Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (733 page)
Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online
Authors: George Eliot
BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
7.02Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
* In a fragment of Theodore of Mopsuestia in Hunter’s Fragm.
Patr. Graic. Fasc. 1, P. 99 f. \ Paulus. }
Hoffinann thinks that the devil, in his second temptation, designedly chose so startling an example as the leap from the temple roof, the essential aim of the temptation being to induce Jesus to a false use of his miraculous power and consciousness of a divine nature. But this evasion leaves the matter where it was, for there is the Baine absurdity in choosing unlit examples as unlit temptations. § Mess, Gesehichte Jesu, 1, 8. 124.|| See tlie author of the discourse de jejunio et fentationibus Chrlsli, among Cyprian’s works. «[ Compare Joseph, b. j. v. v. 6, vi. v. 1. Fritzsche, in Matth., S. Kil. Us
Patr. Graic. Fasc. 1, P. 99 f. \ Paulus. }
Hoffinann thinks that the devil, in his second temptation, designedly chose so startling an example as the leap from the temple roof, the essential aim of the temptation being to induce Jesus to a false use of his miraculous power and consciousness of a divine nature. But this evasion leaves the matter where it was, for there is the Baine absurdity in choosing unlit examples as unlit temptations. § Mess, Gesehichte Jesu, 1, 8. 124.|| See tlie author of the discourse de jejunio et fentationibus Chrlsli, among Cyprian’s works. «[ Compare Joseph, b. j. v. v. 6, vi. v. 1. Fritzsche, in Matth., S. Kil. Us
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
temptation, as to the situation of tlie mountain, from whose summit may be seen all the kingdoms of the world, lias been met Ly the information that KOO|U.OC here means no more than Palestine, and j3ao-(^eiac:, its several kingdoms andtetrarchies:* hut this is a scarcely less ludicrous explanation tlian the one that tlie devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world on a map! No answer remains Taut that such a mountain existed only in the ancient idea of the earth as a plain, and in the popular imagination, which can easily stretch a mountain up to heaven, and sharpen an eye to penetrate infinity.
Lastly, tlie incident with which our narrative closes, namely, that angels came and ministered to Jesus, is not without difficulty, apart from the above-mentioned doubts as to tlie existence of such beings. For the expression SirjKovovv can signify no other kind of ministering than that of presenting food; and this is proved not only by the context, according to which Jesus liad need of such tendance, but by a comparison of tlie circumstances with 1 Kings xix. 5, where an angel brings food to Elijah. But of the only two possible suppositions, botli are equally incongruous: that ethereal beings like angels should convey earthly material food, or that the human body of Jesus should be nourished with heavenly substances, if any such
exist.
§ 55. THE TEMPTATION CONSIDERED AS A NATURAL OCCURRENCE
EITHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL; AND ALSO AS A PARABLE.
THE impossibility of conceiving the sudden removals of Jesus to the temple and tlie mountain, led some even of the ancient commentators to tlie opinion, that at least tlie locality of the second and third temptations was not present to Jesus corporeally and externally, but merely in a vision ;f wliile some modern ones, to whom tlie personal appearance of the devil was especially offensive, have supposed that the whole transaction with him passed from beginning to end within the recesses of the soul of Jesus. Herewith they have regarded the forty day’s fast either as a mere internal representation^ (which, however, is a most inadmissible perversion of tlie plainly historic text:
vijaTEvoac; fjfiKpa^ reoaapditovra va~epov wuvaos, Matt. iv. 2), or as a real fact, in which case tlie formidable difficulties mentioned in the preceding section remain valid. The Internal representation of the temptations is by some made to accompany a state of ecstatic vision, for which they retain a supernatural cause, deriving it eitlier from God, or from the kingdom of darkness :§ others ascribe to tlie vision
* The one proposed by Kuinol, in Matth., p. GO; the other by Fritzsclie, p. 168.
\ Theodore of Mopsuestia, ut sup. p. 107, maintained, afiain^t Julian that the devil had made the imago of a mountain, ijiavTaaiav opouc TOV A.u,8oAov vcTfOi.fjiteva.l, and according to the author of the discourse already cited, de jejunio et tentatiimibus Clirisii, the first temptation it is true passed liicaliter in, deserld, lut Jesus only went
-- » o.. c,,, (,,„ former. H. Fanner, Gratz, Comm. znm Ev, ilatth.
1, S. 217, for -• •- • .>..,.. ..,,n,,>i,en,i him.
1, S. 217, for -• •- • .>..,.. ..,,n,,>i,en,i him.
TEMTATION OF JESUS.
more of the nature of a dream, and accordingly seek a natural caixse for it, in the reflections with which Jesus was occupied during his waking moments.* According to this theory, Jesus, in the solemn mood which tlie baptismal scene was calculated to produce, reviews his messianic plan, and together with the true means for its execution, he recals their possible abuses; an excessive use of miracles and a love of domination, by which man, in the Jewish mode of thinking, became, instead of an instrument of God, a promoter of the plans of the devil. While surrendering himself to such meditations, his finely organized body is overcome by tlieir exciting influence; he sinks for some time into deep exhaustion, and tlien into a dream-like state, in which his mind unconsciously embodies his previous thoughts in speaking and acting forms.
To support tills transference of tlie whole scene to the inward nature of Jesus, commentators tliink tliat they can produce some features of the evangelical narrative itself.
The expression of Matthew (iv. 1), avr^Q’t] £((• -n}v KpfJfwv VTTO TOV IIveiyo.-o?, and still more that of Luke (iv. 1), i/ye-o EV TU HVEV^CITI,, correspond fully to the forms : eyevofi^v ev TrvevfzaTi,, Rev. i. 10, dmjveyns jiie eic; Sprifnov ev •nvevji.ari, xvii. 3, and to similar ones in Ezekiel; and as in these passages inward intuition is alone referred to, neither in the evangelical ones, it is said, can any external occurrence be intended.
The expression of Matthew (iv. 1), avr^Q’t] £((• -n}v KpfJfwv VTTO TOV IIveiyo.-o?, and still more that of Luke (iv. 1), i/ye-o EV TU HVEV^CITI,, correspond fully to the forms : eyevofi^v ev TrvevfzaTi,, Rev. i. 10, dmjveyns jiie eic; Sprifnov ev •nvevji.ari, xvii. 3, and to similar ones in Ezekiel; and as in these passages inward intuition is alone referred to, neither in the evangelical ones, it is said, can any external occurrence be intended.
But it has been with reason objected,! that tlie above forms may be adapted eitlier to a real external abduction by the Divine Spirit (as in Acts viii. 39, 2 Kings ii. 16), or to one merely internal and visionary, as in tlie quotation from the Apocalypse, so that between these two possible significations the context must decide ; that in works replete with visions, as are the Apocalypse and Ezekiel, the context indeed pronounces in favour of a merely spiritual occurrence;
but in an historical work such as our gospels, of an external one.
Dreams, and especially visions, are always expressly announced as such in tlie historical books of the New Testament: supposing, therefore, tliat tlie temptation was a vision, it sliould have been introduced by tlie words, elder ev bpup.a.Ti, ev eitdrdaei,, as in Acts ix.
12 ; x. 10 ; or e(}>dvr] avrw KOT map, as in Matt. i. 20; ii. 13. Besides, if a dream had been narrated, the transition to a continuation of the real history must have been marked by a (5teyep0e^, being awaked, as in Matt. i. 24; ii, 14, 21 ; whereby, as Paulus truly says, much labour would have been spared to expositors.
It is further alleged against the above explanations, that Jesus does not seem to liave been at any other time subject to ecstaeies, and that he nowliere else attaches importance to a dream, or even recapitulates onc.j: To what end God should have excited such a vision in Jesus, it is difficult to conceive, or how the devil should have had power and permission to produce it; especially in Christ.
* Paulus, S. 377 ff.f Friteche, in Matth. 155 f. Usteri, Beitrag zur ErkUrung der Versuchuiigsgescliichte, S. 774 f.t Ullmann, tiber die Unsundlichkeit Jesn, in hia Studien, 1, 1, S. 56. Uiiteri, ut sup. S. 775.
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
The orthodox, too, should not forget that, admitting the temptation to be a dream, resulting from tlie thoughts of Jesus, the false messianic ideas which were a part of those thoughts, are supposed to
have had a strong influence on his mind.*
If, then, the liistory of tlie temptation is not to be understood as confined to the soul of Jesus, and if we have before shown that it cannot be regarded as supernatural; nothing seems to remain but to view it as a real, yet thoroughly natural, event, and to reduce the tempter to a mere man. After Jolin had drawn attention to Jesus as the Messiah, (thinks tlie author of the Natural History of tlie Prophet of Nazareth,!) the ruling party in Jerusalem commissioned an artful Pharisee to put Jesus to tlie test, and to ascertain whether he really possessed miraculous powers, or whether he might not be drawn into the interest of the priesthood, and be induced to give his countenance to an entcrprize against tlie Romans. This conception of tlie c!ta/3o;loc is in dignified consistency with that of tlie dyye/lot, who appeared after his departure to refresh Jesus, as an approaching caravan with provisions, or as soft reviving breezes.f But this view, as Usteri says, has so long completed its phases in the theological
world, that to refute it would be to waste words.
If tlie foregoing discussions have proved that the temptation, as narrated by the synoptical evangelists, cannot be conceived cither as an external or internal, a supernatural or natural occurrence, the conclusion is inevitable, tliat it cannot have taken place in the manner represented.
The least invidious expedient is to suppose that the source of
our histories of the temptation was some real event in the life of Jesus, so narrated by him to his disciples as to convey no accurate impression of tlie fact. Tempting thoughts, which intruded themselves into his soul during his residence in the wilderness, or at various seasons, and under various circumstances, but which were immediately quelled by tlie unimpaired force of his will, were, according to the oriental mode of thought and expression, represented by him as a temptation of tlie devil; and this figurative narrative was understood literally.§ Tlie most prominent objection to this view, that it compromises tlie impeccability of Jcsus,|| being founded on a dogma, lias no existence for the critic: we can, however, gather from tlie tenor of the evangelical liistory, that tlie practical sense of Jesus was thoroughly clear and just; but this becomes questionable, if he could ever feel an inclination, corresponding to tlie second temptation in Matthew, or even if he merely cliose such a form for communicating a more reasonable temptation to his disciples. Further, in sucli a narrative Jesus would have presented a confused mixture of fiction and truth out of his life, not to be expected from an in
* Uateri, S. 776. \ 1 Bd. 8. 512 ff. f The former in Henke’s n. Magazin 4, 2, 8.
852 ; the latter in the naturlichen Geachichte, 1, S. 591 (f.§ This view is held by Ull-T... .,,i yo^nri^,.]] Schliaennacher, uber den Lukas, Si 51. Usteri, ut sup. S.
TEMPTATION OF JESUS.
ecnuous teacher, as he otherwise appears to be, especially if it be supposed that the tempting thoughts did not really occur to him after his forty days’ sojourn in the wilderness, and that tins particular is only a portion of the fictitious investiture; while if it be assumed, on the contrary, tliat the date is historical, there remains the forty day’s fast, one of the most insurmountable difficulties of the narrative. If Jesus wislicd simply to describe a mental exercise in the manner of tlie Jews, wlio, tracing tlie effect to tlie cause, ascribed evil thoughts to diabolical agency, nothing more was requisite than to say that Satan suggested such and sucli thoughts to his mind; and it was quite superfluous to depict a personal devil and a journey with him, unless, together with the purpose of narration, or in its stead, there existed a poetical and didactic intention.
Such an intention, indeed, is attributed to Jesus by tliose who hold tliat the liistory of the temptation was narrated by him as a parable, but understood literally by his disciples.
This opinion is not encumbered with the difficulty of making some real inward experience of Jesus tlie basis of tlie history ;* it does not suppose tliat Jesus himself underwent sucli temptations, but only that he sought to secure his disciples from them, by impressing on them, as a compendium of messianic and apostolic wisdom, tlie three following maxims: first, to perform no miracle for their own advantage even in the greatest exigency; secondly, never to venture on a chimerical undertaking in the hope of extraordinary divine aid; thirdly, never to enter into fellowship witli tlie wicked, however strong tlie enticement.f It was long ago observed, in opposition to tills interpretation, tliat tlie narrative is not easily recognized as a parable, and that its moral is hard to discern.^ With respect to tlie latter objection, it. is true that the second temptation would be an ill-chosen image; but tlie former remark is the more important one. To prove that this narrative lias not the characteristics of a parable, the following definition has been recently given: a parable, being essentially historical in its form, is only distinguishable from real liistory when its agents are of an obviously fictitious character.S Tills is the case where tlie subjects are mere generalizations, as in tlie parables of tlie sower, the king, and others of a like kind; or when they are, indeed, individualized, but so as to be at once recognized as unhistorical persons, as mere supports for the drapery of fiction, of which even Lazarus, in tlie parable of tlie rich man, is an example, though distinguished by a name. In neither species of parable is it admissible to introduce as a subject a person corporcally present, and necessarily determinate and historical. Thus Jesus could not make Peter or any other of his disciples the subject of a parable,
This opinion is not encumbered with the difficulty of making some real inward experience of Jesus tlie basis of tlie history ;* it does not suppose tliat Jesus himself underwent sucli temptations, but only that he sought to secure his disciples from them, by impressing on them, as a compendium of messianic and apostolic wisdom, tlie three following maxims: first, to perform no miracle for their own advantage even in the greatest exigency; secondly, never to venture on a chimerical undertaking in the hope of extraordinary divine aid; thirdly, never to enter into fellowship witli tlie wicked, however strong tlie enticement.f It was long ago observed, in opposition to tills interpretation, tliat tlie narrative is not easily recognized as a parable, and that its moral is hard to discern.^ With respect to tlie latter objection, it. is true that the second temptation would be an ill-chosen image; but tlie former remark is the more important one. To prove that this narrative lias not the characteristics of a parable, the following definition has been recently given: a parable, being essentially historical in its form, is only distinguishable from real liistory when its agents are of an obviously fictitious character.S Tills is the case where tlie subjects are mere generalizations, as in tlie parables of tlie sower, the king, and others of a like kind; or when they are, indeed, individualized, but so as to be at once recognized as unhistorical persons, as mere supports for the drapery of fiction, of which even Lazarus, in tlie parable of tlie rich man, is an example, though distinguished by a name. In neither species of parable is it admissible to introduce as a subject a person corporcally present, and necessarily determinate and historical. Thus Jesus could not make Peter or any other of his disciples the subject of a parable,
Other books
Creature by Amina Cain
Flynn by Vanessa Devereaux
Limbo by Melania G. Mazzucco
The Seduction of Lord Stone by Anna Campbell
No Beast So Fierce by Edward Bunker
The Winter Wish by Jillian Eaton
The Winter King by C. L. Wilson
The Mistletoe Phenomenon by Serena Yates
HCC 115 - Borderline by Lawrence Block
The Exiles Return by Elisabeth de Waal