SLTJ:Ch 21

Copyright, L.D. Underwood 2011

The Temptations of Christ

In the first four chapters of Luke’s gospel account, Luke focuses on three witnesses that uniquely qualify Jesus of Nazareth as the only Son of God. That is the way Luke begins his gospel—three witnesses to the deity of Christ. The first of these witnesses is John the Baptist—that fascinating prophet of the Lord who cried out “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. He who is after me is greater than I am… I am unworthy to untie his shoelace; I baptize with water but he will baptize with the holy spirit and with fire.” The second witness, was seen at the baptism of Jesus marking his total identification with humanity: “And the words of God the father from heaven who said this is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased.” The Third witness to the messiahship of Jesus Christ strangely enough, is the Devil. That may come as a surprise but the third voice that speaks relatively to who Jesus is in this book of Luke comes from the one who is against him. Satan’s very opposition, helps to sharpen our own understanding as to who Jesus Christ is.

Very often, those who are the most against the Lord, will pay tribute to him in the strangest ways. Friedrich Nietzsche for example, in his great hatred for Jesus, nevertheless paid uncanny tribute to the person of Jesus Christ in what he wrote. Consider also the Brothers Karamazov by the Russian writer, Fyodor Dostoevsky. This particular work is a deeply moving story about three brothers, Dmitry, Ivan and Alachua; Alachua is the youngest and he is a Christian. In one sense the novel is a journal of his own pilgrimage. Ivan his brother is a cynical atheist who doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ. One of the most exciting moments in that particular novel consists of a very long and involved argument between these two brothers about Christianity. In the midst of this lively exchange, there is told what is called the grand inquisitor parable. It is a parable about Jesus in a Spanish setting concerning the temptation of Christ in the wilderness by the Devil. And surprisingly this parable isn’t given by Alachua the Christian, instead it is given by Ivan the cynic who tells the story to mock Christ and to discredit him.

The strange thing happens in the telling. Both brothers have become agitated during the debate, and emotions are running high and at the point of explosion. Finally as Ivan finishes his parable, Alachua the Christian responds with a classic reply, when he says, “But it makes no sense,” he cried, turning red “your poem is no disparagement of Jesus as you intended, its in praise of him.” Notice the dynamics there. When Ivan started to do when he gave this parable was to mock and ridicule Christ, but as has happened frequently through the centuries when we start to take on Christ in the kind of fashion, the more we interact with him, and try to figure out what Jesus would do and how he would react, the more the majesty and the wonder of who Christ is begins to loom large. In trying to show how irrelevant Jesus is to the late nineteenth century Russian, the portrait of Christ takes over and becomes completely out of hand for Ivan.

That is what happens in the wilderness. The Devil tempts Jesus Christ, and out of that temptation, we have the third witness as to who Jesus Christ is in that particular gospel. When the Devil finishes his temptation, we know more about Christ, and he is elevated even higher than he was before in our thinking.

There are three accounts of the temptation in scripture: Mark the first chapter gives a very concise and yet includes all of the essential items in those two verses that make up his account of the temptations. Matthew the fourth chapter gives us what we believe to be the chronological sequence in the order of events. Luke’s gospel gives us more of the logical, perhaps, or the topical sequence of ideas. So that these would differ in these ways.

Notice the nature of this temptation. First of all, was this a literal historical event in time and space, or was this purely a symbolic episode? Another question: was this confrontation with a real, personal Devil? Or was it with an imaginary evil abstraction symbolically depicted? Thirdly, did this encounter take place in a visible and audible encounter—did it appeal to the outward senses—did he actually hear and see? Or did this occur in the realm of his imagination—appealing to his inward consciousness—the way we get most of our temptations. Was this experience thrust upon Jesus reluctantly, or was this a voluntary act on the part of Jesus challenging a hesitant adversary to come forth and do battle? Could Jesus have yielded to these temptations and thus sin or was this a make believe encounter. Were these the first or the last temptations experienced? Or were these merely public temptations at the outset of his ministry?

There are a number of descriptive elements recorded for us that describe this ordeal—and this certainly is not an exhaustive list, but the fact that he was tortured with hunger during this time and spent with fatigue and suffering from the heat of the day and the cold by night, the fact that he would be absorbed with a sense of loneliness, that there was physical revulsion and agony of soul.

The purpose of these temptations seems three fold: first of all they were ordained of God as a testing, or a trial of character for Christ’s own sake. That is a kind of discipline if you please. This is underscored particularly in the writings of the book of Hebrews 5:7-10 which reads: "Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec" (KJV).

There was something that this brought out in Jesus in terms of character development—obedience to the Father—this kind of discipline, which is one reason for the temptation. Secondly, it was necessary to qualify him to become a sympathetic high priest. Hebrews 4:15 says that Christ was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Some might contest, Well that is not true. I know some saint who has been suffering and agonizing in a hospital bed for months. Did Jesus ever experience that? Surely Christ was not confronted with all of the modern expressions of temptation that we face today in the twentieth century world. I know a young man who was deserted by an unfaithful wife, certainly Jesus never went through that experience did he? Think of the biggest problem, the biggest temptation you have ever faced. Do you have something in mind? You say, well the Lord never faced that. Well, you are right, and so is the Bible right. Because although he did not go through your identical experience, even though he didn’t face your particular temptation he was tested in exactly the same basic way we are. We will see how that is the case.

A third reason that this is an example for us, for as we examine how Jesus dealt with these temptations, we’ll find that we have the same weapons, the same resources available that he exercised in this temptation. Peccability or impeccability that is the question. That is, there is a lot of debate in theological circles as to whether or not Jesus could have yielded to these temptations or not. Could Jesus have fallen? Part of our help in that is to realize the meaning of the Greek word used in this case, πειράζω (peirazō). This particular Greek word has a twofold meaning. It can either mean, tempting in the sense of inciting or enticing people to evil, seducing people to evil, or it can mean to test in order to prove the value and the worthiness of the object. Obviously it is the second meaning that is being used here, because God doesn’t tempt men with evil as James makes very clear in the first chapter of his epistle. We don’t test a genuine diamond to prove that it is phony, we test it in order to show that it is genuine, perfect. So that ultimately, we might suppose, everything else being considered, Jesus could not have fallen, and still have been the Savior and still have things turn out the way they did.

On the other hand, we have to claim that these were legitimate and genuine tests, and not “make-believes.” Again, we can leave it to the theologians with the ability to carve up Christ and say well it was within his divine nature he couldn’t have sinned, and in his human nature could have sinned. The problem with that is that he is a God-man, he is not half and half, he is not a demigod, and therefore how that duality of natures fits into one personality is something beyond our ability to solve. But we might would want to insist upon the fact the solicitation to sin was external, entirely external. It came from outside of Jesus. There was not sin nature within Jesus to respond to that temptation in that negative manner so that the temptation came completely from outside; while at the same time, it was real and not farce.

Historically there have been two positions on this question put in terms of their Latin phrases that mean either that he was not able to sin, or to say he was able not to sin (Potuit Non Peccare or Non Potuit Peccare). Just that little play on words has a tremendously different meaning as we’ll see.

More concerning though is that we see that pattern of attack that was aimed against Jesus. Satan really only has one basic pattern of attack. He is not that original; not that creative; he doesn’t have to be. We fall for the same trick all the time. He uses the same fundamental techniques as he has always used. He has a trilogy of temptations here, something for everybody. If we look for a moment at 1 John 2 where John indicates the nature of Satan’s approach or attack. 1 John 2:16 reads: “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world” (KJV). In other words, we have a three-fold pattern. We can see that same three-fold pattern in the temptation to Eve in the garden, back in Genesis 3:6 where she saw that the fruit was good for food, that is lust of the flesh, pleasant to the eyes, Lust of the eyes, and to make one wise, the pride of life. Christ faced that same three-fold pattern of attack as we’ll see. Satan today makes the identical appeals to us as we’ll see. For each of these temptations and each of the ones we face can be placed in one or more of these three basic categories. Either the consuming passion to do, the compelling urge to have, or the constant longing to be.

Notice the time, Matthew tells us in his description that, “then Jesus went into the wilderness.” Mark puts it “immediately or straightway”, and Luke simply has the word ‘and.’ We might ask “What is the significance of indicating that?” These words suggest a continuity between the temptations and what just happened previously to the temptations at the Baptism of Jesus. That was a highlight experience for our Lord. It was a moment of recognition publicly. A highlight experience, a mountaintop experience. What happens immediately after such a time? Temptation in the wilderness. That tells us something. That tells us that times of spiritual blessing are often times followed by times of trial, temptation, and depression. After the testimony, the test; after the dove, the devil.

Notice the place. We are simply told it was in the wilderness. Thought tradition has given us the title of Quarantania as the precise location. But we can picture in our mind at this point an area of dry, yellow sand with warped and twisted ridges; hills, like dust heaps; blistered limestone; shattered shingles in every direction. Bare and jagged rocks and everything shimmering with a furnace like heat. Its in that kind of atmosphere and environment that the Son of Man in utter loneliness withstands Satan for forty days and forty nights. What a contrast with the first Adam who in that gorgeous garden of Eden, that pristine paradise, was tempted and fell; whereas Christ conquered in the wilderness.

We have a stark contrast between the Garden and the barren desert; between the various kinds of animals, where the preparation involved in the environment, where we have the one who should not have fallen but did; the other who should have fallen, but didn’t. Paradise lost, paradise regained. We have a vivid contrast between these two types of temptation.

This confrontation did not just happen; nor did it happen just because Satan arranged the encounter. This meeting was God ordained and that Christ went out into the wilderness under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to find the Devil. He compelled the adversary to enter into direct combat. He is not being cornered by the enemy; he’s led out to meet the enemy. It might be reasonable to assume that Satan would very much have liked to escape this kind of encounter, because it wasn’t set up on his terms. Usually the Devil tries to put something between himself and his victim, so as to hide his own evil personality in the process. But in this case the initiative is on the side of the Divine, not on the side of the diabolical. I wonder if that tells us if we shouldn’t be defensive against the foe, but that we should press the fight—we have a legacy here to press the fight. Notice further that Christ did not resist Satan in his deity, one part of his personality, if anything, stresses the manhood of Jesus in his responses. That is, he didn’t assert his divine authority; he didn’t use supernatural power; he didn’t call upon miraculous intervention of Angels; or otherwise we would have had no pattern to follow. But as we’ll see, Christ used something that available to all of us; his weapon was the Word of God. His source of power was the fullness of the Spirit. His victory was based upon his utter dependence upon the Father.

Notice Luke’s rendition of this for just a moment, paying attention to the first verse and the fourteenth verse. In Luke 4:1we are told that Jesus was, “full of the Holy Spirit” and returned from the Jordan and was led by the spirit for forty days in the wilderness tempted by the devil. Notice, he was “full of the Holy Spirit.” If we look at verse fourteen, Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee. So he went into the wilderness full of the Spirit. While he was in the wilderness, he was being led by the spirit, and he exits from that temptation in the power of the Spirit. Anyone can do his own preaching, but notice the fullness of the Spirit, becomes the power of the Spirit, how? Through the process of testing. A lot of people are crying out for the power today; the fullness becomes the power through testing.

Looking at these temptations one by one in a little bit more detail we see what their spiritual applications might be to us today. The first phase of the temptation, and we’ll use Matthew’s order here, is what we might call “The snare of the shortcut,” where the tempter aims his first shot at the loyalty of Jesus to the will of his Father. He is testing self identity, his own self awareness. Notice the avenue of approach. The Devil is appealing to his sense of hunger, which is a natural drive, physically—it is a morally neutral urge. It’s a God created sense to eat when we are hungry—it is simply to do what God intended us to do. So the Devil comes to Jesus in this context and says, now you’re naturally hungry according to God’s plan, but unfortunately there is no provision here for satisfying that craving in His plan. Therefore, you are justified in taking matters into your own hands and acting on your own initiative. In other words, be independent. This is a personal temptation of our Lord—be independent. The enemy is seeking to exploit and misdirect and degrade a proper desire. He is suggesting that a perfectly legitimate craving be satisfied in an illegitimate way. If a person acts independently of God for whatever reason, it is sin.

He comes to Jesus and he says, “If you are the Son of God” and when he uses that expression, ‘if’ in this case, it is ‘if’ for the sake of argument. The technical term is a first-class condition in Greek, which can mean an assumed reality. Satan is accepting the title of Son of God for the purpose of argument. He is not questioning the Deity of Christ with this ‘if’ but it is almost as if he were saying ‘since’ (but we must resist the temptation to translate it as ‘since’). However, it would be absurd to think the Devil does not actually know who Christ is. In this context, it is like a boss who complains when he comes home about all those employees at the office and finally his wife has all he can take and she says, “If you are the boss, why don’t you something about it.” She is saying, since you’re the boss, act upon it. Since you have the power and authority, do something about it. That is the invitation of Satan in this case. It is an invitation for Christ to establish his own authority. Since you’re the Son of God, prove it by satisfying your hunger pangs. I mean what is the use of that position without corresponding privileges? What is the value of being Son of God, unless you can make use of all that name implies? This is truly subtle and duplicitous. A hungering Son of God? He doesn’t begin with a point-blank denial of the truth does he? That would be too obvious. We too are tempted to satisfy our legitimate longings outside the will of God. We’re tempted to establish our own authority and thereby deny the absolute authority of God over us. We can read a series of versus to see emphasize this point. At John 5:19, Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the father doing. John 5:30 reads, “I can do nothing on my own authority as I hear I judge and my judgment is just because I seek not mine own will, but the will of him who sent me. At John 8:28, Jesus said, “when you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak thus as the Father taught me. And he continues in verse 29, “He who has sent me, is with me, he has not left me alone, for always do what is pleasing to him. To add one more reference, at John 14:10, Jesus says, “Do not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words I say to you I do not say speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does His work.” What Jesus is saying, over and over and over again? The first Adam, the first man fell, why? Because he chose to walk in independence. The last Adam fulfilled the will and purpose of God because he was in subjection to the Father every step of the way. He didn’t fight Him tooth and toenail. He didn’t have to be dragged along the paths of righteousness. This is very important because the strength of personhood—we prove our manhood or womanhood, not by asserting our rights, but by submitting to His will, just as Jesus did.

Notice the appeal of Satan? He appeals on the physical level. What is Jesus response? – “It is written.” That should be our response as well. He refused to enter into any kind of argument and debate and discussion with the Devil. He simply stated and defined his own position. The moment we try to argue or question Satan, we begin to fight a losing battle. But notice how he used the word. He didn’t just stand there and wave his Bible around and use it like a magical charm. He didn’t just memorize five hundred verses. Of course, we are not opposed to memorizing scripture. There are those of us who might be walking Bibles; having an encyclopedic knowledge of a thousand verses or something. But some of us might admit we don’t know what half of the verses we have memorized mean. This begs the question, what is the value of knowing all those verses if we can’t apply them to a given situation?

What Jesus did was not just to waive a word and say somewhere in here it says this, you can’t do this to me. He based his stand upon a principle didn’t he. “Man shall not live by bread alone.” Man must wait upon divine provision. Satan had said, “Now since you are the Son of God”, but in reply what does Jesus say? “Man shall not live by bread alone.” I am here as man, I am meeting this temptation as human. What is that principle? When he says man shall not live by bread alone, he is saying the physical shall not dominate. It is so easy to think that all people need for the welfare is material satisfaction. Jesus is replying here that there are deeper needs, and if these are not met, even though a person is well fed and well clothed and well housed, he becomes discontent. That if we have to make a choice, an obviously spiritual sustenance must come first. For God has made us for himself and we’re to seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. But this really raises a question, Are we dominated by the physical? By the material?

We might chuckle about it, but when the finances are not coming through we wonder if God’s calling is real. We are so dominated in our thinking by the physical, by the material. We are tempted to paddle our own canoe; to be independent. If God doesn’t provide, make provision, then we’ll provide for Him, we’ll take up the slack. Christ was tempted that way, but he triumphed for our sakes.

The second temptation we might call “playing to the gallery.” Here the test is one of relationship and the Devil comes; he has failed to persuade him from turning aside from the path of dependence upon the Father, so now Satan comes and directs his efforts against that principal of strength; that strength that found its fulfillment in Jesus’ utter confidence in the Father. Here is an attempt to destroy that beautiful relationship between God the Father and God the Son. He is taken to the pinnacle of the temple, that little wing of a temple in Jerusalem, hundreds of feet above the Kidron Valley; whether that was physically taken or whether he was mentally taken there, we won’t argue at this point; but there he is and the word of Satan is “Cast yourself down.”

Again, it is a very sneaky temptation, for here was an attempt to force Jesus to act upon that principal of trust. He is asked to demonstrate his complete confidence in God by doing something extraordinary. Make a spectacular display of your trust. It is interesting, here at the beginning of our Lord’s ministry, he is asked to prove he is the Son of God by coming down from the parapet of the temple.

We will find that at the close of his ministry, he is again asked to demonstrate he is the Son of God, by coming down from the cross. It is suggested if he does that, if he does come down, he will win the allegiance of men to him, and yet Jesus in both occasions recognizes that it would indeed be a come down—and therefore he refuses to come down. Demonstrate your messiahship by a spectacular sign, that’s something the Jews loved. How the world loves the sensational. What a stir it would have made had Jesus jumped down suddenly and in dramatic fashion, from the dizzy heights, to the courts below thronged with worshippers. Hadn’t the prophet of old said that the Lord would come suddenly to his temple. Besides there was the promise that God “shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone” (Psalm 91:11-12, KJV).

This passage in the Psalm 91 is not intended for daring God, but for trusting him. The devil is very sneaky in quoting that verse of scripture, to omit the little phrase, “in all thy ways.” Here is an enticement, to deliberately depart from God’s way. That was the method that many false messiahs used as they were constantly arising. According to Flavius Josephus there was a famous Egyptian pretender who promised that with a word he would just lay flat the walls of Jerusalem. Legend has it, Simon Magus promised to fly through the air and perished in the attempt.

Here was an attempt at recognition before God’s timetable. Let’s suppose that someone were to jump off the top of the highest building in the country and land in a gentle fashion without being squashed. He’d be a special person, wouldn’t he? This time, he is using an if with a question mark. If that experience of forty days ago, when you think you heard from heaven the voice, “this is my beloved son, if that was real, and if you are really the son of God then force God’s hand. Here you have been led of the spirit into the Mojave desert, you’ve lost all track of civilization, your water and food supplies are running out, your are feeling pretty weak; were you really called here? You begin to question your sanity, you begin to question your relationship to God. Is he really with me after all? Give some tangible evidence of your relationship to God. Yet Jesus never acted on the principal that the ends justifies the means. Had he yielded to this impulse, he would have been a sensation, but he would not have been a savior.

Frequently, we are tempted in similar ways. Perhaps in our witnessing, perhaps in our lifestyle as a Christian; to make people stare. Let’s adopt some cheap device or stunt. Beware the sensational, because that kind of feat has no future. To retain power and influence, means to produce even greater sensation next time. Wonders are apt to be nine-day wonders. This year’s sensation is next year’s common place. If imitation is the best form of flattery, it is very striking to note that Satan begin to flatter the Master by copying his technique by quoting scripture also. Notice where he takes that quotation from, the book of Deuteronomy. Jesus replies, it is written again. In other words, we can’t isolate that text from its context. Again notice the familiarity with the Word is not proved by the length of the quotation or how obscure the reference may be, but by whether we can apply that word to the need of the moment.

So Christ says that to cast myself from the wing of the temple into that yawning abyss below would really be tempting God and that would indicate a lack of trust. Only when we doubt a person, do we make experiments to discover how far that person can be trusted. Real trust never trifles; never tests or tries; real trust abides in calm confidence. So often we fall here because we want to be adventuresome and exciting and dashing and extraordinary; its as if we want to put the Almighty on the spot and say this we’re going to do and we’re going to force your hand into proving that you are our God. Really what we are showing is that we have no trust in His will to unfold its purposes through our patient waiting upon Him.

Third temptation is forcing the issue. Here is a test of Jesus’ goal or mission. While at first Satan suggests something reasonable and then something questionable; but now he is suggesting something that is definitely wrong. He casts off all of the disguise, all of the camouflage; no longer is he trying to be subtle. In sheer desperation having been forced out in the open, he aims at luring the Master away from the pathway of perfect service. He offers him all the kingdoms of this world, if Jesus will just bow down and worship him. What made that offer so tempting is that Jesus had come into the world for that very purpose—to win the world to himself, to seek and to save that which was lost. Here is offered the very thing he came to seek, but at a price. The kingdoms of this world are temporarily under the delegated authority of Satan. Whether people realize it or not, they are under the spell, the dominion of the enemy; they are submissive to his way, they are obedient to his law; the prince of this world still reigns.

Luke tells us the he revealed these kingdoms to Jesus in a moment of time. Perhaps if he feared to let the picture linger lest Christ would discover how worthless that prize was. No one is looking. How often we fall when no one else humanly is watching us; forgetting that God sees us. Here is again the temptation that comes to all of us, to take shortcuts. We failed to heed the axiom that there is no gain without pain. There is no crown without a cross. Jesus replies that he’ll win the kingdoms, but not by paying homage to Satan, but rather by evicting Satan from those kingdoms. Notice Satan only asks for worship; but Christ knew that if anyone worships Satan, he will also be in bondage to him and serve him. So, we have worship and service, that are very closely linked together.

Christ conquered the tempter and so can we. We don’t overcome the devil by being strong-willed. We don’t overcome him by long years of experience. We don’t overcome him by an excellent education. We triumph by using the same weapons he had. We stand on the Word of God, written. We are utterly dependent upon the Heavenly Father.