Bible Commentary (1871–1879 Edition)
Descent of the Holy Ghost inform of a Dove, MATTHEW IV. Chrisl Fasielh Forty Days, awl is Templed.
but rather qualified to impart it to those who did. And do not all liis other testimonies to Christ fully bear out tliis nense of the words? But it were a pity if, in the glory of this testimony to Christ, we should miss the Ijeautiful spirit in which it was borne—'Lord, must /baptize Theef fan I bring myself to do such a thing?'—reminding us of
One," the "separate from sinners?" "Thou art fairer than the children of men; grace is poured into Thy lips; therefore God hath blessed Thee for ever !" But the fourth Gospel gives us one more piece of information here, on the authority of one who saw and testified of it: "John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit desccnding from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon Hui." And lest we siiould think that this was an accidental thing, he adds that this last particular was expressly given him as part of the sign by which he was to recognize and identify Him as the Son of God: "And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me. Upon whom thou Shalt see the Spirit descending and ViEMAiiiiNGON Him, the same is He which baptizetli with the Holy Ghost. And I saw and bare record that tliis is the Son of Gotl" (John 1. 32-34). And when with this we compare the predicted descent of the Spirit upon Messiah (Isaiah 11.2), " And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him," we cannot doubt that it was this permanent and perfect resting of the Holy Ghost upon the Son of God now and henceforward in His official capacity—that wtis here visibly manifested. 17. And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is—Mark and Luke give it in the direct form, "Thou art"—ray beloved Son, in whom 1 am well pleased—The verb is put In the aorist to express absolute complacency, once and for ever felt towards Him. The English here, at least to modern ears, is scarcely strong enough. ' I delight" comes the nearest, perhaps, to that inel Table comptacenej/ which is manifestly intended ; and this is the rather to be preferred, as it would immediately carry the thoughts back to that august Messianic prophecy to which the voice from heaven plainly alluded (Isaiah
I'eter's exclamation at the supper-table, " Lord, dost Thou wash my feet?'' while it has nothing of the false humility and presumption which dictated Peter's next speech. 'Thou shalt never wash my feet" (John 13. 6, 8). 15. And Jesus answering said unto him, SulTcr it to be so now —
' Let it pass for tlie present;' q. d., 'Tliou recoilest, and no wonder, for the seeming incongruity is startling; but In the present case do as tiiou art bidden.' for thus it becometh us—"uj," not in the sense of ' me and thee,' or
' men in general,' but as in John 3. 11. to fulfil all righteousness—If tills be rendered, with Scrivener, 'every ordinance,' or, with Campbell, 'every institution,' the meaning is obvious enough ; and the same sense is brought out "all righteousness," or compliance with everything enjoined, baptism included. Indeed, if this be the meaning, our version perhaps best brings out the force of the opening word "Thus." But we incline to thinlt that our Lord meant more than tills. The import of Circumcision and of Baptism seems to be radically the same. And if our remarks on the circumcision of our Lord (on Luke. 2. iJl-24)are well founded. He wov.ld seem to have said, 'Thus do I impledge myself to the whole righteousness of tlie Law—thus symbolically do enter on and engage to fulfil it all.' Let the thoughtful reader weigh this. Then he snl Fered him—with true humility, yielding to higher authority than his own impressions of propriety.
42. 1), " Behold mj' Servant, whom I uphold; mine Elect, IN WHOM MY SOUL DELiGHTETH." Nor are the words which follow to be overlooked, "I have put my Spirit upon Him; He shall bring forth judgment to the Gen-
Descent of the Spirit rcpon the Baptized Redeemer (i>. IG, 17). 16. And Jesus when he was baptized, went up istraightway out of—rather, ' from'—the water. Mark has "out of th« water." and—adds Luke (3. 21), " while He was praying;" a grand piece of information. Can there be a doubt about the burden of that prayer; a prayer sent up, tiles." (The LXX. pervert tills, as they do most of tho Messianic predictions, interpolating the word "Jacob," and applying it to the Jews.) Was this voice heard by th« bystanders? From Matthew's form of it, one might sup* pose it so designed ; but it would appear that it was not, and probably John only heard and saw any Ih Ing peculiar about that great baptism. Accordingly, the words " Heal ye Him" are not added, as at the Transfiguration.
prol)al)ly, while yet in the water—His blessed head suffused with the baptismal element; a prayer continued likely as He stepped out of the stream, and again stood upon the dry ground; the work before Him, tlie needed and expected Spirit to rest upon Him for it, and the glory
He would then put upon the Father that sent Him—would not these fill His breast, and find silent vent in such form as this?—'Lo, I come; I delight to do thy will, O God. Father, glorify thy name. Show me a token lor good. Let the Spirit of the Lord God come upon me, and 1 will preach the Gospel to the poor, and heal the brokenhearted, and send forth judgment unto victory.' Whilst He was yet speaking—lo, tlie heavens were opened Mark says, sublimely, "He saw the heavens cleaving." and lie saw the Spirit of God descending—tliat is. He only, witli the exception of His honoured servant, as he
CHAPTER IV.
Verl-U. Tkmptation of Christ. (—Mark 1. 12,13; Luke 4. 1-13.) 1. Then—an indefinite note of sequence. But Mark's word (1. 12) fixes what we should have presumed was meant, that It was "immediately" after His baptism; and with this agrees the statement of Luke (4..
1). was Jesus led up i. e., from the low Jordan valley to some more elevated spot, of the Spirit—that blessed
Spirit immediately before spoken of as descending upon Him at His baptism, and abiding upon Him. Luke, connecting these two scenes, as if the one were but the sequel of the other, says, "Jesus, being full of the Holy Ghost, returned from Jordan, and was led," Ac. Mark's expression has a startling sharpness about it—" Immediately the tells us himself, John 1. 32-34; the bystanders apparently seeing nothing, like a dove, and lighting upon him—Luke says, "in a bodily shape" (3. 22); that is, the blessed Spirit, assuming the corporeal form of a dove, descended thus upon His sacred head. But why in this form? The Scripture use of this emblem will be our best guide here. "My dove, my undefiled is one," says the Song (6. 9). This Is chaste purity. Again, "Be ye harmless an doves," says Christ Himself (Matthew 10. 16). This is the same thing, in the form of Inotlensiveness towards men. " A conscience void of of Tence toward God
Spirit drlveth him," ' putteth,' or ' hurrieth Him forth,' or 'impelleth Him.' (Seethe same word in Mark 1.43; 5.40; Matthew 9. 25 ; 13. 52; John 10. 4.) The though t thus strongly expressed is the mighty constraining impulse of the Spirit under which He went; while Matthew's more gentle expression, "was led up," intimates how purely voluntary on His own part this action was. into the wilderness— probably the wild Judean desert. The particular spot which tradition has fixed upon has hence got the name aJid toward men" (Aits 24. 16) expresses both. Further, when we read in the Song (2. 14), "O my dove, that art in the clefts of the rocks, in the secret places of the stairs (see iBaiiUi 60. 8), let me see thy countenance, let me hear thy voice; for sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely"— it is shrinking modesty, meekness, gentleness, of Quarantaria or Qxtaranlaria, from the forty days,—'an almost perpendicular wall of rock twelve or fifteen hundred feet above the plain.' [Uobinson's Palestine.] The supposition of those who Incline to place the Temptation amongst the mountains of Moab is. we think, very improbable, to be tempted— The Greek word (pei7-azeiH) means simply tofrj/ormakeproofof ;and when ascribed to that is thus charmingly depicted. In a word—not to allude to the historical emblem of the dove that tiew back to the ark, bearing In its mouth the olive leaf of peace
(GeiKsis 8. 11)—when we road (Psalm (i8. 13), "Ye shall be as the wings of adovecovcred with silver, and her I'eatliers
(i()(l In llisdeallngswith men, itmeans,aiul can nieiui no more than this. Thus, Genesis 22. 1, " 11 came to pass thai witli yellow gold," It is bcaiifeousness that is thus licld l5rt!i. And was not such that " holy, harmless, undellled
Christ Fasteth Forty Days, MATTHEW IV. and is Tempted by the DetiU.
be made bread—rather, " loaves," answering to "stones" in the plural; whereas Luke, having said, "Command this stone," in the singular, adds, " that it lie made bieaJ," in tlie singular. The sensation of hunger, unfelt during all tlie forty days, seems now to have come on in ail its keenness—no doubt to open a door to the tempter, of whicli lie is not slow to avail himself: q. d., 'Tliou still clingest to that vainglorious confidence that thou art the Son of God, carried away by tliose illusory scenes at the Jordan. Thou wast born in a stable ; but thou art the Son of God ! hurried otT to Egypt for fear of Herod's wrath
God di<l t«mpt Abraham," or put his faith to a severe proof. (See Deuteronomj' 8. 2.) But lor tlie most part in Scripture tlie word is used in a bad sense, and means to entice, solicit, or provolie to sin. Hence the name here given to the wicked one—" the tempter" (i-. 3). Accordingly " to be tempted" here is to be understood botii ways. The Spirit conducted Him into the wilderness simply to have His faitli tried; but .ns the agent in this trial was to be the wicked one, whose whole object would be to seduce Him from His allegiance to God, it was a temptation in the bad sense of the term. The unworthy inference wliich some would draw from this is energeticallj' repelled by an apostle (James 1. 13-17). of the devil. The word signifies a slanderer— one who casts imputations upon another. Hence that other name given him (Revelation but tiiou art the Son of God! a carpenter's roof supplied thee witli a home, and in the obscurity of a despicable town of Galilee tliou liast spent tliirty years, yet still Uio\x art the Son of God! and a voice from heaven, it seems, proclaimed it in thine ears at the Jordan ! Be it so; but alter that, surely thy days ol obscurity and trial should have an end. Wliy linger for weeks in tliis desert, wandering among the wild beasts and craggy rocks, uni>onoured, unattended, unpilied, ready to starve for want of the necessaries of life ? Is this beti Ltiug " tlie Son of God 7" At the bidding of "the Son of God" sure those stones siiall all be turned into loaves, anil in a moment presmt an abundant repast?' 4. But Ite answered and said, It is written (Deiiteronomy 8. 3), Man shall not live by bread alone—more emphatically, as in tiie Greek, "Not by bread alone shall man live"—but by every word tl»n ( proceedetli out of the mouth of God. Of all passages i u Old Testament Scripture, none could have been pitched upon more apposite, perhaps not one so apposite, to our Lord's purpose. " The Lord led thee (said Moses to Israiil, at the close of their journeyings) these forty years in the wilderness, to humble tliee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no. And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with maiuia, whicli thou knewest not, neither did tliy fathers know; tliat he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only," &c. ' Now, if Israel spent, not forty days, but forty years in a waste, howling wilderness, where tliere were no means of human subsistence, not starving, but divinely provided for, on purpose to prove to every age that human support depends not upon bread, but upon God's unfailing word of promise and pledgeofall needful providential care, am I, distrusting this word of God, a.i-d despairing of relief, to take the law into my own hand? True, the Son of God is able enougli to turn stones into bread : but what the Son of God is able to do is not the present question, but what is man's duty under want of the necessaries of life. And as Israel's condition in the wilderness did not justify their unbelieving niurmurings and frequent desperation, so neither would mine wari-ant
12. 10), "Tlie accuser of the ijrethren, who accuseth them before our God day and night." Mark (1. 13) says, "He was forty days tempted of Satan," a word signifying an adversary, one who lies in wait for, or sets himself in opposition to another. These and other names of the same fallen spirit point to different features in his character or operations. What was the high design of this? First, as wejudge, to give our Lord a taste of what lay before Him in the work He had undertaken; next, to make trial of the glorious furniture for it which He had just received further, to give Him encouragement, by the victory now to be won, to go forward spoiling principalities and powers, until at length He should make a show of them openly, triumphing over them in His cross; that the tempter, too, might get a taste, at the very outset, of the new kind of material in man which he would find he had here to deal with; finally, that He might acquire experimental ability "to succour thorn that are tempted" (Hebrews 2.
18). The temptation evidently embraced two stages : tlie one continuing tliroughout the forty days' fast; the other, at the conclusion of that period. First Stage: 2. And when he had fa«ted forty days and forty nights. Luke says, " Wlien they were quite ended." he was afterward an hungered—evidently Implying that the sensation of hunger was unfelt during all the forty days; coming on only at their close. So it was apparently with Moses (Exoduis 34. 28) and Elijah (1 Kings 19. 8) for the same period. A supernatural power of endurance was of course Imparted to the body, but this probably operated through a natural law—the absorption of tlie Redeemer's Spirit in the dread conflict with the tempter. (See on Acts 9. 9.) Had we only this Gospel, we should suppose the temptation did not begin till after this. But it is clear, from Mark's statement, that "He was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan," and Luke's, " being forty days tempted of the devil," that there was a forty days' temptation be/ore tlie three specific temptations afterwards recorded. And this is what we have called the First Stage. What the precise nature and object of the forty days' temptation was is not recorded. But two things seem plain enough. First, the tempter had utterly failed of his tlie exercise (if the power of the Son of God in snatching despairingly at unwarranted relief. As man, therefore, I will await Divine supply, nothing doubting tliat at the fitting time it will arrive.' Tlie second temptation in this Gospel is in Luke's the third. Tliat Matthew's order is the right one will appear, we think, pretty clearly in tlie sequel. 5. Then the devil talieth him up—latiier, ' couductetli him'—into the holy city—so called (as in Isaiah object, else it had not been renewed ; and the terms in which he opens his second attack imply as much. But further, the tempter's whole object during the forty days evidently was to get Him to distrust the heavenly testimony borne to Him at His baptism as the Son of God—
48. 2; Nelieniiah 11. 1) from its being "the city of tlie Great King," the seat of tlie temple, tlie metropolis of all Jewish worship, and settetli him on a pinnacle—ratlier, 'the pinnacle' — of the temple— a certain well-known proto persuade Him to regard it as but a splendid illusion and, generally, to dislodge from His breast the consciousness of His Sonship. With what plausibility the events of His previous history from the beginning would be urged upon Him in support of this temptation it is easy jection. Whether this refer to the liighest summit of the temple, which bristled with golden spikes (Josepuus, to imagine. And it makes much in support of this view of the forty days' temptation that the particulars of it are not recorded ; for how the details of such a purely internal struggle could be recorded it is hard to see. If this be cor-
Antiquities,?). 5, 6); or whetlier it refer to another peak, ou Herod's royal portico, overhanging tlie ravine of Kedron, at the valley of Hinnom—an immense tower built on the very edge of this precipice, from the top of which diz.zy height JosEPHUS says one could not look to the bottom {Antupjilies, 15. 11, 5)— is not certain; but the latter rect, how naturally does the Second Staoe of the temptation open! In Mark's brief notice of the temptation there is one expressive particular not given either by Matthew or by Luke—that " He was with the wild beasts," no doubt to a<ld terror to solitude, and aggravate the horrors of the whole scene. 3. And when the tempter came In him. Evidently we hae here a new scene, he said, It thoa be the Son of God. command that these stones is probably meant. 6. And saith unto Itim, If thou be the Son of Uod—As this temptation starts with llie same point as the first—our Lord's determination not to be disputed out of His Sonship—it seems to us clear that the one came directly after the other; and as the remaining temptation sliows that the hope of carrying tba(
Christ is Tempted by the DevU. MATTHEW IV. Ue is MinlUered to by Angels.
point was abandoned, and all was staked upon a desperate ventuie, we think that remaining temptation is tlius shown to be the last; as will appear still more when we come to it. cast thyself down ("from hence," Luke 4.
In this case his offer to our li Ord was that of a depx Ued supremacy commensurate with his own, though as hU gift and for his ends. If tlion wilt fall down and worsl>ip me — This was the sole but monstrous condition. No Scripture, it will be observed. Is quoted now, because nonecould be found to support so blasphemous a claim. In fact, he has ceased now to present his temptations under tle mask of piety, and stands out nnblusliingly as the rival of God Himself in his claims on the homage of men. Despairing of success as an ange! of light, he throws off all disguise, and with a splendid bribe solicits Divine honour. This again shows that we are now at the last c)f the temptations, and that Matthew's order is the true one. 10. Tlien gaitli Jesus unto him, Get thee lienre, .Satan—Since the tempter has now thrown off the mask, and stands forth in his true character, our Lord no longer deals with him as a pretended friend and pious counsel-
C): for it is written (Psalm 91. 11, 12). 'But what is this I r;ee?' exclaims stately Bishop Hall— ' Satan himself with
I). Bible under his arm and a text in his mouth !' Doubtless the tempter, having felt the power of God's word in ihe former temptation, was eager to try the effect of it from his own mouth (2 Corinthians 11. 14). He shall give IiU angels charge concerning thee: and in— ratlier,
' on'—tlieir hands they shall bear thee np, lest at any time thoii dash thy foot against a stone—The quotation is precisely as it stands in the Hebrew and LXX., save tliat after the first clause the words, " to keep thee in all tliy ways," are here omitted. Not a few good expositors have thought that this omission was intentional, to conceal the fact that this would not have been one of "His ways," t. e., of duty. But as our Lord's reply makes no allusion to this, but seizes on the great principle Involved in the promise quoted, so when we look at the promise lor, but calls him by his right name—His knowledge of which from the outset He had carefully concealed till now —and orders him off. This is the final and conclusive evidence, as we think, that Matthew's must be the right order of the temptations. For who can well conceive of the tempter's returning to the assault after this, in the pious character again, and hoping still to dislodge theconsciousness of His Sonship, while our Lord must in that case bo supposed to quote Scripture to one He had called the devil to his face—thus throwing His pearls before worse than swine? for it is written — (Deuteronomy 6.13.) Thus does our Lord part with Satan on the rock of Scripture. Tliou shalt worship—In the i?e6rew and LXX. it itself, it is plain that the sense of it is precisely the same whether tlie clause in question be inserted or not. 7. Jesns said unto him, It is written again—(Deuteronomy 6. 16), q. d., 'True, it is so written, and on that promise I implicitly rely; but in using it there is another scripture which must not be forgotten. Then shalt not tempt the Lord thy God—Preservation in danger is divinely pledged : shall I then create danger, either to put the promised security skeptically to the proof, or wantonly to demand a display of it? That were "to tempt the Lord my God," which, being expressly forbidden, would forfeit the right to expect preservation.' 8. Again, is, "Thou shalt fear;" but as the sense Is the same, so " worship" is here used to show emphatically that wliat the tempter claimed was precisely what God had forbidden, tlie Lord thy God, and Iiim only shalt thou serve—The word " serve" in the second clause. Is one never used by the LXX. of any but religious service; and in this sense exclusively Is it used in the New Testament, as we find it here. Once more the word "only," in the second clause —not expressed In the Hebrew and LXX.— Is here added to bring out emphatically the negative and prohibitory feature of the command. (See Galatlans 3. 10 for a similar supplement of the word " all" In a quotation from Deuteronomy 27. "26.) 11. Then the devil leaveth him—Lu ke says, "And when the devil had exhausted"—or 'quite ended,' as in Luke 4. 2—" every (mode of) temptation, he departed from him till a season." The definite "season" here indicated is expressly referred to by our Lord in John 14. 30 and Luke 22. 52, 53. aitd, behold, angels came and intjiistered unto him—or supplied Him with food, as the same expression means in Mark 1. 31 and Luke 8. 3. Thus did angels to Elijah (1 Kings 19. &-8). Excellent tlie devil taketh him up— ' conducteth him,' as before into, or 'unto,' an exceeding high mountain, and sliowetli liim all tiie Itlngdoms of the world, and the glory of them—Luke (4. 5) adds the important clause, " in a moment of time ;" a clause which seems to furnish a key to the true meaning. That a scene was presented to our Lord's natural eye seems plainly expressed. But to limit
(ills to the most extensive scene which the natural eye could take in, is to give a sense to the expression, " all the kingdoms of the world," quite violent. It remains, then, to gather from the expression, "in a moment of time" which manifestly is Intended to Intimate some supernatural operation—that it was permitted to the tempter to extend preternaturally for a moment our Lord's range
' of vision, and throw a "glory" or glitter over the scene of vision : a thing not inconsistent with the analogy of other scriptural statements regarding the permitted operations of the wicked one. In this case, the "exceeding height" of the "mountain" from which this sight was beheld would favour tlie effect to be produced. 9. Antl critics think that they ministered, not food only, but Bupernattiral support and cheer also. But this would be the natural eftect rather than the direct object of the visit, which was plainly what we have expressed. And after having refused to claim the illegitimate ministration of angels In His behalf, oh with what deep Joy would He accept their services when sent, unasked, at the close of all this temptation, direct from Him whom He had so gloriously honoured! What "angels' food" would this repast be to Him! and as He partook of it, might not a Voice from heaven be heard again, by any who could read the Feather's mind, 'Said I not well. This gaitit tinto liim, All these things will I give thee "and the glory of them," adds Luke. But Matthew having already said that this was "showed Him," did not need to repeat it here. Luke (4. 6) adds these other very important clauses, here omitted—"for that is," or 'has been,' "delivered unto me, and to whomsoever I will I give It." Was this wholly false? That were not like Satan's usual policy, which Is to Insinuate his lies under cover of some truth. What truth, then, is there here? We answer. Is not Satan thrice called by our Lord Himself, "the prince of this world" (John 12. 31; 14. 30; 18.
is my beloved Son, In whom I am well pleased?'
II) ? does not the apostle call him "the god of this world"
12-25. Christ Begins His Galilean Ministry-Calling OF Peter and Andrew, James and John — His First Galilean Circuit. (=Mark, 1. 14-20,35-39; Luke
(2 Corinthians 4. 4)? and still further, is it not said that Christ came to destroy by His death "him that Jia/h the power of death, that is, the devil" (Hebrews 2. 14)? No doubt these passages only express men's voluntary sub-
4. 14, 15.) There is here a notable gap in the History, which but for the fourth Gospel we should never have discovered. From the former Gospels we should have beea apt to draw three Inferences, which from the fourth one we know to be erroneous: First, that our Lonl awaited the close of John's ministry, by his arrest and ImprLsonment, before beginning His own ; next, that there was bul a brief Interval between the baptism of our Lord and th« imprlsonnu'nt of John; and further, that our Iord not only oi>ened His work in Galilee, but never ministered out of It, and never visited Jerusalem %t all uor kept a jection to the rule of the wicked one while they live, and his power to surround death to them, when It comes, with all tlie terrors of the wages of sin. But as this is a real and terrible sway, so all Scripture represents men as rlghteouslj' sold under It. In this sense he speaks what is not devoid of truth, when he says, "All this is delivered unto me." But how does he deliver this "to whomsoever he will?" As employing whomsoever he pleases Of his willing subjects In keeping men under his power.