfes, according
to the nature of the fubjed to which it is
joined ; nor is it foreign from our prefent
purpofe. It does not, however, convey the
precife and full meaning of the pafTages that
follow, where being in the Spirit, fignifies
being under the full influence of the pro
phetic Spirit, making revelations in the way
of vifion ; and doing any thing in the Spirit
denotes that thing's being done, not merely
Jpiritually (in oppofition to the more grofs
and literal meaning,) but in prophetic fcenery
and reprefentation. When St. John tells us,
I was in the Spirit', he means what the
ancient prophets do by this phrafe, that he
received a revelation from God, in the way
of a vijion ' ; as clearly appears from the ac
count he gives us of what he heard and Jaw
while
i It is very juftly applied by Dr. Clarke to John iv. 23.
Rom. ii. 28. Phil. iii. 3. compared with ACt. vii. 51.
Perhaps the other paffages cited by this learned writer require
a different interpretation.
' Rev. i. 10.
B Fuit in Spiritu,- i. e. \v \xsi<r&, faciente Spiritu fanCto,
ut ceffante ad tempus fenfuum externorum ufu defixus hseferit
in contemplatione illarum rerum, quarum imagines ipfiiis Dei
manu per duCtus fubtiliflimarum fanguinis partium in cerebro
deferibebantur, & fecundum leges naturas ad mentem refere-
3 bantur,

[ 77 ]
while the Spirit of prophecy was upon him \
When he repeats the fame phrafe", he flill
ufes it in the fame fenfe. This every one
muft allow who furveys the context. A voice
Jaid, Come up hither, and I will fhew thee
things which mufi be hereafter. And immedi
ately I was in the Spirit : and behold, a throne
was fit in heaven. From a regard, I prefume,
to this connedion, a learned and judicious
expofitor x fays, " This phrafe, / was in the
" Spirit, fignifies to be under a firong and .
" fupernatural operation of the Spirit of
" God, ading on the imagination in fuch
" a manner, as to open extraordinary fcenes,
" which had not any external archetype y."
Sometimes, however, in a prophetic vifion,
the fcenes prefented to the prophet's view
were real, and he faw what was tranfaded
at a diftance. St. Paul tells the Corinthians x,
J verily, as abfent in body, but prefent in fpirit.
In the very fame ftrain he addreffes the
Coloffians % Though I be abfent in the fiefh,
yet am I with you in the Jpirit, joying and
bantur : quod revelationis genus, (i vigilantibus obtingat,
Scriptural ftylo vifio dici folet. Vitringa in loc.
• Compare Rev. i. 10, with Ezek. iii. 12.
" Ch. iv. 2. x Doddridge on loc.
y In the Affembly's Annotations the fenfe is thus ex-
preffed, " He was fpiritaally carried up into heaven in a
" vifion."
z 1 Cor, v. 3. " Ch. ii. 5. behold-

r 7*i
beholding your order. In both thefe places^
the apoftle is fuppofed by many interpreters b
to refer to an extraordinary revelation of the
Spirit, giving him a particular view of the
circumftances of the churches of Corinth
and ColofTe, fuch as was equivalent to the
adual fight of them : juft as Elifha was
enabled by a divine impulfe, to difcern what
his fervant had done, when he ran after
Naaman the Syrian ' ; and as Ezekiel faw in
Babylon what was done in Jerufalem d.
Whether the vifionary reprefentation had an
external archetype or not, the prophet is
fpoken of as being tranfported to the place
where the fcene of his vifion was. St. John
tells us, in language as appofite as poffible to
our prefent purpofe, that an angel carried him
away in the Spirit into the wildernefs '. New
fcenes were afterwards prefented to his view,
which he thus defcribes, He carried me awaj
in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and
fhewed me that great city, the holy Jerufalem {.
St. John was not carried (as Dr. Clarke*
obferves) into the wildernefs, (and we may
add, nor to a high mountain) really and
b See Dr. Doddridge and others ori thefe places.
« z Kings v. 26. i Ezekiel, ch. viii. and xf.
e Rev. xvii. 3. f Ch. xxi. 10.
J Dr. Clarke, Vol. I. p.. 286, literally^

[ 79 ]
literally, but only in a vifionary reprefentation*
Nor indeed are there any who underftand
the apoftle as fpeaking here of any other than
a fpiritual rapture. During the age of infpi
ration, the fame language was not un
common, and it was ufed in the fenfe here
explained ; as appears from the writings of
Hermas, the fame, as is commonly fuppofed,
that was cotemporary with the apoftles h.
We may add, that the pafTages from Ezekiel
cited above to illuftrate the language of
St. Matthew, are equally applicable to that of
St. Luke' In a word, if we will explain the
three evangelifts on the fubjed under confi
deration, by the phrafeology of the OldTefta-
ment or of the New, then we muft allow,
that when they affirm, that Jefus was brought,
driven or carried into a wildernefs by or in
h Hermas, in his ill vifion, fays, Et dum ambulaffem,
obdormivi. Et Spiritus me rapuit et tulit me per quendam
locum ad dexteram, per quem non potuit homo iter facere.
Erat autem locus ille in rupibus. — Cumque tranfirem locum
ilium, veni ad planiciem. In his 2d vifion, he expreffes'
himfelf as follows : Rurfumque me abftulit Spiritus, & duxit
me in eundem locum, quo anno primo.— Et video contra me
anum illam, quam & anno fuperiore videram, ambulantem.
Cotelerii Patres apoftol. ed. Clerici, Vol. I. p. 75, 77,
Dr. Harwood's New Introduction, Vol.1, p. 173.
1 See above, p. 64, &c. That paffage in particular, Ezek.
xxxvii. 1. according to the Septuagint, anfwers exaCtly to
the language. Of Luke, He led me out Iv mvi\>y.a\t, in the'
Spirit. the

[ So }
the Spirit, they muft mean that he tvas cofte
veyed there (not perfonally and corporeally/
but) by the afflatus or infpiration of the
Spirit of God, in a prophetic vifion,- trance
or extacy \
Let us now proceed to examine the nature
of this vifion, or the feveral fcenes that eom-
k It majr riot be improper to obferve,' that the Scripture
fometimes diftinguifties between a vifion, and a trance or
extacy. When St. Peter faw heaven opened, and a fheet full of
Haft! and fowls, we are told, that he fell into d trance, or ds
it is in the original, an extacy, iir'vwio-iv \tr dvlbv "iuracr/o
ACt. x. 10, n, 12. The objeCts which the apoftle faw during
his trance, are called a v'fion. While Peter doubted in himjelf,
what this vi/ion fro oa-j.ij.cr.) which he had feen, Jhould mean;
ch. X. 17. While Peter thought on the vifion, •srsp/ tb lt>duar}<& ;
v. 19. He thought he Jaw a vifion, or fcenes divinely repre-
fented to his mind, ch. xii. '9. In a trance (iv lusd?^) 1 faw
a vifion (opafjc), ch. xi. 5. St. Paul fays, ch. xxii. 17, iS;
/ was in a trance, (-v incdo'e., in an extacy,) and faw the
Lord faying unto me. His rapture into paradife, and what he
heard there, he calls a vifion and revelation of the LorJ,
2 Cor. xii. 1. When the Scripture diftinguifties vifion from
extacy or trance, it means by the former the fcenes and objeds
placed before the mind by God, or the fymbolicalrevelation : and
by the latter, the prophetic impulfe; or rather that preternatural
ftate of mind produced by it, during which it perceives only
thofe objeCts and fcenes which are prefented to it by a
divine hand, and without the instrumentality of the
bodily organs. Being in the fpirit (Rev. i. 10.) includes
both an extacy, and a fymbolical revelation, or the objeCts
feen. Vifion likewife feems to be ufed in the fame compre-
henfive fenfe. Saul has Jeen in a vifion (iv ood/j.d]i) a man
named Annanias), ACt. ix. 12. Cornelius faw in a vifion (iv
opdy.dlt) evidently, an angel of God coming in to him, ch. x. 3.
Thefe two things, vifion and extacy, mutually imply each
Other j and therefore may fometimes be ufed as fynonymous. pofed

f Si ]
pbfed it. St. Matthew affirms, that thd
intention of Chrift's being carried into a wil
dernefs in a prophetic trance or vifion, was*
that he might be tempted by the devil '. St. Luke
fays the fame1": Jejus being full of the Holy
Spirit, was led or carried in or by the Spirit
into a wildernefs, being (or that he might ben)
forty days tempted of the devil. St. Mark
expreffes himfelf in the following terms ° i
The Jpirit driveth him into a wildernefs: And
he was there in that wildernefs (that is, in the
wildernefs into which the Spirit drove hirrij
and which was the fcene of his prophetic
vifion) Jorty days tempted of Satani Now if
the proper end and defign of Chrift's pro
phetic vifion, was, as both St. Matthew and
St. Luke afTert, that he might be tempted by
the devil ; then his temptation by the devil
was a vifionary reprefentation, the operation
and effed of that prophetic afflatus he was
now under. His temptation could not have
been fpoken of as the intention of his vifionj
if it had not itfelf been fuch. Befides, if
his temptation was the defign of his vifion,
the former muft have befallen him during
1 Ch. iv. I. ¦" Ch. iv. i, z.
n Compare Rev. xx. 2. where ligavit eum, is thought by
fome to denote ut effet ligatus.
0 Ch. i. 12, 13.
G the

r 82 ]
the continuance of the latter ; or in other
words, he was tempted by the devil whiie
he was under the miraculous illumination of
the Spirit of God, making new revelations
to him, and exhibiting extraordinary fcenes
before him. This is exprefly aflerted by
St. Mark, and clearly and neceffarily implied
in the language of St. Matthew and St. Luke.
From hence it follows, that his temptation
by the devil ; all the parts of it, as well the
feveral propofals which the devil made to
Chrift, as the different fcenes and objeds he
prefented to him, and his carrying him to
the fummit of the Jewifh temple, and from
thence to a high mountain p; all the parts of
p With regard to the taking Chrift from the wildernefs to
the Jewifh temple, and from thence to a diftant mountain,
there is fome peculiar evidence that this is not to be under
ftood of a real and corporeal tranflation of Chrift from the
wildernefs to thefe different places, but of fuch as was
fpiritual and mental only. For it appears from the hiftory,
that Chrift was in the wildernefs bordering on Jordan when
the temptation ended, as well as when it began, purfuing
his journey into Galilee *. If he really left the wildernefs,
and travelled firft to Jerufalem, and from thence to a high
mountain ; how come we to find him at the conclufion of his
temptations, at the very place where they began ? Is it not
natural to conclude from this circumftance, that his removal
from place to place was merely by vifionary reprefentation ?
Nor did the time allow of his going to thefe different places in
* The devil departed from him for a feafon. And Jefus re
turned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee, Luke iv. 13, 14.

[ 83 1
of this tranfadion were merely ideal and
vifionary. They were the fubjed matter of
Chrift's vifion, or of that fymbolical and
emblematical revelation which was now
made to Chrift by the Spirit. Never would
interpreters have conftrued that as a hiftory
of outward occurrences, which was mani-
feftly intended as a defcription of a vifion ;
had they confidered, that by Chrift's being
brought into a wildernefs in or by the Spirit,
we are to underftand his being conveyed
In any other manner. For though the whole time of Chrift's
continuing in the wildernefs expofed to temptation, was forty
days, as St. Mark affirms f ; yet thofe particular tempta
tions fpecified by St. Matthew and St. Luke, did not begin
till he had been tempted forty days, as both thefe evangelifts
inform us J. Thofe temptations muft therefore have been
propofed to Chrift, not after the forty days were expired,
and at three different times, as fome, without any manner of
reafon, have fuppofed ; but after the commencement of the
fortieth day, and yet before the expiration of it. But in fo
fhort a time, how was it poffible, that Chrift lhould hold
a 'converfation with the devil ; firft in the wildernefs of
Jordan, next upon the top of the temple of Jerufalem, and at
laft upon a high mountain, and after travelling to fuch
diftant places, return again to that from which he fet out at
firft ?
f He was there in the wildernefs forty days tempted of Satan,
Mark i. 13.
{ When he had fiafied forty days, and forty nights, be was
afterwards an hungred. And when the tempter Came unto him, &c
Mat. iv. 2, 3. Being forty days tempted of the devil. And
when they were ended, he afterwards hungred. And the devil
faid unto him, &c. Luke iv. 2, 3.
G z there

[ H 3
there by prophetic infpiration, and by that
particular mode of infpiration, which was
by vifion, as diftind from every other fpecies
of revelation. For if he was carried into
the wildernefs in vifion, that he might be
tempted of the devil ; and was fo tempted,
during his vifion ; then every thing that
occurs concerning his temptation by the
devil, was a vifionary reprefentation q. The
meaning of the evangelifts is plainly this :
" Jefus was brought into a wildernefs by a
" fupernatural operation of the Spirit, in
" vifion ; which (in part, at leaft) confifted
" in a feeming appearance of the devil to
" him, carrying him to different places, and
" urging various temptations : and the
" making this reprefentation to the mind
tf of Chrift, was the fpecial end of his pro-
" phetic vifion." It would not therefore
be more unreafonable to conftrue the pro
phetic vifions of Ezekiel and St. John re
ferred to above, as relations of a feries of out
ward occurrences ; than it is to put the like
conftrudion upon this vifion of Chrift ;
9 Were we even to allow, that Chrift was brought into a
wildernefs perfonally and corporeally (and not mentally
only;) yet on this fuppofition, what is called his temptation
by the devil,- was a divine vifion or revelation, the effeCt of
that prophetic afflatus he was now under, and it's declared
intention. fince

[ 85 j
fince both are introduced in the fame manner,
that is, with exprefs declarations to the
contrary. But if Chrift's temptation was only a vifio
nary reprefentation ; fome may be ready to
objed ; " Why is it faid, that he was led
" into the wildernefs to be tempted of the
" devil? And why is the devil defcribed
" as coming to him, and tempting him ac-
,( cordingly, and taking him from- one place
" to another ; juft in the fame manner as
" if he had been really prefent, and adually
" done thefe things ? Whether this tranf-
" adion paffed in vifion or not, the reality
" of Satm's agency is ftill the fame, on
" either fuppofition. His agency is clearly
" and ftrongly afferted ; which can never
" be reconciled with the opinion here main-
" tained, that the whole tranfadion was
" entirely a divine vifion."
The anfwer to thefe objedions may be
gathered, from what was faid above con
cerning the nature of prophetic vifions, and
the manner in which they are related in
Scripture. In a vifion, the images of things
appear, not the objects themfelves : and there
fore the devil was not really and perfonally
prefent with Chrift, but only in mental re
prefentation ; and confequently could ad no
G 3 part

¦ [ 86 ]
part in this whole tranfadion. If what is
here faid concerning his prefence and agency
be a reality, and not a mental exhibition,
this was no vifion. But though there was
no real prefence or agency of Satan upon this
occafion ; yet was his image now placed
before the imagination of Chrift, and he
feemed to him to fay and do all that is
afcribed to him in the hiftory : which was,
in ejfecl, the fame thing with regard to Chrift,
as if this had been the very cafe, and the
devil had appeared and tempted him in
perfon, and tranflated^ him from place to
place by his proper agency. It is for this
reafon, that the hiftory affirms, that the
devil did all thefe things. In all vifions,
(as in all dreams, which may be confidered
as natural vifions,) the images pafs for the
objeds they reprefent, make the fame im-
preffion, and anfwer the fame end with them ;
and in correfpondence to thefe inward views
and apprehenfions of the prophet, is the
narrative of his vifions always framed. He
takes them for fads, and they are related as
fuch ; as we have fhewn in a great variety
of inftances r. The evangelifts, therefore,
in afcribing the temptation to the devil,
r See above, p. 34—37- and p. 64, &c, and below, p. 98,
&c. have

[ *7 J
have ufed no other language, than what it
was to be expedcd they would ufe, no other
than what was common on all fuch occa-
fions. Having told us, that Chrift was car
ried into a wildernefs in a prophetic vifion,
they then explain the vifionary reprefenta
tion, which was, his being tempted by the devil,
who accordingly is faid to come to him, to
remove him from one place to another, and
to propofe to him difFcrertt temptations.
Nothing more, as we have already fhewn,
could be intended by this language, than to
fpecify and defcribe the nature of Chrift's
prophetic vifion, which confifted of a repre
fentation of Satan as appearing and ading in
the manner ftated in the hiftory. Chrift's
being affaulted by Satan in this manner, was
the Jcenery, or appearance of things, which
was placed before his mind by a divine hand ;
and could not therefore be an outward tranf
adion, though, agreeably to the ftyle of
Scripture, it is related as fuch.
Some have thought, that if the entire
fcenery or vifion was divine, the evangelift
would have faid, that the Spirit took or car
ried Jefus to Jerufalem, and that the Spirit
tranflated him from thence to an high
mountain ; and not that the devil did thefe
things. This objedion is owing to their
G 4 not

[ 88 ]
not diftinguifhing between the author of this
vifion, and the fcenes that compofed it. The
hiftory, which exprefly refers the vifion to
God's Spirit, defcribes the fcenes juft fuch as
they were prefented to Chrift ; and could not
properly do otherwife. It was neceffary
therefore that the hiftory of them fhould
recite the apparent agency of Satan, in order
to it's correfponding to the views and appre-
henfions of Chrift, and truly reprefenting the
fcenes of his vifion.
The evangelifts Matthew and Luke clofe
their account of thefe fcenes, which were
reprefentations of the devil's temptations, by
faying the devil departed from Chrijt\ But
nothing more can be underftood hereby,
than that the image of the devil now difap-
peared, or that the vifion which he had Jeen
went up Jrom him1. Such language as this
pan not be miftaken, by thofe who re
member, that images imprefTed, and adions
performed upon a prophet's imagination, are
always related in the fame manner, as if
they had been real objeds and outward
tranfadions ; and ¦ that the temptation of
Chrift is declared by all the evangelifts, to be
a prophetic trance and revelation u. This
• Mat. iv. ii. Luke iv. 13. t Ezek. xi. 24.
« St. Luke (ch. iv. 13.) fays, The devil departed from
Chrift for a feafon ; which, if (triCtly underftood, feems to
5 ^ply

[ 89 ]
This paffage of Scripture then is to be
underftood as a hiftory, not of an outward
imply, both that the devil was perfonally prefent with Chrift:
before his departure from him for a feafon ; and that after a
feafon he returned to him again in perfon. But that the
deyil was not perfonally prefent with Chrift at this time,
when it is faid he departed from him for a feafon, has been
(hewn already. And thofe who fay he was now perfonally
prefent with him, do not allow that he was fo at any fubfe-
quent period, or that the devil ever affaulted Chrift in the
fame manner, they fuppofe he did at this time. On the
contrary, they maintain that Satan, finding himfelf unable
to prevail againft Chrift by his own perfonal afiault, (lined
up Judas to betray, and the Jewifh rulers to perfecute him.
See John xiv. 30. ch. xiii. z. Luke xxii. 3, 53. Now if
the paffage before us refers, as the advocates of the common
interpretation maintain it does, to thofe perfecutions which
Chrift fuffered from his enemies at the clofe of his miniftry ;
this does not anfwer the account given of it above, as import
ing the perfonal return and appearance of the devil to Chrift ;
and confequently if it contains an objection againft our hypo
thefis, that objection holds againft their own. Againft the
former it has no force. For the temptations of the devil in
this vifion, being (as will be fhewn in the fequel) predictions
and prefigurations of thofe trials which Chrift was afterwards
to undergo in the courfe of his miniftry ; it was natural to
clofe the hiftory of the former by taking notice of the rela
tion they bore to the latter. Whether by thofe words which
we render for « feafon, St. Luke defigned to intimate, that
after that feafon Chrift was to be actually affaulted by thofe
temptations which were now foretold; or whether they ought
to be rendered until the feafin, (¦J-'xpt Hdivv.) and refer to the
feafon itfelf appointed for the accomplifhment of thefe pre
dictions : on either fuppofition, it was St. Luke's intention
to inform us, that thofe fevere trials which were predicted
and prefigured by the temptations of the devil, in the fcenes
of this vifion, did accordingly overtake Chrift in the courfe
pf his-fucceeding miniftry. tranf-

r 90 j
tranfadion, but of the fcenes and reprefenta
tions of a vifion. As fuch the writers of the
gofpel exprefsly reprefent it, without leaving
us (as the facred penmen have been thought
to do in other inftances) to colled it from
the nature and circumftances of the relation.
They likewife reprefent this vifion, not as
diabolical, but divine; afcribing it to the
Spirit of God. So that to all the other ar
guments urged above, we may add (what we
before promifed to produce) the authority of
the evangelifts, and the exprefs letter of the
text, in confutation of thofe, who mifconftrue
Chrift's temptation, either as an outward
tranfadion, or as an illufion of Satan \
Nor
x Should it be objected, that by aflerting the vifionary
nature of Chrift's temptation, while we allow the reality of
his forty days fall, and fubfequent hunger, the hiftory appears
a confufed mixture of faCts and vifions : I anf«er, that there
are certain rules by which faCts and vifions may (very gene
rally at leaft) be diftinguiftied from each other ; which were
laid down above, p. 37. If the hiftorian makes no parti
cular and exprefs declaration, that what he relates as matter
of faCt, is only a vifion ; we are to be determined by the
nature and fcope of the relation. But in the prefent cafe,
the language of the facied penmen guards us from miftake.
By telling us that Chrift was carried into a wildernefs by a
miraculous operation of the Spirit in vifion, to be tempted of
the devil ; they lead us to conceive of every part of the temp
tation as vifionary. But this declaration does not affeCt any
other branch of the hiftory ; which ought therefore to be
literally underftood, as the nature and intention of the faCts
themfelves manifeftly require.
\ It

[ 9< ]
Nor are the evangelifts at all anfwerable for
thofe mifconftrudions which have been put
upon it. But
It is further urged, " that it is unnatural to fuppofe,
" Chrift was carried into a wildernefs fpiritually in order
" to his having a vifionary reprefentation of the devil's
" temptations ; inafmuch as there intervened the fpace of
" forty days, between his fuppofed fpiritual rapture into a
" wildernefs and thofe temptations : in which intervening
" fpace of time Chrift's faft and hunger, which we allow to.
" be real occurrences, took place." But though there was
indeed the fpace of forty days between Chrift's being carried
into a defart in vifion, and thofe particular temptations
which are recorded by St. Matthew and St. Luke, (probably
becaufe they referred to Chrift's publick minifiry, while they
omitted others of a more perfonal and private nature ; yet we
are exprefly told by St. Mark (ch. i. 13.) 7 bat he was there
in the wildernefs (that wildernefs into which the Spirit drove
him, in a ftate of trance or extacy. See above, p. 69, 70,
71, 72.) forty days tempted of the devil. And fince we
have proved, that by his being tempted by the devil, we are
to underftand his having a reprefentation of the devil as
coming to him, and propofing temptations; he muft have
been during the entire fpace of forty days under the power of
a divine vifion. The other circumftances of the hiftory, in
stead of deftroying, confirm this opinion. His being fup-
ported forty days without food, and without feeling the fenfa-
tiou of hunger, was itfelf a perpetual miracle wrought upon
his body, and one very proper to preferve his mind in the
moft fit ftate for receiving fupernatural communications from
God. Towards the clofe of the fortieth day, the divine
power was fupfended, and Chrift was permitted to feel the
ienfation of hunger, in order to prepare the way to the firft:
temptation, (juft as Peter became very hungry before his vifion
of the. fheet containing all manner of animals, ACts x. 10;)
and to give him a jufter fenfe of what was afterwards to befal
him- And laftly, Chrift's miraculous protection through the
S whole

[ 92 ]
But fome, perhaps, may ftill imagine, that
this ftate of the cafe, while it folves fome diffi
culties, raifes others ; fince it may feem hard
to conceive, that a divine hand fhould prefent
fuch fcenes as thefe before the mind of Chrift,
or what purpofes worthy the wifdom of God
could be thereby anfwered. This brings us,
SECTION IV.
TO examine the proper intention of this
prophetic vifion. Here I will endea
vour to fhew, that the feveral fcenes which it
contains, though prefented to Chrift in the
form, and capable of anfwering the end, of a
prefent trial; were diredly intended as a
fymbolical predidion and reprefentation of
the future difficulties of his office and mi
niftry. ' But what occurs in this and the
former fedion, I offer with a juft diffidence ;
and having no guide to follow, it behoves me
to proceed with caution, and to prepare the
whole fpace of forty days, from the commencement to the
conclufion of his vifion, during which he could be in no
capacity of defending himfelf, (as was obferved above, p. 72,)
agrees better with our hypothefis, than with any other. Now
if Chrift's vifion commenced at the time of his being carried
into a wildernefs in the Spirit, and continued through
the entire fpace of forty days, till it was clofed with thofe
reprefentations of Satan defcribed by St. Matthew and St.
Luke ; the objection under confideration falls to the ground.
way

C 93 ]
way for the proof of what is advanced, by (
premifing a few general obfervations.
i.) It may be obferved, that Chrift was li
able to temptations. This is plainly implied
in that declaration of Chrift to his difciples,
Ye are they which have continued with me in my
temptations T ; and exprefsly aflerted in the
epiftle to the Hebrews, He himfelj hath
Juffered, being tempted'". In terms of yet
larger import it is faid, He was in all points
tempted like as we are, yet without fin \ There
is in thefe feveral paffages a very peculiar
reference to the outward fufferings and per
fections which he underwent b. But thefe
were not the only trials to which he was
expofed. The moft innocent affedions, the
defire of efteem, the dread of poverty or
reproach, refentment againft injury or wick-
ednefs, and other paffions belonging to our
original frame, whenever they interfere with
the convidion of duty, cannot but ferve for
our trial, whether we will be governed by
them or byconfcience. And therefore amongft
innumerable other triumphs of the Re
deemer's virtue, we read, that he did not Jeek
his own glory % that he became poor i Jor our
V
r Luke xxii. 28. z Heb. ii. 18.
a Heb. iv. 15. b See above, feci. 1. p. 1 J.
c John vii, 14. d 2 Cor. viii. 9. Jakes,

t 94 ]
fakes, that he tempered his anger with com-*
paffion e, endured the jhame f as well as
torture of the crofs, and reftrained his own
inclinations out of regard to th-e benefit of
others ; for he pleajed not himjelf1. In a word,
there is no pafiion, if it be not kept under
difcipline, which may not hold us back from
our duty, or lead us into fin. The firft
Adam, though he came out of the hands of
his Maker in a ftate of innocence, was liable
• to temptations ; and he fell by them : the
fecond Adam was as liable to them as the
firft, though he overcame them. This ob
fervation, (which is not always carried to it's
juft extent,) is very neceffary to the right
underftanding of this paffage, whether it de-
fcribes a prefent or foretels a future trial. It
may likewife ferve to illuftrate many other
pafTages of Scripture, and to fet the charader
of our Redeemer in*ajuft point of light ; for
his merit riles in proportion to the number
and ftrength of thofe temptations which he
overcame. We may obferve farther,
e Mark iii. 5. And 'when he had looked round about on thent
with anger, trvKfS.vTriCij.ivoc at the fame time grieving for the
hardnefs of their hearts. He was at 'once touched both with
difpleafure and compaffion at the malice and obftinacy of the
Pharifees.
f Heb. xii, 2. s Rom. xv. 3. 2.) The

[ 95 3
2.) That it is poffible, this vifion might
contain a prefent trial \ The two moft com
mon ways, in which God revealed him
felf to the prophets, were vifions and
dreams \ In both thefe, the divine will
was generally communicated by emblematical
images and appearances k; and therefore they
are oppofed to a dired and plain revelation,
in which there was no enigmatical or para
bolical reprefentation '. But there was this
difference between vifions and dreams : in a
dream, the infpired perfon was afleep, all his
external fenfes were bound up, and the ordi
nary operation of his reafon fufpended ; but
in a vifion, he was awake, and had the
regular exercife of his underftanding and
judgment m. This kind of infpiration was
called
h How far, and in what fenfe, this vifion might be a pre
fent trial, is (hewn in the Appendix, N'.'V.
» Numb. xii. 6. Joel ii. 28.
k Dan. viii. 1 — 10, 15. Gen. xxviii. 12. ch. xl. 9  11,
16, 17. ch. xii. 1 — 7. Hof. xii. 10. Vifions and dreams feem
fometimes to have fucceeded one another, Gen. xv. 1, 12.
Dan. vii. 1, 2. ch. viii. 16  18.
1 Numb. xii. 6  8.
m It has, indeed, been generally faid, that in vifions as
well as in dreams, the external fenfes were laid afleep ; but'as
this is faid without evidence, fo it deftroys the diftinCtion be
tween thefe two different methods of revelation. In a vifion,
I grant, the mind of the prophet was fo ingroffed by the
ftriking fcenes that were prefented to it, as to render him
quite regardlefs of the external objeCts around him ; but
inafmuch

[ 96 ]
Called vifion or fight n, probably not from atiy
ufe made of the bodily fight, but on account
of the analogy between thefe two methods
of information ; vifion exciting images
within us, or enabling the mind to perceive
objeds, no lefs than the corporeal faculty of
feeing. For this reafon prophets are often
called Jeers ° '. And though the reprefentations
of a vifion are only as the images of things
in a glafs, in which we do not behold the
things themfelves ; yet vifion gives as clear
a view of what it reprefents, as if it was the
very thing itfelf, and the notice of it was
conveyed by the fenfes. What is imaginary,
no way differs in appearance from that which
is real, and has the fame effed upon the
prophet ; who does not at the time diftin
guifh between the images of a vifion, and
inafmuch as he was awake, the ordinary exercife of his under-
(tanding could not be fufpended, as it is when the external
fenfes are afleep. See Numb. xxiv. 2 — 4, 16. The fenfes
indeed were not ufed in a vifion ; but if they were in
any meafure bound up in it by a fupernatUral agency, this
could only be done, in order to prevent the mind from being
diverted by outward objeCts and occafions, and to engage it's
attention more clofely to thofe miraculous fcenes which were
fpread before it.
11 1 here fpeak of vifion, as diftinguifhed from every other
fpecies of revelation, not as it denotes prophecy or infpiration
in general, or any extraordinary difcovery of the mind of
God. If. i. 1. 2 Sam. vii. 4—17, Prov. xxix. 18.
* 1 Sam, ix. 9.
outward

r 97 i
outward objeds p. If the mind be paffive*
as no doubt it is, in receiving thefe images,
and cannot but judge according to ap
pearances ; let it be remembered, that juft
thus it is with regard to the impreffion made
by external objeds themfelves, and the ideas
they raife in the mind ; the will having no
more power to controul our inward views
and apprehenfions, in this latter cafe, than
.in the former. And as in both cafes, the
mind is alike paffive in receiving impreffions ;
fo in all other refpeds, it may enjoy an equal
liberty in both. Whether the notice of
things is conveyed to it, by the inftrumen-
tality of the fenfes, or by a miraculous
agency ; it may experience the fame difpofi-
tions and fentiments with regard to the things
themfelves. It may be as capable of a rational
determination and choice, with refped to the

p See above, SeCt. i. p 36, note '. In confirmation of
what is there argued at large in proof of this point, I add ;
that when Saul had a vifion of Ananias coming in, and putting
bis hand on him, that he might receive his fight, ACts ix. 12;
this was an exaCt reprefentation of what was afterwards
actually done. And Saul, though now blind, faw Ananias as
clearly in reprefentation or vifion, as he did when he appeared
tO him vifibly, upon the recovery of his fight. This is one
proof, amongft many others, that the miraculous fcenes of
a vifion were not (always, if ever) placed before the bodily
eye, but were difcerned by the mini, without the afliftance of
the. corporeal organ. II repre-

[ 98 1
reprefentations of a vifion, as with refped to
the objeds of fenfe. And confequently, the
one may ferve for the trial, difplay and im
provement of virtue, no lefs than the other.
This account of the nature of prophetic vi
fions, is confirmed by the behaviour of thofe
who have been favoured with them. During
the fupernatural illumination of their under-
ftandings,they were free from that extatic dif-
order and confufion of mind, as well as from
thofe convulfive agitations of body, with
which the pretences to prophecy and divina
tion amongft the Pagans were attended. As
their reafon was not difturbed, fo their
paffions worked in a natural way; and were
affeded by the fcenes of a vifion, juft as they
would have been by outward objeds of a
fimilar nature prefented to their fenfes q.
They argued and aded with as much freedom,
force and propriety, as they could have done
at any other time. Thus r when the word of
the Lord came unto Abraham in a vifion, fay
ing, I am thy Jhield, and thy exceeding great
reward ; Abraham very rationally repxefented
to God, how little the greateft riches would
avail him, if he muft at laft leave them to
« See Gen. xv. 12, 13. ch. xvii. 17. Ifa. xxi. 3, 4.
Jer.xxiii. 9. Dan. x. n,iz,i6, 17. Ads xviii. 9. ch, xxiii. u.
and compare Exod. iii. 3. Dan. v. 5. ACts xxvi. 19.
' Gen. xv. 1 — 6. the

[ 99 J
the inheritance of a fervant.. And when
God promifed him, that a fion of his own
body fhould become his heir, and brought
him Jorth abroad, and. Jaid, Look now toward
heaven, and tell the fiars ', if thou be able to
number them ; adding, fo (hall thy feed be;
Abraham believed in the Lord, upon due con
fideration of the omnipotence and truth of
God, who counted it to him for righteoufnefs ,
while he was yet under the vifion. In like
manner, when St. Peter ' had a vifionary
reprefentation of a large fheet, let down, as
it were from heaven, full of abundance of
animals, clean and unclean, all mixed to
gether; and was bid to take his choice, and
fatisfy his hunger; he flartles at the propofal,
and remonftrates juft as he would have done,
had it been a real fcene, not a vifionary one;
Not fo, Lord, for I have never eaten any
thing common or unclean : for he was not yet
5 This language, God brought him forth abroad, and faid,
Look now toward heaven, and tell the fiars, confirms what
was obferved above, SeCt. i. p. 34, &c. that the reprefen
tations of a vifion are related as faCts ; and juftifies the expli
cation given of the language both of the prophet Ezekiel. and
of the evangelifts, SeCt. 3. For that this was nothing more
than a vifionary reprefentation, is certain from its beincr
called a vifion, ver. 1 ; and from this farther circumftance,
that the fun was not yet gone down, v. 12, and confequently
the ftars were not vifible to the eye.
( ACts x. 10—14. H 2 aware,

[ 2°° J
aware, that the Jewifh law was no longer,
in any part of it, obligatory upon Chriftians u.
It were both a needlefs and an endlefs tafk
to adduce all the other examples * of this
kind which the Scripture affords ; fince
amongft the numerous vifions it records, I do
not recoiled one, in which the prophet does
not difcover a found underftanding, and make
the fame refledions upon the imaginary fcenes
which paffed before him, as he would have
done had they been real. And if this was the
cafe with the other prophets, during their vi
fions ; it is reafonable to fuppofe, it was the
fame with Chrift, during his ; and confe
quently he was capable of returning a rational
anfwer to the propofals made to him in
vifion, in the manner the hiftory reprefents ;
and his rejeding them would difcover and
« When St. Peter had this vifion, it is faid, He fell into
an extacy. A prophetic extacy therefore denotes not an aliena
tion of mind or lofs of reafon ; nor any tranfport of fear,
wonder, or other paflion ; but that ftate the mind is in
when it receives extraordinary divine communication? by vifion.
See above, p. So. The pal-.ons excited in the prophets were
as various as the objeCts which their vifions prefented.
x Thofe, however, who defire more inftances, may compare
St. Paul's behaviour when he had a vifion of Chrift in the
temple, ACts xxii. 17 — 20; with his behaviour when he had
an actual fight of him on his way to Damafcus, ch. ix. 4  6 :
and they will find both to be equally rational. Or they may
conlult Ezek. i. 28. ch. iii. 14. ch.iv. 9 — 14. ch. xl. 4.
and the paffages referred to above, p. 9^, note 1.
i difplay

[ ioi ]
dfplay the virtuous affedions and principles
by which he was governed. And fo far this
vifion would ferve as a prefent trial. This
however could not be it's dired intention ;
as is fhewn in the appendix r.
3.) This vifion was properly defigned as a
predidion and fymbolical reprefentation of
the particular difficulties and temptations, he
was to meet with in the execution of his
office, and in the exercife of his miraculous
powers, as the Meffiah. If we examine the
other vifions recorded in Scripture, we fhall
find, that all the images they contained, were
not defigned for their own fakes, without
any farther intention and reference ; but that
they were fymbols or emblems, that is, figns
and reprefentations of other things z. By
thefe images and emblems, God was pleafed
to fignify and exprefs moral inftrudions, and
to foretel and prefigure future events. From
hence it will follow, that if the temptation
of Chrift was a divine vifion, as we have al
ready proved it to be ; we muft allow in
general, that the images prefented to him in
it, were fymbolical, or relative to fome other
y N«. V.
x See the appendix, Np. IV. where many proofs of the
prophetic and fymbolical nature of vifions in general, are
produced. H 3 matters,

[ 102 ]
matters, of which they were an apt reprefen
tation ; unlefs we will interpret this vifion,
in a manner different from all other vifions.
But if the vifion of Chrift was figurative and
parabolical, it may very naturally be inquired,
What is the particular intention of it ? and
how is this to be learnt ? I anfwer, that as*
it is no where explained in Scripture, the
proper meaning of it muft be colleded from
the nature and circumftances of the vifion
itfelf, as was ufual in the like cafes. When
the images of a vifion bore an obvious mean
ing, and clearly pointed out the particular
inftrudion they were defigned to convey, no
formal explanation was given \ The inquiry
here therefore muft be, What do the images
or figns in this vifion moft naturally denote ?
to what do the fymbols moft nearly cor
refpond ? And if it fhould appear, when
we proceed to examine the particular fcenes
of this vifion, that there is a perfed cor-
» When Daniel had feen the vifion of the ram and he-
goat, he fought for the meaning, and it was explained to him.
Dan. viii. !J — 17. But when St. Peter doubted in himfelf,
what his vijion (cited above, p. 99.) Jhould mean, no
formal explanation of it was given, though it was defigned
for his own information. He was only directed to go with
the meffengers of Cornelius ; which was fufficient to guide
him into the true interpretation of his vifion. ACts x. 1 7 — 20.
Nor did St. Paul's vifion, ACts xvi. 9, 10. receive or require
any explanation, refpondence

[ I03 1
refpondence and refemblance between them
and the feveral temptations to which Chrift
was expofed, in the exercife of his miniftry
and miraculous powers ; it may fairly be
inferred, that the former were defigned as a
predidion and prefiguration of the latter.
But fhould it be ever fo clearly demonftrated,
that this vifion contains a reprefentation of
the future difficulties of Chrift's public mi
niftry ; this will rather confirm, than over
throw the opinion of its anfwering at the
fame time the end of a prefent trial ; fince
the very profped of thofe difficulties would
conftitute a very great trial. And furely
the wifdom of God might frame fuch fcenes,
as fhould be both probationary in their own
nature, and prophetic or fymbolical in their
principal intention. This leads me to add,
4.) That fuch fcenes as this vifion contains,
¦whether confidered as probationary or pro
phetical, might be prefented to Chrift by a
divine hand, without any unworthy imputa
tion upon the divine holinefs or goodnefs.
Nothing is more certain, than that God does
not tempt any man b, in the criminal fenfe of
that expreffion ; he never ads with an inten
tion of feducing men into fin ; nay, he does
every thing confillent with the rules of his
b James i. 13.
H 4 moral

[ 104 1
rnoral government, to guard them againft it.
And in this fenk of the word, the fcenes of
this vifion did not contain a pi-dent tempta
tion ; they were not defigned to feduce
Chrift into fin \ Neverthelefs, there is a
fenfe of the word, in which God does tempt d
men ; that is, he propofeth to them fuitable
trials, for the difcovery, difplay and improve
ment of their piety and obedience. Thus
God tempted, or made trial of, Abraham*.
And thus he tempteth or trieth all men ;
having indued them with thofe affedions,
and placed them in thofe circumftances,
which neceflarily conftitute a trial of their
integrity. Nor are thefe trials unworthy
of God ; but are indeed the very means
he ufes to exercife, confirm and perfed
our virtue. And trials might be propofed
to the Son of God, with the fame general
intention as they are to the children of
men. For though a Son, yet learned he
obedience, by the things which he fuffered f. It
could not therefore be unworthy of God, to
c See Appendix No. V.
d The word, vetg^Xtn , imports nothing more, in its pri
mary (ignification, than veigav KaCat, periculum facere, to
make a trial, effay or proof of fomething. ACts xxiv. 6.
2 Cor. xiii. 5. Heb. xi. 17. But even in this fenfe of the
word, when God is faid to tempt men ; this is not defigned
for his own information, but to ferve the ends of his moral
government.& e Gen. xxii. 1. f Heb. v. 8. fpread

[ io5 1
fpread fuch fcenes before the mind of Chrift,
as fhould ferve to exercife, to difcover and
difplay his virtue : the only fenfe in which
we affert them to be probationary E. But
what alone would be a full vindication of
the divine condud in the prefent cafe, is,
that the fcenes of this vifion were defigned
to reprefent the temptations of his future
miniftry, fuch as it could not be unworthy
of God to place before his view; becaufe
they were no ether than what God faw fit
adually to appoint. They fprang from a
divine conftitution, were the natural con-
fequence of the humanity of Chrift, of the
office and powers with which he was in
verted by the Father, and the wife rules by
which he was to condud himfelf in the
exercife of them. So that he was placed by
God in thofe trying circumftances, which
this vifion reprefented. And as the pro-
pofals, which were afterwards to occur in
real life, now appeared to be made to him
by the devil ; the manifeft intention of the
vifion was to lead him into a juft conception
of thofe propofals, as criminal in their
nature, and on that account fit to be re-
jeded \ The very nature of the reprefen
tation is a full proof that it was not intended
« See Appendix, N°. V. h See the Appendix, N". VI. to

. [ 106 ]
to feduce Chrift into fin, but to guard him
againft it. Befides, the beft ends were to
be anfwered, (as we fhall endeavour to
evince,) by this predidion and reprefentation
of fuch future events as were to befal him ;
and therefore it muft be efteemed worthy to
proceed from the Spirit, not of delufion, but
of holinefs, truth and wifdom \
Having premifed thefe general obferva-
tions, I proceed now (as I propofed) diftindly
to examine the feveral fcenes of this pro
phetic vifion, in order to point out the pecu
liar intention of each, and to fhew, that
though they might contain a prefent trial",
yet that they were diredly and properly
defigned as fymbolical predidions and repre
fentations of the future difficulties of Chrift's
office and miniftry.
I. In the firft of thefe prophetic fcenes,
the great adverfary ' of mankind feemed to
approach
1 With regard to the objection made to the reprefentation
of Satan's promife of 'the world to Chrift, fee the Appendix,
N°. VII.
k Should it appear doubtful to any, whether the feveral
fcenes of this vifion were probationary in their nature, and
anfwered the end of a prefent trial ; this will not affeCt what
is urged in fupport of their being a prediction and prefimira-
tion of Chrift's future trials ; which is here aflerted n be
their proper intention.
1 When God revealed to Abraham in a deep deep the
ajfiidims of hispofterity, they were reprefented by the horror of

[ i°7 1
approach our Redeemer, and to accoft him
in the following manner : If thou be, (or in
afmuch m as thou art) the Son of God (or, the
Meffiah ") command that thefe fiones be made
bread. Chrift having already continued faft-
ing forty days and forty nights together ;
and the divine power by which his body had
hitherto been fuftained without any nourifh-
ment, being withdrawn ; he now began to
feel the keen fenfations of hunger0 : and he
was
of great darknefs, Gen. xv. 12, 13. But what more natural
emblem of temptations could there be, than the image of the
great tempter ?
m It is generally thought, that thefe words imply a doubt
in the devil, whether Jefus was the Meffiah ; or that they
were intended to raife fuch a doubt in the bread of Jefus
himfelf But that the devil could not doubt who Jefus was,
has been (hewn above, fed. 1. p. 13. note k. And when
we confider what exprefs teftimonies were borne to Chrift at
his baptifm, it appears impoffible, that Jefus himfelf (hould
entertain any doubt about his own character. In thofe
words, If thou be the Son of God, command that thefe fiones be
made bread, it is taken for granted, that he was the ^on of
God ; and he is prompted to eCc as became him under that
character. See the note here referred to.
n That the Meffiah and the Son of God are equivalent
terms, or were underftood to denote the fame perfon, will
appear by comparing Mat. xxvi. 63. Luke xxii. 67, 70.
John i. 34,41,49. Mat. xvi. 16. Mark viii. 29. ACts viii 37.'
See Pf. ii. 7, from whence the Jews might learn to apply
this title, the Son of God, to the Meffiah. Compare Dan. iii.
25, and 2 Efdr. ii. 47.
0 This circumftance was proper to prepare the wav to the
prefent temptation, and to give it force. Comp.'re -.Cb x. 10,
where we read that St. Peter became very hungry, juft before his

[ io8 ]
was ftill in a barren defert, remote from all
the ordinary means of fuftenance. In thefe
circumftances it was fuggefted to him by the
tempter, " That it was very unfuitable to
" his dignity and peculiar relation to the
" Father, to remain deftitute of the ne-
" ceffary fupports of life; and that it be-
" came him to exert the miraculous powers
" with which he was inverted as the Meffiah,
" for his own immediate relief." What
temptation could be more fpecious than
this ? -why might not the Son of the. moft
High, when he felt the fevere prefiure of
bodily wants, and had no profped of a
fupply in the ordinary way, exert his power
for fo important a purpofe, as felf- prefer
vation ?
Yet, forcible as this temptation was, it
was rejeded, and upon the jufteft orincipies ;
as appears from the following reply of our
Lord : Man fhall not live by bread only, but by
every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God p, or by every thing that God may appoint.
Thefe, words, which are borrowed from the
writings of Mofes, refer to the c.iie of the
Ifraelites in the wildernefs, and affio-n the
his vifion of the fheet containing all manner of living
creatures. p Deut. viii. 3. reafon

[ lc9 ]
reafon of God's feeding them there with
manna from heaven. In this connedion
they are very applicable to the cafe of our
Lord, and are to be underftood as com
prizing in them the following argument :
" If God, when he led the Ifraelites into
" the wildernefs, did not fuffer them to
" perifh in it, but interpofed in a mira-
" culous manner for their fupply, and fed
" them with manna, (which, though alight
" kind of food, gave their bodies as much
" vigour as the bread and flefh of Egypt,)
" in order to convince them, that he could
" fuftain this animal life, not by bread only,
" but by whatever other means he ftiould
" fee fit to appoint and provide, or even
" without any natural means at all, by his
" own efficacious word or will alone q : why
" then fhould I, from a diftruft either of
"' his power or providential goodnefs, un-
" dertake to fupply my own wants in a
" manner he has not prefcribed ? I may
" reafonably hope, that he will not be lefs
<c ready, at the proper feafon, to interpofe
" on my behalf, than he was on their's ;
" efpecially as I have hitherto had expe-
i As in the cafe of Mofes, Exod. xxiv. 18. Deut. ix. 9, 18;
of Elijah, 1 Kings xix. 8 ; and of Chrift, Mat. iv. 2 ; each
of whom failed forty days. " rience

[ "o ]
" rience of his power in proteding me from
" the dangers of the wildernefs, and in
" fuftaining me without food for forty days
" together. In this exigence, I will truft
" in God ; perfuaded that he will himfelf
" rather work a miracle in my favour, than
" fuffer me to want neceffary fuftenance."
Thus did our Lord, from a principle of re-
fignation to God, and reliance on his power
and care, refufe to turn ftones into bread.
And his piety was fpeedily rewarded by a
miraculous fupply of food, provided for him
by God r. For, when the temptation was
ended, the angels came and minifiered unto
him \ And does it not appear, from what
has already been offered under this head,
that this firft fcene in Chrift's vifion was
probationary, and ferved to difcover the
prefent turn and temper of his mind ?
No lefs evident does it feem that this fcene
was prophetical, and had a reference to his
future miniftry, through the whole courfe of
which he was prefled with the fame kind of
temptations, and refifted them upon the fame
r Compare I Kings xix. j.
' Mat. iv. n. The word, J'ntx.oveii; here rendered to
minifter, very often (ignifies, to ?ninifter food, or to wait at
table. Mat. viii. 15. Lukexvii.8. ch. xxii. 27. John xii. 2.
Numerous inftances of this ufe of the word in heathen authors
are produced by Wetftein upon the place.
1 principles.

[ III ]
principles. This part of the vifion very
naturally conveyed this general inftrudion ;
" That Chrift, though the Son of God,
was to ftruggle with the afHiding hardfhips
of hunger and thirft, and all the other evils
of humanity, like the lowefl 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 occafions ;
but- with refignation and faith to wait for
the interpofition of God in his favour."
Accordingly we find that Chrift regulated
his condud by this maxim. He did not
fubfift by miracles; but though rich in the
poffeffion of a power capable of controuling
all the laws of nature, though heir and lord
of all, he became poor, lived an indigent
life, without any fettled habitation or certain
provifion '. He knew how much more
Wetted it is to give than, to receive, and yet
difdained not to accept kindnefs from others,
or even to ftand indebted to their bounty for
his fupport". In fome circumftances he felt
the prefiure of hunger *, without having food
to eat ; at other times he had no leifure to
take any, through a zealous application to
the duties of his office, fuch as was not to
* Mat. viii. 20. " Luke viii. 3. * Mark xi. 12. be

[ "2 ]
be interrupted by the preffing calls of nature.
He chofe rather to deny himfelf neceffary
refrefbment, than lofe an opportunity of
healing and inftruding the multitude7. And
neither on thefe, nor on any other occafions,
did he relieve himfelf by a miracle. This
is the more extraordinary, as he interpofed
with readinefs on the behalf of others, who
daily rejoiced in the temporal as well as fpiri
tual benefit of his divine power ; and at
different times fed the hungry multitudes in
the defert, by a miraculous increafe of his
own flender provifions*. Nor did he only
endure hunger and thirft, but all the other
evils incident to human nature. He lived
a laborious, and led an itinerant life. In-
ftead of commanding angels to his fervice,
he fubmitted to the inconveniences and fa
tigue* of travelling on foot from one part of
Judea and Galilee to another, and was toffed
about by tempefts at fea. He was ex-
haufted b by the inceflant labours of his mi-
y Mark iii. 20, 21. ch. vi-. 31 — 34. Mat. xiv. 13, 14.
z Mat. xv. 33, 34. Mark viii. 4, 5. Mat. xiv. 16, 17.
Mark vi. 37, 38.
a John iv. 6.
b Dr. Lardner in the firft volume of his fupplement to the
Credibility, of the gofpel hiftory, p. 203, obferves, that our
Lord's deeping in the midft of a ftorm was owing to his
undertaking the voyage ir. the evening, after the fatigue of
long difcourfes in publick, and without any refrefliment.
Markiv. 36—38. niflry,

r "3 i
niflry, and that intenfe application of mind
with which he engaged in it. After per
forming tirefome journies, and preachino-
to the crowds which followed him, in the
day; he often fpent a confiderable part of
the night, fometimes the whole of it, in
earneft prayer to God % and in the open air;
notwithftanding the copious dews, which
fall by night in thofe parts, muft have been
very dangerous, efpecially when the body
was heated by the exercife of the preceding
day. So many injuries did his conftitution
fuffer, that the crafis, or texture of his blood,
was deftroyed, and fweated through every
pore of his bodyd. And to fuch a degree
was he enfeebled by the violences to which
he patiently fubmitted, as to be unable to
bear his crofs c. He, who in fo many
thoufand inftances renewed the health and
vigour of others, never exerted any mira
culous power either to preferve or reftore his
own, but funk under the prefiure of his in
firmities ! In all his exigencies he referred
himfelf to God. Even under that great ex-
c Luke vi. 12. The juftly celebrated Mr. Jof. Mede
(Works, p. 67.) and other eminent critics render, iv 7J1
isfoo-iuyn t? ©sb, in an oratory of God. But thefe oratories
were open at the top.
A Luke xxii. 44. e Mat, xxvii. 32.
I tremity.,

[ "4 J
tremity, his agony in the garden, he fought
and waited for the interpofition pf God ;
who, in anfwer to his prayer, fent an angel
from heaven to ftrengthen him f. And
when the hour of his death approached, he
ufed no means for his refcue B, but meekly
refigned himfelf into the hands of his moft
malicious enemies, in obedience to his
Father's will.
The divine powers with which Chrift was
inverted, were defigned as the feal of his mif-
fion ; and accordingly they were never applied
to a different purpofe. This ftrid appropria
tion of his miracles to their proper intention,
ferved to point it out more clearly, and to
keep it in conflant view ; to manifeft the
wifdom and neceffity of the works themfelves,
and to preferve their dignity and authority,
which would have been impaired, if not
deftroyed, by a more general application of
them. As Chrift never applied them to any
purpofe foreign to their grand intention ;
fo it was in a very peculiar manner neceffary,
that they fhould never be employed to proted
himfelf from the calamities and diftrefTes to
which human nature is incident, Had he,
when made in the likenefs of men, faved
himfelf by miracles from the evils of huma-
f Luke xxii. 43. s Mat. xxvi. 52, 53, 54. John xviii. 6.
nity;

[ "5 ]
nity ; where had been his confiid, his vidory^
his triumph ? or where the confolation and
benefit his followers derive from his example*
his merit, his crown ? Sufferings were the
theatre on which he difplaved his divine
virtues'", and they were both the ground of
his advancement to the glorious office of our
Redeemer ', and a natural means of infpiring
him with compaffion k to all who were to
follow him '.
II. In the fecond fcene of this vifion'", the
devil taketh Chrijl into the holy city, Jerufalem,
andjetteth him on the wing " of the temple, and
Jaith unto him, If thou be (or, fince thou art)
the Son of God, cafi thyfelf down : for it is
written ", He fijall give his angels charge con-
h Heb. v. 8. cited above, p. 104.
* And being made perfed, he became the author of eternal fal-
1/ation unto all them that obey him. Heb. v. 9. fee ch. ii. 10.
k Heb. ii. 17, 18. ch. iv. 15.
1 What is urged under this head, anfwers the old objection
of the Jews to Chrift, when he was hanging on the crofs,
"from his not ufing his power for his own protection and
fafety, as it may be thought a wife man ought to have done :
an objection that has been repeated in every age from that
day to this, by .the adverfaries of the gofpel, Without re
flecting, that his power of miracles was never defigned for
any fuch purpofe. See Whitby on John xviii. 4.
m Mat. iv. 5, 6.
" impvytov, the wing, not the pihndcle, as it is in th&
common tranflation. See Lightfoot's works, VoL IF. p. 130.
and above, SeCt. I. p. 23, note c.
• Pfal. xci. 11. I 2 cerning

[ u6 ]
cerning thee, and in their hands Jhall they bear
thee up, lefi at any time thou dafh thy foot
againfi a fione.
It is generally fuppofed, that Chrift is here
called upon to expofe his perfon to danger
without any neceffity, from a confidence in
the protedion of the Almighty, which he,
as the Son of God, had peculiar reafon to
exped ; fince even to good men God had
promifed the guardianfhip of his angels.
But the propofal is very capable of a more
comprehenfive meaning. For the fcene of
this vifion is different from the former, as
feveral writers p have obferved. Chrift is
not placed at the top of a high rock in the
wildernefs, where he already was ; though by
throwing himfelf down from any formidable
precipice in fuch a folitary place, the divine
power muft equally have interpofed for his
prefervation, and his faith in that power been
put to the trial. The fcene of this tempta
tion was Jerufalem, the metropolis of Judea,
and the feat of power ; it was the temple of
Jerufalem, where the Jews expeded the firft
appearance of their Meffiah, that angel of
the covenant, who was to come fuddenly
to it q ; it was the wi?ig of the temple, the

p Dr. Lightfoot's and Dr. Macknight' % Harmonies.
"3 Malachi iii, i.

eaftern

[ "7 1
eaftern front of it, which commanded a view
of the crowd of worfhippers below. From
this moft public eminence, and before im-
menfe multitudes, not from the obfcurities of
the wildernefs, is Chrifi required to throw
himfelf down, in a dependence upon the
divine protedion, (which none could have
fo much reafon to exped as the Son of God ;)
that fo his miraculous prefervation might
give evidence of his divine miffion, and
induce the numerous worfhippers, who were
eye-witneffes of it, to acknowledge hira
immediately as the Meffiah, vifibly defend
ing from heaven, in a manner agreeable to
the expedation of the Jews. Such was the
propofal here made to Chrift; and in it's
own nature it certainly carried a very power
ful temptation. How feemingly honourable
and glorious would it have been for the
Meffiah, to have opened his commiffion upon
fuch a public theatre, and with fuch demon-
ftrations of divine power ? Let us inquire
therefore upon what principles this fpecious
temptation was rejeded.
In anfwer to the quotation from Scripture,
by which the devil fought to. inforce his
temptation, our Lord replies, It is written
(ilfio, thou jhalt not tempt the Lord thy God '.
' Mat. iv. 7.
I 3 To

[ u8 ]
To tempt God, is to make an improper trial
of his power, to make new and unreafonable
demands upon it, after fufficient evidence
has been already afforded ; and to do this,
not barely from prefumption, but from
diftruft. In this fenfe the expreffion is often '
ufed in Scripture, as well as in the particular
inftance referred to by our Lord '. His
meaning, therefore, muft be this : " The
*' Scripture forbids us to prefcribe to God
<< in what inftances he fhall exert his power :
" and as we are not to rufli upon danger
" without a call, in expedation of-an ex-
" traordinary deliverance ; fo neither are
" we to didate to divine wifdom what
*' miracles fhall be wrought for men's con-
" vidion."
We are in the next place to inquire, what
reference this fcene might have to Chrift's
» Exod. xvii. 2, 7. Numb. xiv. 22. Pf. lxxviii. 18. Pf. cvi.
14, 15. Mat. xvi. 1. ACts xv. 10.
1 Deut. vi. 16. Mofes does not here refer to any particular
cafe, in which the Jfraelites were fo properly chargeable with
prefuming too far upon the divine power and interpofition in
their favour, as with diftrufting it. After all the demonflra-
tions of the divine prefence, in dividing the red fea, in fup-
plying them with manna, and going before them in the
cloud, they ftill doubted, Is the Lord amongft us, or not?
Exod. xvii. 2 — 7. There might, however, be a mixture of
prefumption on this occafion, in daring to prefcribe to God
the time and manner, in which he fhould interpofe on their
behalf. future

[ "9 ]
future miniftry. Through the whole courfe
of it, he was affaulted with temptations
fimilar to that here propofed, and repelled
them upon the maxim here adopted. Inftead
of needlefsly and unwarrantably running into
danger, and then relying upon the divine
power to extricate him ; which muft have
occafioned an unneceflary and endlefs multi
plication of miracles : we find him ufing the
utmoft caution in declining hazards ; avoid
ing, as far as poffible, whatever might exaf-
perate his enemies, and even injoining filence u
with regard to his miracles, thofe feals of his
miffion, when the publication of them in
fome particular circumftances was likely, by
raifing envy or popular commotions, to in
flame their minds yet more againft him.
We find him alfo difappointing their malice,
by prudently retreating " out of its reach, till
the appointed period of hjs miniftry was ful
filled. So that although there were fome
inftances, in which he was proteded from
his adverfaries in a miraculous manner y,
and in which it was abfolutely neceffary he
fhould be fo proteded, that he might not be
cut off before the ends of his miniftry were
0 Mat. viii. 4. ch. xii. 15 — 21.
* Johnx. 39,40. Mat. xii. 15. Mark iii. 7. John viii. 59.
y John viii. 20.
I 4 accom-

[ 120 j
accomplifhed : yet confidering how eagerly
the Jewifo rulers were bent upon his de-
ftrudion, and how often they attempted it z,
thofe inftances are very few, compared with
what they muft have been, had not Chrift
been perpetually attentive in his whole
condud to this maxim, Tbou jhalt not tempt
the Lord thy God.
In producing the evidences of his divine
miffion, he ftill aded upon the fame maxim,
though he was often under the ftrongeft
temptation to depart from it. Inftead of
opening his commiffion at Jerujalem, and
difplaying all at once upon that grand theatre
the powers with which he was inverted; he
performed his firft miracle at Cana in Galilee,
and made that dbfcure country, for a confi-
fiderable time, the principal fcene of his
miniftry. On this account he was blamed
by his own brethren, as ading unfuitably to
his extraordinary charader and commiffion,
and urged to fljew himfelf publicly to the
world"'. But as he was not influenced by
ollentatious views, and was folicitous to
anfwer the ends and fulfil the period of his
miniftry, in a manner the leaft likely to create
z Mat. xii. 14. Mark iii. 6. Luke vi. 11. John vii. 1.
ch. vii. 25, 31, 32. ch. viii. 20, 37, 39. ch. x. 39, 40.
ch. xi. 7—16, 45—57.
,» John vii. 4. noife

[ *?I ]
noife and difturbance, or to give offence ; he
kept himfelf as private as the nature of his
work would admit; fometimes retiring into
deferts, where thofe who were defirous of his
inftrudions were willing to follow him, and
to fuftain the inconveniencies of hunger and
thirft for feveral days together. Inftead of
courting the favour of the opulent and power
ful, to engage them to countenance and fup-
port his caufe ; or challenging from the rulers
of the Jewifh nation the homage due to his
high charader ; he did not bear a commiffion
chiefly, or particularly, direded to them, (an
honour fome of the antient prophets enjoyed,)
but converfed freely with all forts of people,
not only with the lowefl, but with the worft,
in order to bring them to repentance. When
he had ufed fufficient means to fatisfy the
moft fcrupulous integrity, to win over thofe
to the faith, who were either pioufly dif-
pofed, or willing to be reformed, agreeably
to the commiffion he had received from
heaven ; he would not proceed any farther.
He refufed to comply with the unreafonable
demands of thofe, who, notwithftanding all
the proofs of his miffion which had been
already offered, rtill demanded farther evi
dence, and called Jor figns Jrom heaven \
» John ii. 1 8. Mat. xii. 38, Luke xi. 14. Mat. xvi. 1.
Mark viii, 1 j.
Now

[ 122 1
Now thefe circumftances of Chrift's miniftry
correfpond to thofe in his prophetic vifion,
in which he was tempted to a public and
ofientatious difplay of his miraculous powers.
And his anfwer to this fecond temptation
contained a new limitation, under which
thofe powers were to be ufed. Even in
bringing men to the faith, he was not to
exceed the order and appointment of God.
And though the determination of God in
this refped was certainly founded in the
higheft wifdom, which ever regulates all the
operations of his power ; though it was per
fedly analagous to the other meafures of
his government over his moral creatures,
who are not formed to religion and virtue-
by the utmoft exertions of Omnipotence, but
in fuch methods as are confiffent with their
freedom ; and though it was well calculated
to promote the credit and true intereft of the
gofpel, to eftablifh it on an evidence beft
adapted to its nature, and to win over thofe
to the faith of it, who were moft likely to
comply with its holy defign : though this
determination of God was wife and juft ; yet
did it require the greateft humility, fortitude
and piety in him, who had the power of
working miracles at pleafure, to acquiefce
therein. Ambition and vain glory could never

[ i23 I
never have refilled the temptations Chrift
was under to an incefTant and unlimited
exertion of his miraculous powers ; by which
he would have advanced his own honour,
rendered his miniftry more confpicuous and
illuftrious, forced univerfal convidion, and
commanded the admiration and applaufe of
the whole world. This temptation was the
more difficult to be overcome, as in con-
fequence of the method which was taken,
his dodrine was embraced only by a few
well-difpofed perfons, and thofe generally in
the lowefl rank of lifec; while it was de-
fpifed and perfecuted by the rich and great,
by the wife and learned, who were inflaved
to prejudice, or governed by fenfual and
ambitious views.
III. In the third temptation the fcene
changes i, and the devil taketh our Lord up
into an exceeding high mountain, and jheweth
him all the kingdoms of the world % and the
glory
c This circumftance gave occalion to the difplay of the
moft humble and amiable piety, Mat. xi. 25, 26.
11 Mat. iv. 8, 9.
e Lucian, in relating his dream, fays, dpdiis fi us i?4©"
iytl, ITTiSKOOIOVV dttb 7t)f iU df>c]d//.iv@- dypi tstf^s io~ir'zpav,
tss'oKmc, Kai tflco, m J"»ijl\ss. Ego vero in fublime fublatus,
ab oriente incipiens, ad occidentem ufque contemplabar,
urbes, gentes & populos. Luciani Somnium, Tom. I.
p. 10, 11. ed. Var. Amftelodami, 1687. This language illu
strates that of the evangelifts ; and ferves to remove an ob
jection urged by Dr. Whitby and others, « that if Chrift
1 " had

C 124 3
glory of them : and faith unto him, All thefe
things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down
and worjhip me.
How abfurd foever the offer, which the
devil here makes to Chrift, muft have ap
peared to him in other circumftances f; and
confequently how little merit foever there
might be in rejeding it : yet in a vifion the
objeds prefented to the imagination are ap
prehended to be real 8, and adually to poffefs
all the powers and properties they claim h ;
and

" had only a vifionary reprefentation of the kingdoms of the
" world, it was needlefs to take him into an exceeding high
" mountain, or even into any mountain at all." Notice
was taken of this objection above, p. 28, at the end of note f.
Rev. xxi. 10, is there cited, in order to (hew, that St. John
was in like manner carried to a high mountain, to give him
a profpeCt of Jerufalem. Ezekiel alfo fays, ch. xl. 2. In the
vifions of God brought he me into the land of Ij'rael, and fet me
upon a very high mountain, by which was as the frame of a city
on the fouth. Will you here objeCt, that it was needlefs to
take St. John or Ezekiel to any eminence, as both might juft
as well have had their refpeCtive vifions on a plain ? Why then
is it made an objection againft the vifion of Chrift, that he is
faid to be carried to an eminence ? But in reality, neither was
jefus Chrift, nor the apoftle John, nor the prophet Ezekiel
carried to any mountain ; but they appeared to themfelves so
be placed upon very high mountains, which gave fomewhat of
the appearance of nature to the extenfivenefs of the profpeCts
(hewn them. Accordingly Lucian, in relating his dream,
ufes fimilar language.
f See above, SeCt. 1. p. n, 12, 13.
s See above, SeCt. 1. p. 35, &c. and SeCt. 4. p. 96, &c.
h And confequently, if the devil was reprefented as hav
ing the power of difpofing of the empire of. the world ; this
1 repre-

[ I25 ]
and the mind judges concerning things ac
cording to their appearance at that time j
and difcovers the very fame turn and temper,
as it would have done, if the objed had been
real, and not imaginary. Hence it is that
Chrift does not difpute the devil's claim to
the difpofal of the world. The offer of it in
thefe circumftances, appeared to proceed
from one able to make it good ; and there
was juft the fame merit in rejeding it, as if
it had really done fo. How great that merit
was, may be judged by the 1-argenefs of the
offer ; which was nothing lefs than the
empire and glory, not of Judea only, but of
the whole univerfe. Thefe objeds were
placed before Chrift in their moft alluring
forms, and all comprized in one view, fo as
to ftrike his imagination in their full force.
Neverthelefs, the propofal was rejeded, the
very inftant it was made1; and not without
a mixture of juft indignation : Get thee hence,
Satan, Jor it is written, Thouffoalt worfhip the
Lord thy God, and him only Jhalt thou Jerve l.
This reply was a proof of the moft fteady
and exalted piety.
But the trial and difcovery of his prefent
temper, was not the dired intention of this
reprefentation of him would appear as real as one perfectly
conformable to his true nature. See the Appendix, Np. VII.
and VIII.
1 Mat. iv. 10. prophetic

[ 126 ]
prophetic fcene ; which is to be confidered
as a pre-fignification and warning of the like
temptation, to which he was to be expofed
in the courfe of his future miniftry ; during
which he was called upon to proftitute him
felf, with all his miraculous endowments, to
the fervice of Satan, for the fake of worldly
honours. The Jewifh nation expeded their
Meffiah to deliver it from the yoke of fer-
vitude, to raife it to a pitch of grandeur fu-
perior to what it had ever enjoyed under their
greateft monarcbs, and to extend their ccn-
quefts over all the Heathen nation-s, to the
very ends of the earth. As thefe were the
expedations which the Jews entertained ; fo
they were very folicitous that Jefus fhould
anfwer them, and would have done every
thing in their power to promote the fuccefs
of fuch an undertaking. They even would
have taken him by force, and made him a
king fc. And it is certain, that had his mira
culous powers, which were wholly confe-
crated to the ereding the kingdom of God
amongft men, been employed in paving his
way to fecular honour, he might not only
have efcaped fufferings and death, but eafily
afcended the throne of the univerfe. How
readily would not only the Jews, but all
k John vi. 1 5, other

[ 127 1
other nations have repaired to the ftandard
of a prince, who by a miracle, by a word or
filent volition only, could provide for his
own armies ', or deftroy thofe of his ene -
rnies"1; and under whom therefore they
might hope for all the rewards, without the
ufual toils and hazards, of military atchiev-
ments ? How eafily might he, who com
manded from a fifh that tribute he was to
pay to the temple, have inriched himfelf and
his followers with all the treafures of the
world ? " Why then," it might have been
fuggefted to him, " inftead of fpending your
" life in afflidion, and then ending it upon
" the crofs ; will you not ufe your power
" for your own benefit, to deliver yourfelf
" from mifery, and make yourfelf mafter of
" the world ?" But this temptation did not
at any time prevail over our Lord, notwith-
ftanding the defire of honour, wealth and
dominion is natural to every human mind,
and however innocent in itfelf, is with greater
difficulty than any other fubjeded to the
controul of reafon and confcience ; and not-
withftanding univerfal empire carries with it
charms almoft irrefiftible, efpecially to noble
and heroic minds, confcious of their fuperior
wifdom and abilities, and an intention to
1 John vi. n — 13. m Ch. xviii. 6. ch. ii. 15.
employ

[ 128 ]
employ their power to the true ends For
which it is beftowed. If any thing can
heighten the virtue of defpifing worldly
greatnefs, when it comes in competition
with our duty ; it is the being pradifed in
circumftances of indigence, fuch as are in
finitely beneath that rank to which our merit
entitles us. And therefore to refufe, as our
Saviour did, grandeur and royalty, and uni
verfal empire, while he was more deftitute
of the accommodations of life, than even
the beafts of the field, or birds of the air ",
and was ftruggling with poverty, reproach
and perfecution in the caufe of God, and
had death itfelf in certain profped before
him, (all which evils might have been
avoided by a mifappl-ication of his miraculous
powers,) was the higheft ad of virtue that
humanity could exhibit.
Having endeavoured to fhew, by a diftind
examination of the feveral fcenes of this vi
fion, that each of them, while it contained
the propofal of a prefent and urgent tempta
tion, was a fymbolical predidion and repre
fentation of fuch trials as he was to undergo
in the courfe of his future minifiry ; I would
add, that the account which has been given
of it in this latter view, will be confirmed by
" Mat. viii. 20. refleding

[ 129 1
fefleding on the peculiar propriety of it in
fuch a view, at this Jeajon. Chrift had been
very lately confecrated to the high office of
the Meffiah by the baptifm of his illuftrious
fore-runner, and at the fame time inverted
and confirmed in this office by a voice from
heaven, and amply qualified for it by an un
limited communication of the Spirit of God %
and he was juft going to enter upon the
public execution of it. No fooner did the
Spirit of God defcend upon him* than he
felt the effeds of his prefence and infpira
tion ; for he was brought into a wildernefs
by a prophetic illumination of his mind, iri
a vifion or fpiritual rapture* In this ftate he
continued forty days and forty nights to
gether ; a divine power, during this whole
fpace of time, both fupporting him without
food, and proteding him from the dangers
of the wildernefs, (fuch was the place where
he now was in perfon as well as the fcene of
his vifion.) Hereby he had an opportunity
of preparing ° himfelf for his miniftry by
receiving
° Whether he had flow aff dpportufiity of exercifing any
extraordinary devotion, I will not undertake abfolutely to de
termine ; the text making exprefs mention only of his failing.
In other cafes, fafting was feldom feparated from prayer,
when perfons were fet apart to facred offices, ACts xiii. 2, 3.
ch. xiv. 23. compare Mat. xvii. 21. And why might not
the revelations Chrift now received from God, both leave
K. room

[ i3° 1
receiving new communications from God",
particularly a revelation of the Chriftian
dodrine, which he was now anointed by the
Spirit to preach*. When the forty days
were expired, the vifion was clofed by a pre
didion and prefiguration of the trials he was
to combat, in the execution of that great
office he was about to undertake. Now
what could be more wifely adapted to his
circumftances at this time, than fuch repre
fentations r ? The view given him of the
room for, and even give occafion to the exercifes of his
devotion ?
- p Thus MoJ'es continued in the mount for the fpace of forty
days without the ufe of food, receiving inftruCtions from
God, Exod. xxxiv. 27, 28, and making interceffion for the
Ifraelites, Deut. ix. 18.
9 Luke iv. 18.
r In order to difcern the propriety and neceffity of this
revelation ; we are to recollect, that Chrift's fupernatural
knowledge was communicated to him, as occafion required,
by the Holy Ghoft, under whofe conduCt he continually
aCted, while he lived upon earth. Luke iv. 18. It is not
unreajonable to fuppofe (fays Archbifhop Tillotfon, Vol. IX.
p. 273.) that the divine wifidom, which dwelt in our Saviour,
did communicate itfelf to his human foul according to his pleafure.
• ¦ -And if this be not admitted ; how can we underftand that
paffage concerning our Saviour, Luke ii. 52. That Jefus grew
in wifdom and feature? Grotius on Mark xiii. 32, fpeaks to
the fame effeCt, Videtur mihi, ni meliora docear, hie locus
non impie polfe exponi hunc in modum, ut dicamus divinam
fapientiam menti humans Chrifti effeCtus fuos impreffifle pro
temporum ratione. And Beza,- on Luke ii. 52, obferves,
Imd & ipfa £j£tht©- plenitudo fefe prout & quatenus ipfi
libuit, humanitati adamta; infinuavit.
2 tempta-

f '3* ]
temptations of his fucceeding miniftry, was1
highly proper to afford him an opportunity
of arming himfelf with refolution to en
counter them'; while the honours he had
fo lately received, ferved to fupport him
under the firft fhock of fuch difcou raging
profpeds. And when could it be fo fit, to
ftate the ends to which his miraculous power
Was to be applied, and the limits within
which it was to be confined, as at the feafon
when he was called forth to exert it ? He
had a power of performing all forts of mi
racles at pleafure, by a fovereign all-com
manding word ; and by an unlimited exer
tion of this power, he might have efcaped
every perfonal evil, conquered the moft
vicious prejudices of his enemies, and ex
tended his fame and empire to the utmoft
limits of the world. But this, he is here
fhewn, would have been taking part with
Satan, or a criminal mifapplication 'of the
power of miracles. This power he was not
to ufe, to gratify any feparate inclination,
! ACts ix. 16. I willjhew him (Saul,) how great things he
muft fuffer for my fake. Saul, like Chrift, continued for fome
days fading, and without having any communication with
external objeCts ; like Chrift, he alfo received vifions and
revelations from God, and particularly a revelation of his
future fufferings, as a preparation for his publick miniftry : ac
the fame time engaging in the exercifes of devotion.
K 2 or

[i323
or promote any private intereft of his own,
but was to ad on all occafions in perfed
correfpondence to the views, and in com
pliance with the will of his Father1. Ac
cordingly he never undertook a fingle miracle
from his own motion alone ', without fome
previous addrefs to God u, and without an
immediate warrant and diredion from him.
And laftly, fince at this time he was declared
to be the Meffiah, to whom the antient pro
phecies had promifed a power and dominion,
boundlefs both in extent and duration ; which
the Jews univerfally imagined would have
been eftablifhed in this world, upon the ruins
of all the kingdoms of it : how neceffary
was it to explain the true nature of that dif-
penfation or kingdom he was going to ered ?
The kingdom of the Meffiah could not be
of this world, but muft be of a fuperior
kind ; fince he was to rife to the poffeffion
of it by a contempt of earthly grandeur, by
a fuperiority to every thing which the world
either admires or dreads. On the whole
then it appears, that this vifion contained
a plan of Chrift's future miniftry ; fince
he pa-fled through all the fcenes which it
1 John v. tg, 20, 30.
« When going" to raife Lazarus, Jefus faid, Father, I thank
thee that thou haft heard me. And I knew that thou bear eft me
uways. Johnxi. 41,42. Compare Mat. xxvi. 53. repre-

[ '33 1
reprefents, and conftantly aded upon the
maxims here eftablifhed : and that the
argument drawn from the correfpondence
between this vifion and the fubfequent
miniftry of Chrift, to fhew that the former
was a defigned reprefentation of the latter,
is much confirmed by the feafon of this
vifion ; which was juft when the plan on
which it was formed, was going to be
carried into execution. Having thus at
tempted to explain the true nature and in
tention * of Chrift's temptation, I fhall
SECTION V.
CLOSE this inquiry with the three fol
lowing obfervations.
I. This account of the temptation of Chrift,
obviates all the objedions made to the com
mon interpretation, and juftifies the wifdom
of God in this difpenfation. It is not a
feries of external occurrences, fome of them
abfurd and impoflible, all of them ufelefs
and improbable, which is here related ; but
an internal vifion : and this is afcribed not
* The whole of what has been urged in this feftion, to
fhew the wife and benevolent defign of this vifion ; confirms
all the arguments, which had been ufed to prove, that God
was the author of it ; and fupplies a new and unanfwerable
objection againft the opinion of thofe, who afcribe it to the
agency of Satan,
K 3 to

[ »34 ]
to<a diabolical, but to a divine agency j
agreeably to its -inftrudive and beneficial
defign and tendency. The feveral fcenes of
which it is compofed, do each of them
contain a real trial, fuch as occafioned a very
bright difplay of the virtue and piety of our
Redeemer ; and yet he was not acceffary to
his own temptation, the mind being paffive
as to all the fcenes which are prefented to it
in a vifion. But upon the common hypo
thefis, there was no temptation at all y ; and
if there had been any, his being expofed to it
was the matter of his own choice z. If,
befides the probationary nature, we take
into our account the fymbolical defign of
this vifion, it was a proper preparation for
that important office, with which Chrift
was now inverted. With what divine fkil}
are the fcenes of this vifion framed, fo as
to anfwer both thefe purpofes ? What juft
ground then do they afford for cenfure ?
Should it feem ftrange to any, that God
fhould in this, and in fo many other inflances,
reveal his will by emblems and fymbolical
adions : let it be remembered, that this was
done in condefcenfion to the capacities and
ways of men. For in the eaftern nations,
and amongft the Jews in particular, it was
y See above, SeCt. i. p. 3 — 13. « P. 14, &c. ufual

[ i35 ]
ufual to inftrud by actions as well as words ;
by fuch adions as were eafy figns of the par
ticular inftrudion they were defigned to im
part, and ferved to convey it into the mind
with greater force and a ftronger impreffion,
than a more plain mode of information would
have done. And as adions may infpire and
imprefs fentiments with equal advantage,
whether they are really performed, or only
reprefented to the imagination in a vifion a;
fo God made ufe of either, as he faw fit ;
communicating his mind fometimes by real
adions, and at other times by fenfible figns
and images b impreffed upon the imagination.
And what figns or emblems could be more
* This will readily be allowed in the prefent cafe, and in
all others, where nothing was aimed at beyond the inftruCtioa
of the prophet. But the fame method was ufed, when the in-
ftruCtion was defigned to be conveyed by him to the people.
The prophets in this cafe were required to relate their dreams
or vifions to the people, Jer. xxiii. 28, 29. Ezek. xi. 24, 25 ;
and as their vifions were of a parabolical nature, they ferved
the fame purpofes as parables do. The relation of them was
more lively and affeCling, than the bare naked inftruCtion
they contained, would have been.
b I am fpeaking here only of the general intention of this
mode of information. For the fymbols of a vifion, when they
referred to future events, like fome of Chrift's prophetic pa
rables, were fometimes defigned to veil the truth, rather
than to illuftrate it ; to infinuate gently and gradually what
it was not proper to reveal clearly at the time the prophecy
was delivered, which the event would afterwards fufficiently
explain. • K 4 apt

f *36 ]
apt and fignificant, than thofe we have been
examining, or better adapted to anfwer the
end propofed by them ?
If the account here given of this matter,
be indeed both juft and rational ; then it is
obvious to refled, how cautious the adver-
faries of the Gofpel fhould be in taking
offence at any particular pafTages in it, which
may have been injudicioufly explained ; and
how cautious Chriftians fhould be in giving
offence, by hafty interpretations of it; left
many taking occafion from thp abfurdity of
the explication, fhould be tempted to rejed
the Gofpel itfelf. The difficulties fuppofed
to lye againft the belief of the Chriftian
religion are wholly of this fort, owing to
certain paffages in the facred writings mifun-
derftood and mifapplied. Our Saviour com
plains of the Sadducees, that they rejeded the
dodrines of revelation, for want of having
a juft idea of them, and of the writings which
contained them ; Ye do err, not knowing the
Jcriptures" . They went upon the fuppofition,
that the prevailing and eftablifhed dodrine of
the Jewifh church concerning the refur-
redion, and the fenfual gratifications con-
fequent upon it, was true ; and then con-
fiddled the cafe of the feven brothers, who
f Mat. x*ii, 29. bad

t 137 3
had all in their turns married the fame
woman, as an unanfwerable objedion againft
it. But there was no colour for their ob
jedion, in any thing taught concerning the
dodrine of a refurredion in the facred
writings; and had they formed their judg
ment by thefe, the objedion would never
have been thought of. In like manner, in
the prefent age, many form their notions of
the Scriptures, not fo much by the Scriptures
themfelves, as by received interpretations :
and becaufe others put fuch a meaning upon
them as is attended with unanfwerable diffi
culties, they immediately rejed them as in
credible and indefenfible ; for want of know
ing the Scriptures, and diftinguifhing be
tween what is really contained in the divine
word, and what is the offspring of human
weaknefs and prejudice.
II. The account which has been given of
the temptation in the wildernefs, ferves to
exalt the charader of Chrift, and to confirm
our faith in his divine miffion.
What honour hereby accrues to the cha
rader of Chrift, appears in fome meafure
from the view we have taken of the feveral
fcenes placed before his mind, whether con
fidered as refpeding his prefent trial, or the
future difficulties of his minifiry. We have
already

[ 138 ]
already furveyed him as ftruggling with all
manner of hardfhips, and triumphing over
them by a fuperior principle of piety and
goodnefs. I would only obferve farther, that
the clear Joreknowledge which Chrift had
from the beginning of all the trials and
fufferings he was to undergo in the execution
of his office, adds the higheft luftre to his
charader. He was not ignorant what diffi
culties attended the work he was now under
taking, nor was he furprized into one fuffer
ing after another, without any previous warn
ing ; but before he began his miniftry, fore-
fa w all the evils with which he was. to,
combat, the very worft to which human
nature is liable. He knew he was to fpend
his life in want and contumely, and then
finifh it upon the crofs. And having a
natural fenfe and dread of difgrace and fuffer-^
ing, the profped of them made a very deep
impreffion upon his mind. But the cleareft
foreknowledge, and the deepeft impreffion
of the difficulty and terror of the tafk
afiigned him, could not prevent him from
undertaking it. Nothing could damp the
ardour of his benevolence and piety. The
refolution and firm nets which thofe pans-
ciples infpired, was not to be fhaken.
This vifion confidered under the view of
a predidion and prefiguration of the trials of
Chrift's

[ 139 ]
Chrift's future miniftry, prevents all fufpicion
of impofture, and eftablifhes our faith in his
divine miffion. How forward foever enter-
prizing and profligate men may be, to make
falfe pretences t© a divine commiffion and re
velation, in order to ferve the ends of worldly
policy and ambition ; yet no impoftor would
ever make pretences of this kind, if he previ-
oufly knew that he fhould meet with nothing
but fufferings and death as his reward. We
find the true prophets of God, notwithftand-
ing their immediate call from heaven, enter
ing upon their office with great reludance d,
on account of the difficulty and danger at
tending the faithful difcharge of it. For of
all employments none are fo hazardous, as
that of bearing teftimony againft popular and
long eftablifhed prejudice and vice, which are
more eafily exafperated, than extirpated, and
always aim at the ruin of thofe who attempt
a reformation. With regard to our Saviour,
he had a diftind and certain foreknowlege
of that long train of fufferings he was to pafs
through, and which were to be clofed by a
violent and ignominious death upon the
crofs. And his peculiar charader increafed
the bitternefs of thefe evils, and rendered the
new of them more formidable, than they
?ouId otherwife have been. He challenged
d Exod. iv. 13. Jerem. i. 6, 7, 8. ¦a.cha-

[ Ho ]
a charader of tranfcendent dignity, and a
peculiar relation to the Father, as his only
begotten and beloved Son ; and yet was to
live in a ftate of abafement and afflidion,
like the meaneft and moft miferable of the
children of men. He was invefted with
authority over all the laws of nature, which
he difplayed continually for the convidion
and benefit of mankind ; but it was never
to be employed for his own perfonal ad
vantage ; no, not in proteding himfelf from
indigence, or injury, or death. He was the
great Meffiah, the glorious prince and re
deemer promifed by God ; and yet he was
to renounce the offer of worldly empire,
which was accounted by the whole Jewifh
nation to be effential to that charader. Nay,
thofe fufferings which do fo much credit to
other prophets, greatly injured his ; becaufe
they were judged inconfiftent with his claims,
and the predidions concerning him. His
very death, which is the ftrongeft pledge that
human faith can give, inftead of removing,
fixed upon him the charge of impofture %
with
* Though the common people were fo eager to follow Jefus
during the courfe of his miniftry, from the hope of his affiim-
ing a temporal kingdom, John vi. 14, 15 ; and though they
received him with hofannas when he made his laft publick
entrance into Jerujalem, from the fame hope, Mat. xxi. 8, 9 :
yet when they found, that his enemies had feized, tried, and
r condemned

[ Hi ]
with a people who held it as a firft prin
ciple, that the MeJJiah was to abide Jor ever*.
How impoffible then is it, to entertain a
fufpicion concerning the truth and fincerity
of the great author and founder of our reli
gion ? From what motives of intereft could
he affiime the charader of the Meffiah, when
he gave notice beforehand, that fufferings
condemned him to death, without his interpofing for his own
deliverance ; and that he had declared in terms, that his
kingdom was not of this world, and that he had no inten
tion of refcuing himfelf out of the hands of his enemies,
John xviii. 36 ; they clamoroufly demanded his crucifixion,
and perfifted in their demand, notwithftanding the utmofl
endeavours of Pilate to fave him. If there were any who did
not yet defpair of his being the Meffiah, they might join in
the cry againft Jefus the more readily, in order to force him
to an open declaration, and miraculous vindication of his
character. But when they faw him actually nailed to the
crofs, the common people could not preferve their opinion of
him any longer; they were as forward as their malicious
rulers, to revile Jefus as a deceiver and impoftor ; and they
urge his fufferings as a proof that he was fo. The faith
even of his own difciples was, in a great meafure, now loft in
defpair ; for they no longer confidered him as the perfon who
fhould redeem Ifirael, Luke xxiv. 21. The difappointment of
the common expectation of a temporal empire, was not only
a cruel mortification of the pride and ambition of the Jewijh
people ; but was confidered as a demonftration of the falfe-
hood of Chrift's pretenfion to the character of the Meffiah.
In this latter view, (in which it is not fo commonly attended
to) yet more than in the former, the utter difappointment of
the Jewifh people, when they faw Chrift in the hands of his
enemies, accounts for the change of their behaviour towards
him a( that feafon.
f John xii. 34. and

f 142 ]
and death were all the reward he expeded
upon earth ? did thofe impoftors who fprang
up in Judea about the time of Chrift> ad
on fuch principles ? juft the contrary. Of
did any deceiver ever make his undergoing
a violent and publick death by the hands of
his enemies, the foundation of his credit ?
and would Chrift, if he had not been a truly
divine meffenger, have aded thus amongft
thofe, who confidered his crucifixion as an
unanfwerable confutation of his claims ?
There is not the leaft room to furmife, that
he died from a principle of vain glory ; fince
his death expofed him to univerfal infamy;
and in his peculiar circumftances, muft have
blafted his reputation for ever, if God had
not vindicated it by raifing him from the
dead. This confideration, while it heightens
our admiration of the heroic fortitude and
piety of the Redeemer, in fubmitting to the
infamy of a publick execution, (a trial Angu
larly fevere in the prefent cafe !) ferves alfo
fully to convince us, that Chrift undertook
the office of the Meffiah, from no motive of
this world, but from a firm affurance of a
refurredion to a ftate of tranfcendent glory in
another, according to his own repeated pre
didions. And could any thing but the
ftrongeft evidence of his being raifed from the

L H3 1
the dead, and exalted to heaven, efface the
impreffion of his fufferings upon earth, and
engage men to adore as their Saviour and
Meffiah, the very perfon whom, with fo
full a bent of their underftandings s and
hearts, they had crucified as a blafphemer
and impoftor ?
III. This account of Chrift's temptation,
furnifhes ample inftrudion and confolation to
his difciples, under thofe manifold and great
temptations they may be called to encounter.
This being a point, which has been often and
well urged by many pradical writers ; will be
only briefly touched upon. But it may be
proper to obferve, that thofe writers, by
abating the force, nay, deftroying the reality
of Chrift's temptation b ; rob us of all the
pradical improvement of it, and remove the
very foundation upon which the comfort and
edification of Chriftians fhould be built.
Whereas by confidering it as a prophetic
vifion, in which things are reprefented to the
mind in the fame manner as if they really
happened, and that reprefentation anfwers all
the ends of an adual performance ; we
maintain the reality and ftrength of Chrift's
e See above, note c, and Luke xxiii. 34. 1 Cor. ii. 8.
ACts iii. 17. ch. xiii. 27.
h As was fhewn above, SeCt. I. p. 3, &c. tempta-

f 144 ]
temptation ', and confequently fecure all the
advantages, which are, without reafon,
afcribed to the cemmon hypothefis, and do
properly belong to this interpretation only.
We learn from this hiftory, that human
nature, even in its moft perfed ftate, and in
all circumftances, is incident to temptations :
that a pre-eminence of charader, ftation and
endowments, is attended with proportionable
difficulties and dangers : that thefe trials are
no figns of God's difpleafure, but the ap
pointments of his wifdom and goodnefs for
our beaefit, the means of brightening our
virtues, and of rendering our future crown
more illuftrious : that the beft method of
refifling and vanquifhing temptations, is by
the affiftance of the Spirit, by the exercife of
purity and devotion, by arguments drawn
from the word of God, and by yielding im
mediately to the firft and unbiaffed didates
of confeience, without deliberating a moment
in matters of plain duty 3 the leaft delibera
tion in fuch cafes being a fign, that the heart
is already fwerved from virtue : and that
Chriftians have fufficient encouragement
from the tendernefs and fympathy which
* Befides, the very profpeCl which Chrifi now had of the
difficulties of his future miniftry, conftituted a great trial ; as
was obferved above, SeCt. IV. p. 103. Chrift

C 145 1
Chrift acquired by his fufferings k, to exped
all neceffary fuccour under their various infir
mities and trials. We likewife learn from
this part of the evangelical hiftory, that
when we are fet apart to fuch offices, as
bring along with them an obligation to duties
of peculiar difficulty and importance, and
require an extraordinary meafure of divine
affiftance; as we ought to confider well the
great weight of the work we are going to
engage in, take a full view of the difficulties
we fhall meet with in the profecution oi it,
and arm ourfelves with refolution to undergo
them ; fo we fhould, by fafting and the
exercifes of an extraordinary devotion ',
engage the divine prefence with us in our
arduous undertaking. And laftly, we learn
what is the temptation, which prevails with
the pretended vicar of Chrift to corrupt the
true religion ; and this is the defire of the
kingdoms of this world, and the glory of
them, of which the pope challenges the
difpofal, and with the offer of which he
allures men to fall down and pay him divine
honours. And alas ! in all communions,
how many are there who account that the
beft religion, which moft effedually advances
their fecular intereft ? how many are tempted
k Heb. ii, 14, ch.iv. ij. 1 See above, p. 129, note ».
L to

[ 146 ]
to deny or conceal the truth, or to efpoufe
falfhood, by a fondnefs for power, wealth
and popular applaufe, or a dread of poverty,
reproach and perfecution ? whereas no man
is qualified to preach the gofpel, or indeed to
profefs it, who is not fortified againft the
temptations of eafe and affluence, of pride
and ambition ; and who is not willing to take
up his crofs and follow Chrift. A hard
faying to flefh and blood ! But the captain
of our falvation has given us an example, and
fhewn us how to conquer. He bids us be
courageous in our combat, becaufe he has
overcome the world m ; and will not fail
therefore both to affift us in gaining the
vidory, and to reward our fledfaftnefs with
a crown of glory that fadeth not away. Let
us contemplate him as the pattern, not only
of our duty, but of our recompence. He
renounced the kingdoms of this world ; but
has acquired an infinitely more noble and
extenfive empire, and is conftituted the lord
and judge of angels, and of men. Behold
him feated at the right hand of the Majefty
on high, on purpofe that he may advance
his faithful followers, to proportionate degrees
of celeftial honour. We cannot faint under
difficulties, while we liften to the found of
m John xvi. 33. his

t H7 1
his animating voice, addreffing us from
heaven, To him that overcometh, will I grant
to fit with me in my throne, even as I aljo over
came, and am Jet down with my Father in
his throne n.

n Rev. iii. zi.

APPEN-

[ t4s i
APPENDIX I.
CONTAINING
Some farther Observations upon the
fubject of the preceding Inquiry,
and an Anfwer to Objections.
FA ULLY fenfible as I was from the be
ginning, that the argument of the In
quiry was repugnant to the ftrongeft pre-
poffeffions of every denomination of Chrif-
tians ; yet a belief of it's importance induced
me to fubmit it to publick examination : not
without fome hope, that, in cafe it was well
fupported, it might gradually make it's way
into candid and ingenuous minds ; or that, if
it was ill-grounded, fome friend to truth
would corred my miftakes, and place the
fubjed in a jufter light. The fuccefs which •
the Inquiry has met with, has exceeded my
expedations. It is indebted to many for
their candour"; and to fome who are uni
verfally
J The learned and judicious Spanheim, at the fame time
that he pleads for the literal interpretation, recommends can-
z dour

C '49 1
verfally ranked amongft the moft capable
judges of the fubjed, for their approbation.
This has incouraged me to review it, and to
attempt to remove the objedions which have
been urged againft it ; ftill wifhing it may
undergo an impartial fcrutiny by the publick,
whatever be the iffue. I have ufed great
diligence in colleding the objedions, to
which it was thought to be liable. And
though moft of them are in fome degree
either obviated or anfwered in the firft and
fecond editions of the Inquiry, and, I hope,
more fully in the prefent"; neverthelefs, it
may not be improper to enter on a farther
difcuffion of fome of the moft material ones,
as it may lead us to place the anfwers in a
different light, and to make fome farther
obfervations on the general fubjed.
I,
But firft of all I would take notice, that
the publick has been referred to Dr. Clarke's
difcourfes on Chrift's temptation c, as con-
dour towards thofe who rejeCted it, from thefe two confidera-
tions : Quum nee res fidei fit, nee Scriptura id d\m>7\ic\&L
definiat. Dubia Evangel, dub. 55. p. 247. See alfo p. 244.
b The notes added to the fecond and third editions would
have been publilhed feparately, if they had not been fo
numerous, as to make it neceffary to infert them in the
Jnquiry, for the eafe and convenience of the reader.
'<¦ They are the 93d and 94th Sermons, Vol. I, p. j8|,
591. fol. ed, L 3 taining

[ M° ]
taining a fatisfadory folution of the difficulties
attending the literal interpretation. It will
therefore be neceffary to examine thofe
difcourfes ; nor will it be improper to fubjoin
a few obfervations on what Dr. Benfon or
others have written more lately upon the
fame fubjed, and with the fame view.
With regard to Dr. Clarke,' I readily allow,
that fuch were the abilities and learning of
that celebrated writer, as eminently to qualify
him for the talk he undertook. And had
the literal interpretation of this paffage of
Scripture been capable of a juft defence, it
would have been fuccefsfully defended by
this accomplifh'd fcholar and critic. If he
has not fucceeded, we may fairly prefume,
that the fault was in the caufe, rather than
the advocate.
The dodor begins with obfervingd, that
the hifiory of our Saviour s temptation, is a
portion of Scripture, in which there are Jeveral
difficulties, that dejerve particular explication.
And then fets himfelf to explain the follow
ing ones: ift, Why our Saviour, whom the
Scripture elfiewhere declares to have been tempted
in all points, as we are, only without Jin ; is,
yet by the evangelifis recorded, as having been
tempted only at this particular time. 2dly, Why
* P. 5§5- tut

[ »5i ]
mr Saviour continued fo long in the folitary
retirement of a defert place, and why he fafied
through all that fpace of forty days. 3dly, Why
our Saviour, who had power over unclean
Jpirit s, and could cafi out devils at his pleafure ;
tvas yet pleafed to Jubmit himfelf and condefcend
Jo Jar, as to be tempted at all by the enemy.
4thly, Why the tempter would at all ajfault our
Lord, or what advantage he could pojfibly hope
to gain over him. 5thly, and laftly, Since we
read no more in the Gofpels, of Chrift's being
tempted after this ; how and in what fenfe, it
is faid by St. Luke, at the conclufion of this
hifiory of our Lord's temptation, that the
tempter departed from him, only for a feafon.
Thefe are all the difficulties which Dr.
Clarke faw fit to propofe and examine. Whe
ther fome of them do really belong to the
fubjed ; and whether the reft are fully folved ;
I fhall leave to others to determine. Let us
fuppofe, (what many however would very
unwillingly grant) that he has removed all
the objedions here enumerated j there are
many others which he has fuffered to pafs
unnoticed. He did not obferve or has paffed
over in filence moft, if not all thofe which
are urged in the Inquiry \ Now to overlook a diffi-
c Indeed the 4th difficulty which the doCtor undertakes to
explain, correfponds in fome degree with the firft objection in
L 4 tha

[ *5* ]
a difficulty, and to remove it, are things
widely different. It may be faid, perhaps*
that thofe objedions which to others feem,
very confiderable, appeared to him too trifling
to be confidered. And I acknowledge can
dour would oblige us to prefume this to be
the cafe, with regard to a writer of fuch
fuperior abilities, and fuch unqueftionable
freedom and fairnefs as Dr. Clarke, if there
were not certain proof of the contrary. It
appears from his other writings, that he
judged one of the objedions to the hifiory of
Chrift's temptation, which he has omitted
in his fermons, and which is urged in the
Inquiry, to be unanfwerable; I mean that
drawn from the devil's Jloewing Chrifi all the
kingdoms of the world; which he explains by
faying, he made him a reprefentation of them*.
And thus this juftly celebrated writer, like
moft other writers of inferior note upon the
fubjed of Chrift's temptation, though he un
dertook to vindicate the literal interpreta
tion ; found himfelf under a neceffity, in one
inftance at leaft, of receding from it.
the Inquiry, p. 3. But the doCtor entirely overlooks the main
circumftance, the abfurdity of the devil's affaulting Chrift in
an open and vifible manner. This circumftance, is likewife
dropt, when he returns an anfwer to his third difficulty, by
mifapplying Heb. ii. 14 — 18. ch. iv. 15. See the Inquiry,
p. 14—21.
1 faraphrafe on Mat. iv. 8. and Luke iv. 5. Th<s

[ '53 3
The world is juft favoured with a work of
the late reverend and learned Dr. Benfon Ej
and it may reafonably be expeded, that fome
notice fhould be taken of what fuch a writer
has advanced upon the fubjed under confi
deration ; efpecially as he has treated it in
an elaborate manner \ He rejeds the fup^
pofition of it's being a dream or vifion' ; and
affirms, that the evangelifis fieem, plainly, to
have reprejented all tlyeje things as hifiorical
Ja5ls* ; adding, that he was inclined to under-.
fiand this part of the Jour Gqfpels, as literal,
hifiorical, truth ; or an account of what actually
happened*. We find, however, that at firft
fetting out, he began to feel fome doubt upon
his mind ; for thus he expreffes himfelf with
regard to one circumftance of the hiftory,
viz. the manner of Satan's appearance to
Chrift : He feems to have appeared unto Jefus,
in a vifible manner, at leafi in Vision '. As
the dodor proceeds, new difficulties come in
his way ; and he not only doubts, but denies
the truth, and even the poffibility, of the
literal interpretation. It is impofiible, (fays he)
Jrom thence (that is, from the top of the highefi
mountain upon earth) to fee the length, breadth,
and full extent, of any one large kingdom^
s The Hiftory of tbe life of Chrift.
* Chapter ii. « P. 36. k P. 37. 1 P. 32.
much

[ '54 J
much lefs all the kingdoms of this warld, and
all the fplendor and glory of them m. And not-
withftanding his own inclination to under
ftand all the temptations as literal hifiorical
truth, he honeftly confeffes, As to this part of
the reprefentation, there feems to be a neceffity of
having recourfe to vifion ; or rather, to aficli-
tious Jcene, worked up by diabolical power and
art n. Nay, the dodor lays down a rule of
interpretation, which (in my apprehenfion)
deftroys all that he has advanced in favour
of the common hypothefis. His rule is
this, viz. We fhould look upon every thing to be
literally, or hifiorically true; but where there
are Jome circumfiances to determine us to in
terpret a paffage, in a figurative manner ; and
efpecially where the literal fenfe would lead us
into manififi abfurdity °. Is it not abfurd,
that is, contrary to reafon and experience,
to fuppofe that the devil can hurry men
through the air p, or fo much as appear to them
in a vifible manner *% Were it not for the
prejudices of education, we fhould rank thefe
things amongft the moft glaring repugnancies
to the conftitution of the univerfe, and as
a very grofs (though undefigned) impeach
ment of the wifdom of it's fovereign author
and lord.
« P. 39. » P. 38. " P. 39. P P. 35. « P. J2.
I will

[ 155 )
I will take notice of one thing more in the
dodor's performance, becaufe he feems to lay
much ftrefs upon it; though it has been al
ready confidered in the Inquiry. I refer to
the general reafon he affigns for adhering to
the literal interpretation, To fay the truth,
our Lord's rejifiing theje temptations, in vifion
only, would not, in my opinion, have been Jo
much to his honour, Jo glorious an example to
his dijciples, nor Juch an illufirious evidence,
that he was Juperior to all the temptations of
the devil*. Soon after he adds, It Jeems tQ
me altogether worthy of our Lord's high and
facred' ckaraSler, to manifefi that the devil
could, not, by any temptation whatever, prevail
with Jefus to commit the leafi Jin ; even when
the devil was permitted to take his own way,
place him in what fituation he pleafed, and
attack him, in Juch manner, and in fuch cir
cumftances, as might give his temptations all
poffible weight or force. Whether, fuppofing
the fcenes to be vifionary, they conftituted
any proper trial, is a point confidered elfe-
where 8 : here let us examine, whether upon
the dodor's hypothefis, the temptations of
the devil had all poffible force, or any force at
all. In explaining the firft temptation, he
tells us, our Lord was not ignorant, who the
* P. 37. « Appendix I. N°. V. perfon

f *S* ]
perfon was that accofied him '. Now if Chrift
knew Satan from the beginning, this cir*-
cumftance, our moft candid adverfaries allow,
would diminifh the force of all his tempta
tions. With refped to the third and laft
temptation in particular, Dr. Benfon calls
it the greatefi of them all u ; and yet accord
ing to this learned writer, Chrift not only
knew who made him the offer of all king-?
doms of the world, but alfo that the devil's
claim to the difpofal of them was arrogant,
llfurped, AND 1NTIRELY GROUNDLESS AND
vain". Now even to the warmeft Ad-?
vocate for the literal fcheme, I might venture
to appeal, whether there was the leafi force
in fuch a temptation. The Dodor ad
mits, that Chrift knew the devil's claim
to the difpofal of the world, and confequently
the devil's promife of it to him, to be intirely
groundlejs, and therefore that it could not in
any degree be fulfilled. And yet as if Chrift
had known the very contrary to be true, the
Dodor exclaims, to be tempted, at once, with
all the kingdoms of the world, and all the glory of
them ! muft have been fuch a temptation, as it
can hardly enter into the heart of man, to conceive
the prodigious and almofi irrefiflible force there
of y. I own, I cannot difcern the tempting
( Dr. Benfon's life of Chrift, p. 34.
u P. 38- x P. 41. y P. 40. force.

t 157 1
force, much lefs the prodigious and almofi trre-
Jifiible force, of an offer of nothing ; or, which
is the fame, of fomething which the perfon
who makes it, is known to be utterly unable
to make good. The meaneft flave of vice
would turn from fuch a temptation with
fcorn. Was it then by refifting affaults of
this nature, that Chrift was to manifefi his
fuperiority to all the temptations of the devil,
to advance his own honour, and to fet a glo
rious example to his difciples ! And was it
for the fake of fuch triumphs, that the laws
of nature were now fufpended, and all thofe
wonderful fcenes which the Dodor fo affed-
ingly defer ibes, prejented bejore our Lords eyes,
by a feries of miracles ?
Befides Dr. Benfon, Dr. Macknight has
lately appeared in defence of the hiftory of
Chrift's temptation, in the literal fenfe of it.
The reafonings of this gentleman in his Com
mentary upon it, I have carefully examined in
my obfervations on the feveral pafTages, as
they occurred in the Inquiry. And becaufe
nothing ought to pafs unregarded; which is
advanced by this able and judicious writer ;
I would inform the reader, that in his Truth
of the Gofpel Hifiory'1', after taking notice of
my Inquiry, he affirms, " That the literal
o- P. 173, in the note. fenfe

[ i5* ]
fenfe of the hiftory of the temptation, is"
agreeable to the reprefentation which the
Scriptures have given us of the agency of evil
Spirits." On this paffage, I would make the
.following remarks, i. The Inquiry does not
controvert the agency of the devil and other
evil Spirits in tempting mankind \ 2. Nor
does the allowing the temptation of Chrift in
the wildernefs to be a vifion, contradid the
common dodrine concerning the agency of
evil Spirits in propofing temptations. On
the contrary^ the vifion is framed agreeably
to this hypothefis ; the image of the great
tempter being ufed as the fymbol and emblem
of temptation*. 3. In order to fubvert the
principles laid down in the Inquiry, it is ne
ceffary to eftablifh, not fome agency of Satan
in tempting mankind in the general courfe
of things, but the correfpondence of fuch a
general agency to the literal fenfe of this
hiftory, which reprefents him as appearing to
Chrifi in a vifible form, converfing with him
openly, and conveying or accompanying him Jrom
place to place in. a Jenfible matiner. But this is
a point our learned author has not attempted
to prove.
Let others judge of the force of the ob
jedions againft the literal interpretation;
a See the Inquiry, p. 106, note '. with

t 15* ]
with refped to myfelf, having in vain fought
for a fatisfadory folutionof them, from thofe
moft capable of affording it ; I ftill find
myfelf under a neceflity of looking out for
fome different explication. And none ap
pearing to me fo probable as that fuggefted
in the Inquiry, I will attempt to clear it from
objedions. II.
It has been objeded, " That if this part of
*' the Gofpel be only the hiftory of a vifion,
*' the fame may be affirmed concerning every
" other part of the Gofpel. The whole ac-
" count of our Saviour's miracles in parti-
'* cular, may be nothing more than a nar-
" rative of fo many vifions."
This objedion manifeftly proceeds upon
this falfe principle, viz. " That there is juft
the fame reafon, for affirming the miracles
of Chrift to be the hiftory of what was
tranfaded only in vifion, as there is to affirm
the fame concerning his temptations in the
wildernefs." If there be a juft diftindion in
the two cafes, the objedion falls to the
ground. It has been fhewn, that neither
the nature of Chrift's temptations did admit,
nor the end propofed by them require, an
outward tranfadion ; and alfo that the hifto-
rians have clearly intimated by many circum-
2 fiances

[ i6o ]
fiance's of the relation, that they were vlflo*
nary reprefentations ; and that they have even
pofitively afferted them to be fuch. But this
reafoning does not affed the miracles of the
Gofpel : for they are all, in their own nature,
poffible to the power to which they are
afcribed ; the end propofed by them, the
convidion of mankind, required an adual
exhibition and performance ; all the circum-
fiances attending them, the reafonings from
them, and the effeds they produced, farther
fhew that they were real fads ; and the
evangelifts have affirmed that they were per
formed openly, and in the moft publick
manner. Thus all the arguments ufed to
prove Chrift's temptations to have been
vifions, are fo far from warranting the fame
conclufion with regard to his miracles, that
they demonftrate the contrary, and prove
them to be real fads.
I moft readily allow, that the literal fenfe
of all authors ought never to be departed from
without fome juft reafon or neceffity ; and
that very great injury has been done to the
Scripture, by making thofe parts of it fym
bolical, emblematical, or allegorical, which
were defigned to be underftood literally.
This is fe'tting alide the genuine word of
God, and fubftituting in the room of h the
infinitely

b

t '*' J
infinitely various fidions of the human imagi
nation. With this fault, the antient writers
of the Chriftian church have been frequently,
and juftly charged. Origen, and (in their
younger years) Jerome and Auguftin, though
they did not abfolutely rejed the literal fenfe
of Scripture ; yet led men to negled and
undervalue it as low artd trivial, by the pre
ference they gave to myftical interpretations.
But may we not be guilty of equal abfurdity,
and do as great prejudice to the Scripture,
by adhering to the letter unreafonably, as by
iinreafonably departing from it ? When our
Saviour fpeaks of eating his fiefh, and drinking
his blood; are we to underftand him literally,
as the Jews did ? He himfelf has told us,
that his words are jpirit, to be interpreted
figuratively or fpiritually. On other occa-
fions he ufes the like ftyle, and calls himfelf
the door of the fheep,. the bread which came
down from heaven, and the true vine ; leaving
it to common fenfe to explain his meaning.
In a word, there is no book contains a greater
variety of matter than the Bible. And
though many have pleaded, " That the
*> The Chriftian Fathers, in allegorizing the Scripture, feem
to have copied (as Pbilo and other learned Jews before them
had done) the method of the Greeks, in explaining their
myfteries. See Le Clerc's Hift. Ecclef. p, 24. and compare
Dr. Lightfoot's works, Vol. I. p. 37 3.
M " vifions

[ l62 ]
" vifions related in Scripture, occur only id
" the prophetical books, not in the hifiorical -,"
yet it appears from the inftances cited in the
Inquiry c, (to which many more might be
added,) that even the hifiorical books relate
parables, fables d, revelations or mental illu
minations and vifions, as well as plain
dodrines, and outward events. And the
prophetical books, not excepting Ezekiel, and
the Revelation of St. John, have fome inter
mixture of real fads with the hiftory of
c P. 34, 35, 36, 37, 49, 95, &c. See alfo 1 Kings xxii.
19—22. cited below, N9. III. notee.
d The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them,
and they faid, Sec. Judges ix. 8 — 15. Now to borrow the
reafoning fo often employed againft the Inquiry, " We have
" as little reafon to affirm, from the ftyle of the facred writer,
" and the manner of his exprejfions, that this is a parable, as
" we have to affirm that the miracles of Chrift were msre
" parables : both are equally defcribed as real faCts, with-
" out any the leaft intimation of the contrary." But who
does not fee the abfurdity of this reafoning ? Experience
informs us, that trees neither walk nor fpeak. And the
fame experience as certainly informs us, that the devil does
never appear vifibly to mankind, never converfes with them
in an open manner, neither tranfports them through the air,
nor accompanies or conduces them from the country to the
city, or from the city to the country. In both cafes therefore
the nature of the relation points out the neceflity of a figu
rative interpretation. It is objected, " That we are ignorant
" of the powers of fuperior beings, and know nothing of the
" other world." But we are not unacquainted with the laws
and orders of this world ; we know by experience, that they
never are violated ; and by reafon are affured they never can
be violated, but by the great ruler of the world.
5 vifions

[ i6j ]
vifions and revelations. Now all thefe things
ought to be underftood according to their
refpedive natures. By a diligent and impar
tial ufe of our underftandings* we may eafily
diftinguifh between things that differ. The
relation itfelf, or the declaration of the hifto-
rian, if attended to, will preferve us from
miftake. To diftinguifh properly, is the
bufinefs of the critic. And to plead (as all
interpreters do occafionally) for fome figu
rative modes of fpeech ; is not to convert
every thing into figure and allegory ; unlefs
the reafonings made ufe of are as applicable
to the whole, as to particular parts of
Scripture. III.
It has been objeded, "That fuppofing the
" temptation of Chrift to be a vifion, God
" could not be the author of it; inafmuch as
" it contains fuch reprefentations of the
" power of the devil in making Chrift an
" offer of the world, as are not agreeable
" to his real nature."
This objedion, if it proves any thing, would
prove too much : for it affeds the credit of
all vifions, which are mere deceptions, having
no exiftence out of the mind of the prophet *.
Befides,
e This is the cafe, even when the images of a vifion are
types or reprefentative figures of real objeCts, and give a
M 2 juft

[ i64 ]
Befides, it is of no importance whether the
images of a vifion are borrowed from nature, or
juft picture of them ; as when Saul faw Ananias in vifion.
ACts ix. 12. The appearance or reprefentation was fiditious
and delufive, though an objeCt perfectly correfpondent to it
exifted in nature. But very frequently the vifionary repre
fentation has no correfponding objeCt in nature ; or if it bears
a refemblance to real beings in fome refpeCts, it differs from
them in others, and is not framed fo much with a view to
truth and nature, as to conftitute a proper fymbol, emblem,
or hieroglyphic of what it is defigned to fignify and repre
fent : witnefs the cherubim of Ezekiel, chap. i. his emblema
tical temple, chap. xl. (fee Inquiry, feci. III. p. 67, note 1.)
the lamb having feven horns, and fieven eyes, Rev. v. 6. and
the various fymbols and emblems of the Divinity, and thofe
in particular which conftituted the vifion of Micaiah,
1 Kings xxii. 19 — 22. Here the Prophet fays, I faw the
Lord fitting upon his throne, and all the hoft of heaven ftanding
by him, on his right-hand and on his left ; though God, we are
certain, is without bodily parts, fpiritual, invifible, and omni-
prefent. He then tells us, that God advifed with the heavenly
hoft what meafures to take ; and fome recommended one thing,
fome another, till after much deliberation, one of them hit
upon an expedient, fuch as after examination was approved by
the Deity ; which was that of being a lying fpirit in the
mouth of Ahab's prophets. Now if you afk, Has the devil
the difpofal of the world I And if he has not, could he be
reprefented in a divine vifion as actually having it ? I alfo
would inquire with the prophet of God, Who has direded the
fpirit of the Lord? — With whom took he counfel? Or when
could he ftand in need of advice ? When did he authorife
falfhood and lyes ? The anfwer in both cafes is the fame ;
neither are to be underftood literally, or as a hiftory of faCts,
but as vifions or parabolical reprefentations ; and though the
reprefentations are mere (iCtions, they convey inftrudion as
truly and properly, as if they were exaCt copies of outward
objeCts. Micaiah's vifion was a prediction and figurative re
prefentation of God's providence in ordering matters fo as
2 that

[ 165 ]
or whether they vary from it wholly or in
part ; they are ufed only as fymbols and
emblems of other things ; and they may
anfwer this end equally on any of thefe fup-
pofitions. For their propriety does not
confift in their being juft pidures of real
objeds, but in their fitnefs to reprefent the
inftrudion they contain. In the cafe before
us, the appearance of the tempter to Chrift,
and his making him the promife of univerfal
empire, was a fymbol and emblem, not of
the power of the tempter himfelf, but of the
adual offer of grandeur and empire, with
which Chrift was to be tempted in the courfe
of his miniftry. And it was neceffary that
the promife of the world in vifion fhould
appear real ; fince otherwife it could not
have truely reprefented the temptation he
was adually expofed to, of fecuring the
empire of the world by a different applica
tion of his miraculous powers, from that
which he was appointed to make of them.
So that the whole of the objedion amounts
to this, (which equally affeds many other
vifions in Scripture) that the image has no
that Ahab, by giving credit to his own falfe prophets, who
flattered his pride and prejudices, fhould fall at Ramoth
Gilead : juft as the tempter's promife was a prophecy and
prefiguration of the empire and grandeur with which Chrift
was afterwards to be tempted.
M 3 corref-

[ 166 ]
correfponding objed in nature, or no exad
external archetype; (a point which we have
no inclination to difpute;) while it muft be
allowed to have been a proper fymbol of
what it was defigned to reprefent.
If we deny, that any impreffion can be
made upon the mind by God, but fuch as is
conformable to the real nature of external
objeds; we condemn the conftitution of the
world arcund us. Without entering into the
philofophy either of Locke or Berkeley, it is
certain that the objeds around u^. (thofe out
ward fenfible figns, by which God is conti
nually fpeaking to mankind,) raife in us ideas
and fenfations very different from the real
natures of the things themfelves. We afcribe
fenfible qualities to objeds, fuch as heat,
coldnefs, and the like ; though they exift
not in the objeds, but are folely perceptions
in the mind. How various are the afpeds
of objeds, according to their different
diftances, the nature of the medium, and
the difpofition of the organ ? Nor are we
deceived only by thofe fiilfe reprefentations,
which the fenfes make of objeds to the
mind ; but we even miftake thofe images
and reprefentations for the very objeds
themfelves ; and in fo doing, follow an uni
verfal and powerful inftind of nature. Never thelefs,

[ 1 67 3
thelefs it is certain, that though external
^objeds may have a real and abfoluteexiftence;
the mind has no immediate intercourfe with
them, but only (through the inlets of the
fenfes) receives the images, copies, and reprer
fentations of them. The objedion there
fore here made to fitpernatural vifion, equally
affeds natural vifion. If the latter be a dif-
penfation not unworthy the God of truth;
neither can the former. It is not, perhaps,
the intention of Providence, by any im-
preffions it makes upon our minds, to lead us
into the knowledge of the abftrad natures of
things, but (more immediately and princi
pally) to convey fome ufeful inftrudion,
fuch as may ferve for the diredion of our
condud, to admonifh us what to avoid, and
what to purfue. In the cafe before us at leaft,
it is certain that the reprefentation of Satan
in vifion, was. not defigned to give Chrift
any new information concerning the nature
of Satan, becaufe here he is only an emblem
and fymbol of temptation.
If you flill plead, " That we may corred
the errors of fenfe by the refledions of reafon,
which enables us to judge of things, not
merely as they appear at firft, but as they
really are;" the fame anfwer is more fully
applicable to the cafe in queftion ; reafon
M 4 always

\r 168 ]
always enabling the prophet, when the vifian.
is ended, to pafs a trqe judgment concerning
the nature of it's reprefentations. IV.
It is afferted in the Inquiry, that the proper
intention of this vifion was, to predid to our
Saviour his future trials ; that the feveral
Jcenes were diftind prophecies and fymbols
of the different temptations which were to
occur in the courfe of his miniftry, and proper
premonitions againft them. This is argued f
from two confiderations : the general nature
of vifions as fymbolical and prophetic; and
the perfed correfpondence between the figns
in this vifion, and the things they fignified
and reprefented.
Now, though the inftances g produced in,
the Inquiry, may be fufficient to prove, that
vifions in general were of an emblematical
nature ; yet this being a point of very great
importance to the right underftanding of this
and many other paffages of Scripture ; I will
confirm it by fome further examples. That
God is a fpiritual incorporeal being, is equally
the dodrine of reafon and revelation. And
therefore when we read fo often in the
prophets, that they Jaw the Lord fitting upon.
f Inquiry, p. ioi — 103.
£ P. 34, note p. p. 98, gcj, 106, note ', and p. 135. his

[ 169 1
his throne*; we may be certain, that they
had only a mental reprefentation of fome
fymbol or emblem of the majefty of God }.
Jacob's ladder ftanding upon the earth, and
reaching to heaven, with the angels afcendr
ing and defcending on it, was the hieroglyphic?
pf God's particular providence, or of his
readinefs to interpofe in an extraordinary
manner in favour of the patriarch *. In
like manner, the perfons and things which
St. John faw in vifion, do all ftand for other
perfons and things ; and had themfelves no
exiftence, but in the imagination of the
prophet; (the Spirit of God prefenting before
it ail thofe appearances and fcenes which he
h i Kings xxii. 19. If. vi. 1. Dan. vii. 9, 10. ACts vii. 55.
Rev. iv. 2.
s Neverthelefs, the antients, taking every thing fpoken of
God in the Scriptures in a literal fenfe, attributed to him the
figure of a man, and maintained that he was the objed of bodily
fight. And fuch was the zieal with which this doCtrine was
maintained, that the denial of it was branded with impiety,
and put men in danger of their lives. Socrat. Hift. Ecclef.
1. 6. c. 7. I take notice of this here, not only as it is a
ftriking inftance of an abfurd adherence to the letter of
Scripture ; but alfo as it may ferve to (hew, how little regard
in fome cafes is due to the opinions of the antients, and that
it ought to create no prejudice againft the explication here
given of Chrift's temptation, that it is contrary to theirs.
They who could fo far difhonour the omniprefent Deity, as
to attribute to him a vifible and human form ; would hardly
fcruple to afcribe fomething of this kind to the devil.
k Gen. xxviii. 12, 13. compare John i.. 51. defcribes )

[ 1 70 ]
defcribes; which are therefore juftly called
a revelation*.) The glorious perfonage in
a human form, at whofe feet he fell down as
dead m, was not Chrift himfelf, but a fymbo
lical reprefentation of him ; and fuch alfo
was the lamb in the midfl of the throne ". The
four living creatures, and the four and twenty
elders", were not real beings, but were
emblems of fuch things as did really exift in
nature. Sometimes an exprefs declaration is
made, what the objeds of the vifion repre
fent : The feven fiars are the angels of the
feven churches, and the feven candleflicks which
thou fawefi, are, i. e. fignify and reprefent,
the feven churches*. At other times, the
vifion was not explained, and people were
at a lofs to find out it's meaning and re
ference ; as appears by that complaint of the
prophet, Ah Lord God, thgy fay of me, Doth
he not fpeak parables q ? It can never be fufh>
ciently lamented, that Chriftian divines, not-
withftanding the cleareft evidence that vi
fions were merely mental illuminations, and
their feveral fcenes figurative and fymbolical ;
do frequently fpeak of thofe fcenes as defcfib?-
ing real objeds and beings, fuch as have an
> Rev. i. i. m Ch. i. 13—16.
" Rev. v. 6. ° Ch. iv. 4, 6.
' Ch. i. 20, SeeDan- viii. zo, zi. 1 Ezek. xx. 49.
exiftence

C i7' 1
exiftence in nature. The throne of God in
heaven, the worfhip paid him there by the
elders', and the new Jerujalem' ; which
St. John faw and defcribed, are too often
explained in fuch a manner as would lead
one to fuppofe, that they contained, in part
at leaft, a defcription of the true heaven, and
the real worfhip and felicity of the righteous
in it. But if thefe vifions of St. John do
indeed refer to heaven at all ; they are at
moft only fymbols and emblems of it, and
as fuch perfedly diftind from that place or
ftate itfelf. Other undoubted examples of
the fymbolical nature of vifionary reprefen
tations and miraculous appearances, may be
found in the paffages referred to below u. I
r Rev. iv. ' Ch. xxi, xxii.
' The Mohammedans, when reproached with the low and
fenfual defcriptions of paradife, which occur almoft in every
page of their Koran ; retort thefe paffages out of the Revela
tion of St. John, and plead their having the fame right to
have recourfe to figure and allegory, as thofe Chriftians who
do not underftand the forecited paffages in a literal fenfe.
But here lies the difference: all the reprefentations in the
Revelation of St. John, are declared to be vifionary ; and
therefore were defigned to be underftood as figurative and
fymbolical ; and unlefs they are fo underftood, cannot be
reconciled with other plain paffages of the New Teftament :
but the Mohammedan reprefentations of paradife objected
to by Chriftians, are not declared to be vifionary and fymbo
lical ; and even have no confiftent meaning, unlefs they are
literally underftood.
u Gen xv. 17. ch. xxxvii. 7, 9. Exod. iii. 2. Jer. i. 11,13.
Ezek. xxxvii. 1. Zech. i. 7, &c. ch. iv. 2 — 11. ch. v. 1 — 5.
. Ads xvi. 9, 10. fhall

[ 1/2 ]
fhall only add, that when God declares by
the prophet, I have multiplied vifions, and
ufedfimilitudes x ; this language plainly implies,
that the objeds of vifion were always de
figned as refemblances and apt reprefentations
of other things. V. ''
The moft plaufible objedions againft the
Inquiry, are levelled againft thofe paffages
which affert, that Chrift's vifion contained a
prefent trial. It is alledged, " That the fame
" confiderations which diminifh or deftroy
" the force of Chrift's temptation upon the
" common hypothefis, equally affed it's
" force upon mine." If this allegation be
juft ; neither of thefe hypothefes can be
true; fince it ferves equally for the confuta
tion of both. We hope however to fhew,
that the allegation has no fufficient founda
tion to fupport it. In order to the right
underftanding of this fubjed, it will be ne
ceffary to obferve,
i.) That the Inquiry7 afferts this vifion to
be diredly and properly intended, as a pre
diction and fymbol of Chrifi' s Juture tempta
tions. And againft this view of it, no mate
rial objedion has ever been urged. So that
even were we to grant, that this vifion was
v Hofea xii. 10. y P. 101. not

[ J73 1
not probationary ; this would not affed it's
proper ufe and intention as prophetical and. pre
monitory. Though this obfervation was made
in the firft edition of the Inquiry y, it was
neceffary to repeat it here ; becaufe it feems
not to have been attended to, by thofe who
make the objedion we are confidering.
2.) It is evident, that this vifion bore the
form of a prefent trial. To the view and ap-
prehenfion of Chrift at the time, it contained
certain alluring propofals made to him by the
devil, in order to folicit him to evil. And on
this account it is, that the hifiory relates them
as real temptations; and tells us, that Chrift
was carried into the wildernefs, that he might
be tempted of the devil. This expreffion de-
fcribes the nature of the vifion or reprejenta-
tion ; for the hiftory of a vifion always cor-
refponds to the views of the prophet. Chrift
likewife rejeds the feveral propofals here
made to him, as fo many temptations of the
devil. 3.) This vifion, however, could not be de
figned to tempt Chrift, if we thereby mean,
foliciting or Jeducing him into fin ; becaufe it
had a divine author. And if we examine
the nature of the vifion itfelf, we muft im
mediately perceive, that it could not be in-
y P. 63. note 1. ift edit, and p. 106. 3d edit, note k.
tended

[ i74 ]
tended to feduce him into fin : for the feveral
fcenes of it were fo framed, as to guard or
Warn a good mind from yielding to any of
the propofals it contained. To appearance,
thefe propofals were made by the devil in
perfon ; which was defigned to awaken an
immediate refiftance, and was a proper mo
nition againft a compliance.
4.) Neverthelefs, this vifion might (I ap
prehend) anfwer the end of a prefent trial;
that is, it might ferve to fhew, how Chrift
was difpofed to ad, or to difcover and dfplay
his virtue ; which is a very common mean
ing of the word temptation or trial in Scrip
ture1, and is the fenfe in which we ufe it
here, when we call Chrift's vifion a prefent
trial. The feveral propofals now made to
Chrift, viz. the fatisfying his prefent hunger
by a miracle, the opening his divine com
miffion at the temple of Jerufalem by afeem-
ing defcent from heaven, and his afcend-
ing the throne of his father David; thefe
propofals were in themfelves fo enticing, that
nothing but the confidering them as fitful,
or as temptations of Satan, could difpofe the
moft confummate virtue to rejed them.
Chrift's virtue therefore was evidenced and
exercifed by his rejedion of thefe propofals,
1 See above, p. 103—106.
His

[ *7S ]
His ready anfwers fufficiently fhew by what
principles of piety he was aded; and that
he confidered the propofals, however alluring,
as temptations which were to be refifted.
And. he did accordingly refift them. Thefe
circumftances rendered this vifion, though
prophetic and monitory in it's frame and
intention, yet in fome degree probationary
likewife. At the time Chrift confidered it as
a trial, agreeably to the form it bore. When
the vifion was ended, he would naturally re
gard it as an emblem of his future conflids,
on account of the prophetical defign of vifio
nary reprefentations. In this view alfo it
ferved to try the fteadfaftnefs of his piety and
virtue, his readinefs and refolution to under
take the office to which he was appointed by
God, notwithftanding his foreknowledge of
the difficulties and dangers attending it".
The confiftency of thefe two views of it, may
appear by confidering, that the prophetic
figns of Chrift's future temptations, were
famples of thofe temptations : for during the
courfe of his miniftry he was tempted to the
very fame condud, as he was now ; that is,
he was urged to ufe his miraculous power
for his own perfonal relief, for the more
ofientatious difplay of his divine commiffion,
a See above, p. 103. and

[ i76 j
and for the acquifition of worldly empire';
There was, I own , fome confiderable difference
in the two cafes ; but not fuch as prevented
the figns or famples of Chrift's future tempta
tions, from giving a prefent occafion to the
difcovery of his piety and virtue. Let us
now attend to the objedions ; which, even
fuppofing them to be unanfwerable, do
not overthrow the main principles of the
Inquiry. VI.
It is obferved in the Inquiry10, " That the
" appearance of the devil to our Saviour in
" perfon, could ferve no other end, than to
" create a prejudice againft his propofals ;
" and confequently that this circumftance
«' was unfuitable to the allowed policy of
" this wicked fpirit, who, if he wifhed to
" fucceed, would not have urged his tempta-"
" tions in a manner the moft likely to pre-
" vent their fuccefs, and which could not
tc but abate their force upon a virtuous dif-
" pofition." Inftead of anfwering this ob
jedion, fome content themfelves with re
torting it; by pleading, " That the appre*
" hended prefence of Satan in vifion, would
" produce the fame general effed, as his real
*e prefence at any other time."
b P. 3, &c. This

[ ^77 1
This is an obfervation which we are not
at all concerned to difpute : for though true
in itfelf, it is foreign from the purpofe. It
is acknowledged, that both his apprehended
and his real prefence would create upon a
good mind a prejudice againft his propofals.
And for this reafon, it would have been im
politic in Satan, to have made his appearance
before Chrift either in perfon or in vifion ; if
he meant thereby to recommend his pro
pofals. But what.would have been abfurd in
this malignant fpirit, whofe bufinefs it is to
feduce ; was a wife condud in the Deity,
(the author of this vifion ;) becaufe his inten
tion was to forewarn Chrift of his danger,
and to arm him againft it. It was on purpofe
to lead Chrift to regard the prefent propofals,-
(which were afterwards to occur in real life,)
as highly criminal in their nature ; that the
vifion reprefented them as made to him by
the devil, as the temptations of that great
enemy of God, whom it is virtue always to
refift. Thus the very fame circumftance, the
appearance of the devil, which was proper in
the vifion, fuitable both to it's divine author,
and benevolent intention ; would have been
abfurd upon the common hypothefis.
It is farther urged, that the reafonings em
ployed to abate the force of the fecond temp-
N tatLOiij,

[ 178 ]
tation c, upon the common hypothefis; do
equally affed that advanced in the Inquiry.
But let us confider whether there be not a
wide difference in the two cafes. The reafon
ings here referred to, are levelled againft the
fuppofition, fo commonly made by the ad
vocates of the literal interpretation, that the
devil having affumed a human form, and
tranfported Chrift through the air from the
wildernefs to the top of the temple, would
have perfuaded him to throw himfelf down
from thence ; that by his miraculous pre
fervation he might demonftrate his peculiar
charader as the Son of God. And the ob
jedion advanced in the Inquiry againfi this
hypothefis, is, that Chrift could not but
eafily difcern, that a. compliance with this
propofal might not anfwer the end propofed
by it, and might poffibly iffue in his dif-
honour; fince the devil, who had already in
a miraculous manner placed him upon the
temple, might alfo by a fimilar ad of power
have thrown himfelf down from thence, in
the human form which he then wore, with
out receiving any injury; and thus deftroyed
the credit of the miracle, by which Jefus
was to have eftablifhed his divine miftion.
The view with which this objedion was
c Inquiry, p. 8.
made,

t r79 ]
made, was to fhew, that the common hypo
thefis is inconfiftent with the allowed policy
of Satan, who would fcarce have made a pro
pofal, which Chrift could have no induce
ment to comply with, and which (though
alluring in itfelf, yet) under thefe peculiar
circumftances he would confider rather as an
indignity, than a temptation. But what
relation has this objedion to any thing ad
vanced in the Inquiry ? Is it afferted there,
that the reprefentations of the vificn corre-
fponded to this hypothefis ; that the repre-
fentative figure of the apoftate angel, in par
ticular, was a human form ? or does the
hiftory affert or intimate this ? or determine
in what manner Chrift was impreffed with
an apprehenfion of his prefence ? The ob
jedion under confideration arifes entirely
from a fuppofed ftate of things, which the
hiftory does not countenance ; to which
therefore the reprefentations of the vifion
might bear no refemblance, and which might
not leave room for an apprehenfion, that in
cafe Chrift had thrown himfelf down from
the temple, the devil might have done the
fame. And fo far as the reprefentations were
different from this fuppofed ftate of things,
they were not liable to the fame objedion,
In order to determine what the reprefenta-
N 2 tions

[ 180 J
tions really were, we muft look into the
hifiory : for whatever is there related as
matter of fad, that appeared to the mind of
Chrift as fuch. Now all that the hiftory
relates, is, the attempt of the devil to per-
fuade Chrift, whom he had placed upon the
temple, to throw himfelf down from thence,
in a dependence upon God for his preferva
tion, and to fatisfy the Jews at once that he
was the Meffiah. In this fingle view the
propofal was made and confidered. And it
was very inviting in it's own nature d ; but
a compliance with it would have been cri
minal ; and therefore it was virtuoufly re-
jeded. And it could be with no other
view, than to lead Chrift to conceive of it
as criminal and fit to be rejeded, that the
vifion reprefents the propofal as made by
Satan. So that thofe who make this ob
jedion, do not appear to have attended
either 'to the true nature of the vifion, or to
the defign of it'<s author. VII.
It was obferved in the Inquiry e, that the
offer of all the kingdoms of the world, upon
the common interpretation, carried no force ;
becaufe Chrift could not but know, that the
devil who made it, had no power to make it
i P. n6, 117. <• P. II. good.

r 181 ]
good. Now this objedion, it is faid, holds
likewife againft the offer in vifion ; if it be
true, as has been all along- afferted, that the
reprefentations of a vifion pafs for real objeds,
and produce the fame effeds as if they were.
'* What difference then," it is afked, " with
" regard to Chrift, could it make, whether
" he had a real fight of the devil, or a vifio-
(f nary reprejentation of him, when he made
*' him this offer ?"
Thofe who rely on this objedion, feem to
me not to attend to the wide difference which
there is, between judging the images or ap
pearances of a vifion to be real objeds; and
their having exad external archetypes. A
vifion may confift, either of fuch appearances
as are perfed reprefentations or copies of
objeds really exifting in nature ; or of fuch
as bear little or no correfpondence to thofe
objeds: as we have fully fhewn f. And in
either cafe, the appearances equally pafs for
realities. Our Saviour might have had a
vifion of Satan, perfedly conformable to his
true nature*, or (which feems to have been
the cafe) a reprefentation of him with powers
which he did not poflefs \ And the latter view
f Appendix, N°. III. p. 163, notee.
s And had this been fo, the objection we are confidering
might have held good.
k Juft as St. John, inftead of a reprefentation of a lamb,
agreeable to the common animals of that fpecies, had a re-
N 3 prefentation

[ i«a ]
view of him would appear as real as the
former ; it being the nature of vifion
to give a feeming reality to all the ©bjeds
of it, whether they have external archetypes
or not. They appear to poffefs all the
powers and properties, with which they
are reprefented \ From hence it follows,
that fo far as the reprefentation of the devil
in this vifion, was different k from his true
nature ; fo far it muft make a difference with
regard to Chrift, whether he had a real fight
or a vifionary reprefentation of him. In the
former cafe, the third temptation had no
force, becaufe Chrift knew the devil had no
power to difpofe of the kingdoms of the
World ; in the latter, if this power be a part
of the reprefentation, the fame objedion
cannot take place.
Now that this power did belong to the re
prefentation made of him to Chrift, feems
probable from feveral confiderations. ift. Be
caufe the hiftory (which never defcribes any
prefentation of one with feven horns, and feven eyes. See
the place referred to in note f.
' Inquiry, p. I 24.
k It is admitted, that when the internal reprefentation is
exa&ly conformable to any outward objedt, (which was the
cafe of Saul when he faw Ananias, A£t. ix. 12 ) there is no
difference with regard to the impreffion they make upon the
mind, between it's difcerning the objeci ,and the reprefen
tation. thing

[ i83 ]
thing as a fad, but what appears to the mind
of the prophet as fuch, during his vifion,)
relates as matter of fad the promife or offer
of the world made to Chrift by the devil ;
which could not therefore but appear to be
real, every reprefentation of a vifion parting
for a real objed. If the devil had not ap
peared to Chrift to poffefs the powers he
claimed ; Chrift could not have feemed to
himfelf to have had any offer or promife at
all ; which neceffarily fuppofe a power to
make them good. 2dly, At the fame time
that the devil made Chrift the offer, he gave
him a fight of all the kingdoms of the world.
And Chrift could no more doubt of the cer
tainty of the former, than of the latter.
3dly, His anfwer expreffes, not any dijbelief
or doubt about the reality of the offer, but his
abhorrence of the thought of accepting it.
And therefore the fame confideration which
deftroys the force of the third temptation
upon the common hypothefis ; does not
affed the fuppofition of it's being propofed
in vifion. VIII. <
But it is flill afked, " Might not Chrift
" have examined into the foundation of the
" devil's claim to the difpofal of the world;
" fince it is allowed that the vifion did not
N 4 " deprive

[ i «4 ]
*' deprive him of the exercife of his under*
*' ftanding ?" Chrift was prevented from
fuch examination, not fo much by the mo
mentary duration of the vifion, as by the
very nature of it's impreffion, which takes
away all fii'picion concerning it's own reality.
For otherwife, the objeds of a vifion would
not even fiem to be real.
If it be farther inquired,' " How far was
" the mind pajjive, and how far was it jree
" in it's extrcile, under the impreffions of
fl a vifion ? Ought not a line to have been
f drawn, to fhew where it's conftraint
" ended, and where it's liberty began ?"
I anfwer, this line has been already drawn.
It" has been fhewn', ift, That the prophet
was altogether paffive in receiving the im
preffions of a vifion ; juft as we are paffive in
receiving the impreffions made by external
objeds themfelves, and the ideas they raife
in the mind. Here then the prophet had
no liberty; he could not alter his views and
perfuafions concerning the objeds of his
vifion, the impreffion being made by a hand
too firong to be refifted. 2dly, It is alfo
fhewn ">, that in every other refpecl the prophet had
1 P- 97-
m p- 97  -ioi. What is here offered, will enable us
to form a judgment concerning what is advanced by
Spanheia), (Dubia EvangeJ. dub. 55. pars III. p. 242, 243.)
5 Ills

[ i85 J
had the free ufe of his underftanding : and
therefore was as capable of a rational determi
nation and choice, with refped to the objeds
of his vifion, as thofe of bodily fight. From
thefe premifes, we may draw this conclufion ;
that though Chrift could not alter his view
of the tempting propofals or of the other
reprefentations which were now made to his
mind ; (could not, for example, doubt the
reality of the fight or offer of the world,
which the devil appeared to give him,)
any more than he could change the ap
pearance of external objeds ; yet in refifting
thefe propofals, he might exercife his under
ftanding, and evidence the pious difpofition of
his heart. IX.
The only remaining objedion which we
are to examine, is this ; " That by fetting
" the difficulties attending the literal inter-
" pretation of this hiftory in fo ftrong a
*' light ; we give too much advantage to
" infidelity".
Ule enim propre tentari dicitur, qui fui compos eft, & in
ejufmodi (tatu in quo & judicio uti poteft, & libertate
voluntatis ; in vifione vero nee judicii nee voluntatis exer-
citium proprie fie didtum, adeoque nee affenfus proprie nee
drffenfus. From the inftances cited in the paffages of the
Inquiry referred to in the beginning of this note, it appears,
that vifion did not difturb either the underftanding or paflions
of the prophet.
» This objection is in fome meafure obviated in the Inquiry,
p. 2, JO. I leave

E 186 ]
I leave it to thofe who urge the objedion,
to reconcile it either with an ardent love of
truth, which naturally didates the moft im
partial fcrutiny into every fubjed ; or with an
honourable opinion of Chriftianity : a religion
which difdains the arts of worldly policy ; and
nobly conrcious of the validity of it's claims,
fubmits it's dodrines and credentials to uni
verfal infpedion, invites and demands a ri
gorous examination. The timidity and policy
from which this objedion proceeds, would,
I apprehend, have prevented our forefathers,
(had they been under the influence of fuch
principles,) from expofing the abfurdity of
any generally received opinion, founded upon
the letter of Scripture. The common people,
even to this day, muft have entertained fuch
grofs conceptions of the Deity, as can not
be mentioned without horror °. And pro-
teftants muft have fpared that monfter, tran-
fubftantiation. But they never failed to
expofe it's abfurdities, from a full perfuafion,
that however it may be favoured by the letter,
it is certainly contrary to the true fenfe, of
Scripture. And they confidered every ob
jedion againft the literal meaning, as a reafon
for adopting a different interpretation. With
regard to the hiftory of our Saviour's tempta-
? Appendix, N°. IV. note '. tion ;

t % 3
tion ; there was a neceffity for urging the
objedions againft the received expofition, in
order to prepare men to embrace that which
is offered in it's ftead. And in taking this
natural method, I had the whole world before
me for a precedent, in cafes of the like kind.
Nor can Chriftianity fuffer any prejudice by
this manner of proceeding : for if the ob
jedions urged againft the hiftory of Chrift's
temptation are groundlefs, thfey may eafily be
refuted : and if they are well fupported, they
conclude only againft the literal interpreta
tion ; it being a rule univerfally allowed in
the interpretation of all authors, never to
affix any fenfe to their words, which is either
abfurd in itfelf, or manifeftly repugnant to
their avowed principles, if they are fairly ca
pable of a more rational and confiftent mean
ing. Nor is there any room in the cafe
before us to fugged, that we have had re-
courfe to a figurative explication from mere
neceffity, and only to avoid the feeming ab
furdity of the literal one : for we have pro
duced many circumftances of the hiftory to
evince, that the facred writers themfelves
did not, and could not defign to be under
ftood literally. Nay, all the evangelifts have,
in exprels terms, declared the whole to be a
fpiritual and mental tranfadion ; and this is
r proved

[ 1*8 ]
proved without offering any violence to their
words, or affixing any fenfe to them, but
what they are allowed to bear in other parts of
Scripture-, and what their connexion and
other circumftances neceffarily require in this.
Laftly, the evidence of it's being a vifion, is
much ftrengthened, by the rational and wife
intentions of fuch a prophetic reprefentation,
as a predidion and forewarning of thofe
fevere trials, to which Chrift was afterwards
to be expofed. Till the reafoning on thefe
feveral points is confuted, I fhall not be
without fome faint hope, that inftead of
furnifhing new prejudices againft the Gofpel,
I have removed old ones. With this view
at leaft the argument was undertaken ; and
from a full perfuafion, that if Chriftianity
were flripped of all difguifes, and fhewn in
her native fimplicity and beauty, juft as fhe
defcended from heaven ; all objedions to
her divine origin would immediately vanifh.

APPEN,

[ *89 ]
APPENDIX II.
CONTAINING
A Paraphrase upon St. Matthew's
Account of Christ's Temptation
by the Devil, agreeable to the fore
going explication of it.
Matthew IV.
i. Then was r. X "W T H E N Jefus was
Jefus brought in- yy appointed to his
to a wildernefs by office as the great Meffiah,
the Spirit, to be and furnifhed for the exe-
iempted by the cution of it by the defcent
devil. of the Spirit of God in his
miraculous gifts, he was
brought into a wildernefs
by the afflatus or infpira
tion of that Spirit, making
new revelations to him,
and exhibiting extraordi
nary fcenes before him.
One great defign of this
prophetic vifion or repre
fentation was, to give him
a view of his future trials,
which

[ '9° 1
which were couched under
the figure or emblem of
Satan coming to him in
perfon, and urging tempta
tions eorrefpondent to thofe
he was to meet with in the
exercife of that office with
which he was inverted, and
of thofe gifts with which
he was endowed,
2. And when 2, 3. Forty days did he
he had fafied remain in this ftate with-
forty days and out food, receiving new
forty nights, at communications from God.
length he was The vifion was then clofed
hungry. with the following fcenes.
3. And the In the firft fcene, the
tempter coming to tempter came to Jefus,
him, faid, Inaf- who at that time began to
much as thou art feel the keen fenfation of
the Son of God, hunger, and thus addrefled
command thefe him : *f Inafmuch as you
fiones to become " are the Son of God, ad
bread. " in charader, and relieve
" your preffing neceffities
" by a miracle : for, with-
<f out doubt, the Meffiah
" could turn even ftones
" into bread."
4. But he an- 4. To this propofal
fwered and Jaid, Jefus replied : " The life
Man jhall not " of man may be fuftained
live by bread only, " not by bread only, but by

but by whatever
proceedeth out of
the mouth of God,.

5. Then the
devil taketh him
up into the holy
city, and fetteth
him on a wing. of
the temj>le,
6. And faith

I 191 1
" by whatever other means
" God fhall appoint : and
" therefore I will not from
" a diftruft either of his
" power or goodnefs, un-
** dertake to fupply my
" own wants, without an
" immediate warrant from
" heaven." This part of
the vifion, while it evi
denced at that time his re
signation to God, and re
liance on his care, was in
tended to convey this ge
neral inftrudion for the re
gulation of his future con
dud, "ThatChrift, though
the Son of God, was to
ftruggle with hunger and-
thirft, and all the other
evils of humanity ; and was
never to exert his divine
power for his own pro-
tedion or relief, but to
wait for the interpofition
of God in his favour."
5,6. In the fecond fcene
of this vifion, the devil
took Jefus to Jerufalem,
the metropolis of Judea,
and placed him on the
wing of the temple, which
commanded a view of the
crowd

unto him, Inaf
much as thou art
the Son of God,
cafi thyfelf down :
for it is written,
He Jhall give his
angels charge con
cerning thee, and
in their hands
they fhall bear
thee up, lefi thou
fhouldefi dafh thy
foot againfi
fione.

a

j. J ejus Jaid
unto him. It is
aljo written ,Thou
jhalt not tempt
the Lord thy God.

[ 192 ]
crowd of worfhippers be-*
low, and then faid to him :
Inafmuch as you are the
Meffiah, the Son of God,
it becomes you to open
your divine commiffion
in the moft confpicuous
manner; and therefore
throw yourfelf down
from hence, in a depen
dence on the divine pro-
tedion, which the Scrip
ture promifes you ; and
your miraculous prefer
vation will induce the
Jews to acknowledge
you immediately as the
Meffiah, vifibly defend
ing from heaven, in a
manner agreeable to
their expedations."
7. Jefus on this occafion
alfo difplayed the reditude
of his temper, immediately
replying, " The Scriptures
" to which you appeal do
" alfo admonifh us not to
<c make an improper trial
" of God's power ; it for-
" bids us either to rufh
" upon danger without a
" call in expedation of an
" extraordinary deliyer-
" ance,

8. Again, the
devil taketh him
up into an exceed
ing high moun
tain, andfheweth
him all the king
doms of the world,
and thd glory of
them :
9. And faith
unto him, All
thefe things will
I give thee, if
thou wilt fall
down and wor*
Jhip me.

[ 193 1
" ance, or to didate to
" divine wifdom what mi-
" racles fhall be Wrought
*' for men's convidion."
Hereby Jefus was fore
warned of the frequent
temptation he would be
under to an unneceffary
and ofientatious diiplay of
his miraculous powers ;
and direded, even in bring
ing men to the faith, not
to exceed the order of God>
however called upon by
the Scribes and Pharifees
to give them figns from
heaven. 8, 9. Once more the
fcene changes, and the
devil taketh Chrift to an
exceeding high mountain^
gives him a view of all the
kingdoms of the worldj
with all their glory, and
promifes to put him into
the poffeffion of them all>
upon condition of his fall
ing down and worfhipping
him.

O

10. This

[ 194 1
to. Then faith io*. This propofal was
Jefus unto him, rejeded the very inftant it
Get thee hence, was made ; for Chrift, not
Satan : for it without a mixture of juft
is written, Thou indignation, commanded
Jhalt worjhip the the tempter (with whom
Lord thy God, he feemed all along to con-
and him only Jhalt verfe) that moment to quit
thou ferve. his prefence ; all religious
homage being juftly appro
priated in Scripture to God
alone. This prophetic
fcene, while it ferved for
the trial and difcovery of
his prefent temper, was di-
redly intended as a pre-
fignification and warning
of the like temptation to
which he was to be ex
pofed in the courfe of his
minifiry ; during which he
was called upon by the
Jews, who eXpeded their
Meffiah under the charac
ter of a temporal monarch,
to employ thofe mira
culous powers in obtain
ing worldly empire, which
were to be wholly confe
crated to the ereding the
kingdom of God, the king
dom of truth and righte-
oufnefs amongft men. j i. The

[ 19$ ]
1 1 . Then the 1 1 . The vifion was now
devil leaveth himf clofed, and Satan departed
and behold, angels from Jefus, whofe animal
came and mini- nature being greatly ex?
fiered unto him. haufted by the foregoing
very affeding reprefenta
tions, and by the want of
the common fupportsof life
in the wildernefs, he re
ceived miraculous refrefh-
ment. In the courfe of
his fubfequent miniftry,
Chrift parted through all
the trials which this vifion
prefigured, and conftantly
aded upon thofe maxims
of the divine word whicfy
he here adopted.

THE END,

f*ubli£nefi by the fame Author j
I.
A Dissertation on MIRACLES;
defigned . to fhew, that they are Argu-'
ments of a Divine Interpofition, and ab-
folute Proofs of the Miffion and Dodrine
of a Prophet. Price 7 sv
II.
An Examination of Mf. Lemotne's"
Treatife on Miracles. Price is.
III.
An Essay on the Demoniacs of the
New Teftament.

-UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08540 2304

'¦¦38m