TEMPTATION

sacrifice were thrown upon the altar and consumed. The pouring of the drink-offering was now the signal for the choir of Levites to begin the chanting of the Fsalm for the day. At intervals two priests blew on silver trumpets, at whose sound the people again pros-trated themselves. With the close of the Psalm the public service was at an end, and the private sacrifices were then offered.

The order of the mid-afternoon service differed from the above only in that the incense was offered after the burning of the victim instead of before. The lamps, also, on the 'golden candlestick,' were lighted at the 'evening' service. A. R. S. Kennedy.

TEMPTATION.— The English words 'tempt' and 'temptation' are in the OT — with the exception of Mai 3", where a synonym bochan is used, — the tr. of various forms of the root nisssh, which is most frequently rendered 'prove.' In Gn 22' RV tr. 'God did prove Abraham.' But RV retains 'temptation' for (a) God's testing of Pharaoh's char-acter and disposition (Dt 4*i, RVra 'trials' or 'evi-dences'; cf. 7" 29"); (6) Israel's distrustful putting of God Himself to the proof (Dt 6is; cf. Ex XT'- \ Nu 1422, ps 7818. «. 66). In ps 958 E,v rightly keeps 'Massah' as a proper name, the reference being to the historic murmuring at Rephidim {Ex IT'*-; cf. Dt 338, Ps 81').

Driver (7CC, on Dt 6'') points out, in a valuable note, that *niss5h is a neutral word, and means to test or vrove a

Seraon, to see uj^efAer he will act in a particular way (Ex 16*, g 222 3*)^ or whether the character he beais is well estab-lished (1 K 10^). God thus jyroves a person, or 'puts him to the test, to see if his fidelity or^ffection is sincere (Gn 22', Ex 202", Dt 82 13'; cf. Ps 262j; and men test, or prove Jehovah when they act as if doubting whether Hia promise be true, or whether He is faithful to His revealed character (Ex 172- ', Nu 1422, Pa io6U; of. la 712).'

2. The Gr. word peirasmos is the usual LXX rendering of massah. It is also 'a neutral word,' though in the NT it sometimes means enticement to sin (Mt 4', 1 Co 7^ Rev 2'" etc.; cf. 'the tempter,' Mt 4', 1 Th S'). In the RV it is almost always tr. 'temptation,' with the occasional marginal alternative 'trial' (Ja 1'), 1 P 1«); the exceptions are Ac 20", Rev Si", where ' trial ' -is found in the text. The Amer. RV substitutes 'try' or 'make trial of ('trial') for 'tempt' ('tempta-tion') 'wherever enticement to what is wrong is not evidently spoken of (see Appendix to RV, note vi.); but 'temptation' is retained in Mt 6"=Lk 11', where the range of the petition cannot be thus limited; cf. Ja 12.

3. In expounding the prayer 'Bring ua not into temptation,' and other passages in which the word has a wider meaning than enticement to sin, the diffi-culty is partially, but only partially, to be ascribed to the narrowing of the significance of the English word since 1611. If, as Driver thinks, 'to tempt has, in modern English, acquired the sense of provoking or enticing a person in order that he may act in a par-ticular way ( = Heb. hissith),' there is no doubt that 'tempt' is often 'a misleading rendering.' Into such temptation the heavenly Father cannot bring Hia children; our knowledge of His character prevents us from tracing to Him any allurement to evil. The profound argument of St. James (1") is that God is ' Himself absolutely unsusceptible to evil,' and therefore He is 'incapable of tempting others to evil' (Mayor, Com., in loc.). But the difficulty is not removed when the petition is regarded as meaning ' bring us not into trial.' Can a Christian pray to be exempted from the testing without which sheltered innocence cannot become approved virtue? Can he ask that he may never be exposed to those trials upon the endurance of which his blessedness depends (Ja 1")? The suffi-cient answer is that He who was ' in all points tempted like as we are' (He 4") has taught us to pray 'after

TEN COMMANDMENTS

this manner.' His own prayer in Gethsemane (Mt 26"), and His exhortation to His disciples (v."), prove, by example and by precept, that when offered in subjection to the central, all-dominating desire ' Thy will be done,' the petition 'Bring us not into temptation' is always fitting on the lips of those who know that 'the flesh is weak.' Having thus prayed, those who find them-selves ringed round (Ja I2, peri) by temptations will be strengthened to endure joyfully. Their experience is not joyous, but grievous; nevertheless, Divine wisdom enables thera to ' count it all joy ' as being a part of the discipline which is designed to make them ' perfect and entire, lacking in nothing.'

On the Temptation of our Lord see Jesus CHKrsT, p. 447''. J. G. Tabker.

TEN.— See Numbek, § 7.

TEN GOmKUNDMENTS.— l.The traditionalhistory of the Decalogue. — The 'ten words' were, according to Ex 20,proclaimed vocally by God on Mt.Sinai, and written by Him on two stones, and given to Moses (24'2 31'" 3215- 16; cf. Dt 522 gio- 11). When these were broken by Moses on his descent from the mount (Ex 32", Dt 9"), he was commanded to prepare two fresh stones like the first, on which God re-wrote the 'ten words' (Ex 34''- ^s, Dt 102- <). This is clearly the meaning of Ex. as the text now stands. But many critics think that v.2"> originally referred not to the 'ten words' of Ex 20, but to the laws of 3411-25, and that these laws were J's version of the Decalogue. It must suffice to say here that if, as on the whole seems likely, v.28i> refers to our Decalogue, we must distinguish the command to write the covenant laws in v.2', and the words 'he wrote' in v.2S'', in which case the subject of the latter will be God, as required by 34i. The two stones were immediately placed in the ark, which had been prepared by Moses specially for that purpose (Dt 10'-* [probably based on JEJ). There they were believed to have permanently remained (1 K 8', Dt IC) until the ark was, accord-ing to Rabbinical tradition, hidden by Jeremiah, when Jerusalem was finally taken by Nebuchadrezzar.

2. The documentary history of the Decalogue. — A comparison of the Decalogue in Ex 20 with that of Dt 5 renders it probable that both are later recensions of a much shorter original. The phrases peculiar to Dt 5 are in most cases obviously characteristic of D, and must be regarded as later expansions. Such are 'as the Lord thy God commanded thee ' in the 4th and 5th 'word,' and 'that it may go well with thee' in the 6th. In the last commandment the first two clauses are trans-posed, and a more appropriate word (' desire ') is used for coveting a neighbour's wife. Here evidently we have also a later correction. Curiously enough Ex 20, while thus generally more primitive than Deut., shows signs of an even later recension. The reason for keeping the Sabbath, God's rest after creation, is clearly based on Gn 21-3, which belongs to the post-exilic Priestly Code (P). "The question is further complicated by the fact that several phrases in what is common to Ex 20 and Deut. are of a distinctly Deuteronomic character, as 'that is within thy gates' in the 4th commandment, 'that thy days may be long' 'upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee' in the 6th. We see, then, that the Decalogue of Ex. is in all probability the result of a double revision (a Deuteronomic and a Priestly) of a much more simple original. It has been suggested that originally all the commandments consisted of a single clause, and that the name ' word ' could be more naturally applied to such. In favour of this view, beyond what has been already said, it is argued that this short form would be more suitable for inscription on stone.

3. How were the ' ten' words ' divided? — The question turns on the beginning and the end of the Decalogue. Are what we know as the First and Second, and again what we know as the Tenth, one or two commandments? The arrangement which treats the First and Second

905