« הקודםהמשך »
Mark i. 12.
And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilder- The Wilness,
which his predecessor had forfeited. Adam was driven out of
open again the gates of
To shew, however, still more clearly the evident parallel that exists, between the temptations of the first and second Adam, it will be necessary to examine the peculiar circumstances of each event.
According to St. Joho, all the sin that tempts mankind may be comprized in these three terms; the lust of the flesh--tho lust of the eye-and the pride of life ; and to these three may be reduced the temptations both of Adam and of Jesus. In the temptation in Eden these three principles of evil are evidently alluded to, in the description of the forbidden fruit. In the temptation in the wilderness, Christ was tempted like unto Adam; and in a more general sense, like unto all the children of Adam.
Adam was first tempted to the lust of the flesh, by indulging his natural appetite for food, in a manner which was contrary to the express command of God. Christ was tempted to gratify bis wish for food in a manner forbidden by the 'spirit of the law of God. He was tempted to supply himself with provision, by devoting that miraculous power which was given him for the benefit of mankind, and for the more effectual demonstration of the truth of his mission, for the gratification of his human nature.
Adam, was secondly, tempted to the lust of the eye: " He took of the fruit because it was pleasant to the eye." And the evil spirit enforces the power of the motives to disobedience, by perverting the understanding, in misrepresenting Scripture itself. Our Lord was, secondly, tempted by the perversion of Scripture itself, to indulge that feeling which is gratified by the admiration and homage of the world. He was invited by the Tempter to proclaim himself at once, by the performance of an useless and ostentatious miracle, the promised Messiah of the Jews. He was invited to encourage their false notions of a Messiah, and to obtain 'immediate possession of bis promised kingdom, by throwing himself from the pinnacle (or wing, or battlement, or royal portico, for the word "tepúylov, is thus variously rendered,) of the temple, and claim the bomage of the crowds assembled to worship there. For the Jews interpreted literally the prediction of Malachi iji. 1. and expected that the Messiah, by some extraordinary demonstration of his power, would suddenly come to his temple. The pilgrimage wbich our Lord came to undergo, was one which was expressly and painfully opposed to all that train of feelings and dispositions, so pleasing to our fallen nature. The Captain of our salvation was to become persect through sufferings. He was to be poor,
Matt iv. 1. to be tempted of the devil.
The WilMark i 13. And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted derness.
despised, insulted, and rejected. At the time when his painful
Adam, was thirdly, tempted to that kind of evil, which
Thus was Christ, the second Adam, tempted in the same manner as the first Adam; on the same principles, and by the same tempter. But he was also tempted as we are. The object of Satan, from the creation of Adam to the present moment, is to render man unfit for a spiritual condition, by inducing him uniformly to act from natural motives. The spirit of evil does not desire to diminish the supposed happiness of man in this world; it endeavours to immerse him in the pursuit of worldly enjoyments, comforts, vanities, and pride, in such manner that the soul becomes imbruted and embodied in material objects. The spirit of evil so endeavours to sensualize and animalize the intellectual and moral faculties of man, that bis inferior nature may be triumphant; and consequently, when he shall be summoned into another stage of existence, he may be rendered totally untit to be the eternal companion of God the Judge of all-of Christ the Mediator-of Holy Angels and of perfect spirits.
Other circumstances may be adduced to complete the parallel between the two temptations. The first Adam fell through the act of eatidg; the second Adam reversed the sentence of condemnation, by the opposite act of fasting and mortification. The first Adam was tempted in Paradise, surrounded by all the animals of creation, over which he ruled in a state of innocence:
Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those The Wildays he did eat nothing.
Lake iv. 2.
the second Adam is described by St. Mark, i. 13. to have becn
For the passages in the Old Testament, which prophesy
Among the titles given in the Old Testament to the Messiah, collected by Dr. Pye Smith, in his valuable work on the Scripture Testimony to the Person of Christ, I find this “the Adam from above.” He cites, in support of the interpretation which he has there given of 2 Sam. vii. and I Chron. xvii. 16, 17. the learned criticism of Dr. Kenuicott, from which however he has in some measure departed, by rendering the word or “order," instead of law.” Bishop Horsley translates it “ arrangement.” His criticism is very ingenious. The words in the original are as follow-2 Sam. vii. 19. 77777 1978 787 noin non- Chron. xvii. 17. ObX 7901 bynn D7% 1173 3087), &c.; on which Dr. Kendicott observes, « From David's address to God, aster receiving the message by Nathan, it is plain that David understood the son promised to be the Messiah, in whom bis house was to be established for ever. But the words, which seem most expressive of this, are in this verse now rendered very unintelligibly, and is this the manner of man? Whereas the words Din noun nan literally signify, and this is (or must be) the law of the man, or of the Adam,' i. e. this promise must relate to the law, or ordinance, made by God to Adam, concerning the seed of the woman; the man, or the second Adam: as the Mes. siah is expressly called by St. Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 45–47. This meaning will be yet more evident from the parallel place, 1 Chron. xvii. 17. wbere the words of David are now miserably rendered thus: “And thou hast regarded me, according to the estate of a man of high degrec.' Whereas the words obyon DTXT TO 7x7 literally signify, and thou hast regarded me, according to the Adam that is future, or the man that is from above," (for the word bynn very remarkably signifies hereafter as to time, and from above as to place); and thus St. Paul, including both senses. “The second man is the Lord from heaven :' and, Adam is the figure of him that was to come, or the future. Rom, v. 14."
And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he The Wil
derness. was afterward an hungred:
Matt. iv. 2.
It is upon this passage that Bishop Horsley has remarked
2 Sam. vii. 19, “ And this (pamely, what was said about his
1 Chron. xvii. 17. "And thou hast regarded me in the arrangement about The Man that is to be from above, o God Jehovah." That is, in forming the scheme of the incarnation, regard was had to the honour of David, and his house as a secondary object, by making it a part of the plan, that the Messiah should be born in his family. This is indisputably the sense of both passages, though far more clearly expressed by the later writer (d). Dr. Kennicott, not perceiving the identity of the two words non and in, was not aware that the two passages render the very same sense, with no other difference than the advantage of perspicuity, and perhaps of accuracy, in reciting David's very words, on the side of tbe author of the Book of Chronicles. I owe, however, to Dr. Kennicott the important hint, that D787, in Samuel, and byon 07877, in Chronicles, allude to Christ, and to none else, which led me to the right understanding of both passages.-Horsley's Biblical Criticisms, vol. i. p. 184. See also Arrangement of the Old Testament, vol. i, p. 651.
It is difficult to say why Bishop Horsley, after this confession, should bave differed in another point from Dr. Kennicott, and translated b987 by the Man, instead of tho Adam. Dr. P. Smith has very justly observed, from Dr. Kennicott's translation, that the inferences to be drawn from this passage are, that the Messiah would, at a period remotely future, descend from David, and that he would sustain a relation to the human race analogous to that of the first man.
In the New Testament also, our Lord is called the Adam from above. We read these remarkable words, (1 Cor. xv. 47.) The first man is of the earth earthy, the second man is the Lord from Heaven. Through the greater part that beautiful chapter St. Paul draws a parallel between the first and second Adam. In the Epistle to the Romans (v. 14.) be calls the first Adam the figure of him that was to come. (Compare also John iii. 31. viji.
Matt. iv. 3. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou The Wil
be the Son of God, command that these stones be made derness.
bread. Luke iv. 3. command this stone that it be made bread.
The Jewish traditions also affirm the same doctrine, and St. Paul, in this passage, (1 Cor. xv. 47.) uses the very same expression which is found in the book Zohar on this subject: acir. cumstance which may be considered as affording a proof of the real date of that curious book. It is said to consist principally of a recital of the expositions and doctrines of Rabbi Simeon (e), the son of Jochai, who was the cotemporary of the Apostles, and probably known to St. Paul, himself one of the most learned of bis day.
The Messiah is there called xboys 01x, the Adam on high, and is said to have dominion over all things, as the first man, the Adam below, nxnn 07x, bad by divine appointment over the inferior creation of this world. The same idea repeatedly occurs in the rabbinical writings. Plura adhuc, ibi habentur, says Schoetgenius, sed hæc sufficiant. I have selected a few of the very curious traditions dispersed through bis book (f).
I would herc conclude the attempt to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the one Messiah, from his being the second Adam, as the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Jewish traditions assert the Messiah to be; but Mr. Jones bas added some ideas on the time during which the temptation lasted, which may confirm the propriety of the reasoning now adopted. Accord. ing to tradition, Adam and Eve are supposed to have been tried forty days in Paradise. Jones, in his interesting dissertation on the Temptation of Christ,” arguing on this supposition, concludes that the period of forty days will, from this circumstance, naturally occur in other transactions; and particularly in this of our Saviour's temptation. The flood brought upon the world by sin committed in Paradise, (Geu. v. 29.) lasted for forty days-and so long were the rains descending, that the sin and
its history might be recognized in the punishment. When the Israelites searched the land of Canaan, the second Paradise, they had a foretaste of it for forty days, (Numb. xiv. 33, 34.) and the people who murmured at the evil report of those faith less messengers were condemned to wander forty years (a year for a day) in the wilderness. (Jones's Works, vol. iii. 173.) To which may be added many other symbolical coincidences. Moses, as the founder, and the great lawgiver, of the Jewish Church, fasted twice forty days and forty nights on Mount Horeb, when he first received the tables of the law, and after they had been broken and were again restored. Elijah also, the reformer of the Jewish Church, by the same superhuman power, after he had crossed the river Jordan, fasted for the same number of days, and in the same wilderness, as Moses had formerly done. Are these mere coincidences? Is it not rather probable that Christ, who came to fulfil the law to the uttermost, and to establish on it a more perfect dispensation, should be appointed to give the same evidence of his divine mission; and to undergo the same preparation as his typical predecessors had already fulfilled.
(a) Kennicott's (Posthumous) Remarks on the Old Testament, p.114. (6) Smith's Scripture Testimony to the Person of the Messiah, vol. i. p. 184. (c) Horsley's Biblical Criticisms, vol. i. p. 350. (d) Smith's Scriptore Testimony, &c. vol. i. p. 185. (6) Schoetgenius Horæ He