That Christ’s temptations were real and not in vision.—That temptation is Satan’s employment, with the evidences and instances thereof.—Of Satan’s tempting visibly, with the reasons thereof.
Next follows a particular account of those more eminent temptations wherewith Christ was assaulted by Satan. Before I speak of these, I must necessarily remove this stumbling-block out of the way, viz., whether Christ was really tempted, or only in a vision. That this was but visionary hath been supposed; not only by some, whose conceits in other things might justly render their supposals in this matter less worthy of a serious consideration,[376] but also by very grave and serious men,[377] whose reasons, notwithstanding, are not of that weight as to sway us against the letter and history of these temptations, which give us a full account of these things as really transacted, without the least hint of understanding them as done only in a vision. For,
(1.) First, It is a dangerous thing to depart from the literal sense of what is historically related. If we take such a liberty, we may as well understand other historical passages after the same rate, and so bring the history, not only of Christ’s suffering to a visionary and fantastical cross, but also of all the New Testament to a very nothing.[378]
(2.) Secondly, The circumstances of the temptation are so particularly set down—as the devil’s coming to him, leaving him, taking him to the temple, &c.—that if we may expect in anything to secure ourselves from a visionary supposition, we may do it in this history.[379]
(3.) Thirdly, This imagination doth wholly enervate and make void the very end and design of Christ’s being tempted; for where were the glory of this victory over Satan, if it were only a visionary temptation, and a visionary conquest? or where were the comfort and encouragement which believers—from the apostle’s authority, Heb. ii. 18, and iv. 16—might reap from this, that Christ imagined himself to be tempted, when really he was not so? Nay, how impossible is it to make that expression of the apostle, ‘He was tempted in all points like as we are,’ to agree to an imaginary temptation? except we also say that we are only tempted visionarily and not really?
(4.) Fourthly, Neither is it a plea of any value against this truth, that it seems to derogate too much from the honour and authority of our Saviour, that Satan should so impudently assault him with temptations to worship him, and should carry him at pleasure from place to place, when we find that he voluntarily submitted to higher indignities from Satan’s instruments, and ‘turned not away his cheek’ from those that ‘smote’ him, spit upon him, and contumeliously mocked him, and at last submitted to death, even the death of the cross.[380]
As for those objections from πτερύγιον ἱεροῦ, the pinnacle of the temple, upon which Scultetus thinks it was impossible for Christ to stand; as also the objection of the impossibility to shew the kingdoms of the world from any mountain, I shall answer them in their proper place. In the meantime I shall return to the verse in hand, in which I shall first pitch upon the general proæmium, or introduction to these special temptations, which is this, ‘The tempter came to him.’
In this we are to take notice of the name given to Satan, and also the way and manner of the assault, in that expression, ‘he came to him.’
There are three distinct names given to him in these temptations. [1.] His name ‘Satan’ shews his malice and fury, which is the ground and fountain whence all that trouble proceeds which we meet with from him. [2.] He is styled ‘the tempter,’ and that signifies to us how he puts forth this malice, his way and exercise in the exerting of it. [3.] He is called ‘the devil’ or accuser, expressing thereby the end and issue of all. From this name, then, here given, we may observe:—
Obs. 1. First, That it is Satan’s work and employment to tempt men. We need not here dispute whether it be proper to Satan to tempt—that is, an soli, et semper competat, whether it agree to him only and always, which some indeed affirm in such a sense as this, that men do tempt men as Satan’s instruments, the world tempts as it is the object and matter of temptations, but Satan tempts as the proper author and engineer of temptations. Others there are that think that men can and do properly tempt themselves, according to James i. ‘Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust.’[381] But the question is altogether needless as to us; though we and others may be true and proper tempters, yet this hindereth not but that it is most true, that Satan makes temptation his very work and business. And therefore not only here, but in 1 Thes. iii. 5, the devil is described by his employment, ‘Lest by any means the tempter,’ or he that tempteth, ‘hath tempted you:’ which the ordinary gloss doth thus explain, Diabolus, cujus est officium tentare. This name, then, is put upon Satan, κατ’ ἐξοχὴν, by way of eminency. Implying, [1.] That though there be never so many tempters, yet Satan is the chief. [2.] That he makes temptation his proper employment.