THE TEMPTATIONS OF CHRIST: RUSE, RITUAL, OR REALITY?
The Wilderness Test
Matthew and Luke both give detailed accounts of the three temptations. Mark on the other hand only states that Christ was tempted. The two former accounts are almost identical except the order of the second and third tests are reversed. Luke’s order, preferred by Dr. Young1, matches the geography of desert to mountain top to Jerusalem (the main events of Jesus’ life—— temptation, transfiguration, crucifixion). Matthew’s order may also be viewed by relative importance——physical, moral and spiritual.2 Matthew’s order will be used here.
Jesus’ temptation comes at the heels of a spiritual high point, his baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit for the ministry at hand. It could be that only Jesus was aware of the Spirit’s descent and the Voice from heaven. Luke has the Voice speaking directly to Jesus (You are My Son) while Matthew has it speaking in a more general sense (This is My Son).
Jesus is then led by the Spirit into the wilderness for forty days to be tried——tested, tempted—— by the devil. The temptations could have begun at that time and lasted throughout the forty day period (Mark) culminating with these last three being recorded (Luke). Matthew states that after the forty days these three temptations occurred. Jesus fasted forty days with some commentators stating abstinence from both food and water3 while others state abstinence from only food. Others state he could have eaten at some periods when he had food.4 The latter two views show human possibility, the first view would necessitate divine help or strength.
The temptations can be viewed from many different angles.
Vann and Meagher summarize the varying ways. The Fathers of the
Church saw in the temptations a parallel with that of Adam and
Eve. The first was illicit sense pleasure, next was vainglory,
and last was avarice. Godet saw the temptations as “referring to
the humanity of Jesus,. . . to his messianic work,. . . to his divine power” (taking Luke’s order). There may be the temptation
to “inordinate use of power over inanimate nature, over
men, over God himself.” Still others see this as an attack on “Jesus in body, mind, and spirit.” They also go on to say, “Most modern exegetes then are of opinion that Satan’s purpose was to
seduce our Lord from fulfilling that ministry in the manner
willed by his Father.” Yield to the popular notion of messiah
and forget the role of the messiah God had envisioned.5
Lachs states three legitimate ways to explain the
temptation. The first follows the motif of rabbinic literature
and “indicate that Jesus is the Messiah who will overpower the
forces of evil as represented by Satan.” Next, it could be “Jesus’ struggle with himself and overcoming the yezer hara, the evil inclination, part of all men” which is personified by Satan. Thirdly, there is a model for the Church and individual who must face temptation and overcome it.6 The first view seems to be held by conservatives, the second by liberals, and the third is compatible with either of the other views with Jesus giving the story as a model for his disciples. This testing in the desert can be compared and contrasted with the temptation of Adam and Eve in the Garden. The Garden temptation was in a paradise while Jesus was tested in the desert. Jesus was alone, Adam and Eve were in fellowship together. The first couple had all they needed to be satisfied, Jesus fasted forty days and was on the verge of starvation. Adam and Eve were at their best, Jesus was at his worst. Adam and Eve could pass or fail, so it was with Jesus. The fruit was good looking and enticing, but how could a stone look appetizing (unless by this time it looked like bread!)? They (Adam and Eve)failed, He (Jesus) won.7
The temptations can also be seen as testing Jesus in each of the areas of Prophet, Priest and King.8 These areas will be dealt with under their proper headings.
Stone to Bread——A Material Messiah Versus True Prophet.
A prophet lives by the Word of God, he has no other occupation to support himself. His reliance is on God to sustain him——as one sees with Elijah, Elisha, and others. Man shall not live by bread alone, yet the widow was required by the holy man to bake a loaf of bread for him first, and then a blessing would follow. Nothing miraculous, just obedience to the word of God (through His prophet). God will provide for the one who is obedient and waits upon God.
Satan comes not as one who is an enemy taunting Jesus to fulfill his hunger, but rather as one who is “concerned” about Jesus’ well—being.9 Jesus has fasted forty days and starvation is setting in. He needs physical nourishment——now. What better way to provide for oneself than to make bread out of stones using supernatural power? But God supplies more than stones, He provides bread (material needs). Will a father give a stone when bread is required? How can one be satisfied with stone soup when a banquet is promised?
One could see this as a denial of the provision of God. Yet maybe this is more subtle. God’s provision cannot be denied—— Jesus knows better But God has given the ability to perform many things. Why not use God’s power and call into existence that which is not. Use your creative powers given you by God through the Holy Spirit for personal use (gain?). The idea is in God’s timing and in God’s way, He will provide.
The person who places his trust in a material messiah is interested only in the here and now. What is in it for me? This person requires all needs to be met for there to be “faith. ” The material messiah will meet the financial, physical needs while neglecting the spiritual. This is the type of messiah many have looked for found today.
The Pinnacle of the Temple——Re1igious Messiah versus Priest
The next temptation challenges Jesus! role as priest. This is why the Temple is involved. Satan takes Jesus to the Temple and places him at a point jumping from which would be lethal. Some view this point as the roof point overlooking the Kidron Valley.10 Others see it as a place in the sanctuary about 150 feet from ground level.11 Tradition states St. James the Less was thrown from this same place.12 Wherever the exact place was is not certain, but it is a place from which Jesus could jump and the angels of God, according to Satan’s view of Scripture, would bear Him up. All around would notice and Jesus would have the following he would need to become the religious messiah. Jesus would have revealed his true identity and all would worship him.
Another way to look at this could be that the devil is an angel, he is there with Jesus now. “Cast yourself down and I must bear you up! You and I can make a great team. I am here to take charge over you. Leave everything to me. With me as your manager we will have everyone worshipping you. ” This would be putting Jesus’ welfare into another’s hands besides God’s. It could also be seen as presuming upon God as protector to prove Himself.
A rough parallel today is the one who claims to be religious (maybe even a Christian) and yet lives a life of promiscuity. God is a God of health! He will protect that one against AIDS or any other disease which may be transmitted to him or a number of others through a sinful lifestyle. Yet a different ending may be in store for that person who presumes upon the goodness and love of God.
Could this be viewed also as a temptation to fanaticism, stressing the spiritual over the physical or at the neglect of the physical? The person looking for this messiah only requires a spiritual reward while anything physical or material is sinful. The stress is on the spiritual with risk to the physical. Also this one requires signs to be performed. This is the opposite of the material messiah.
Jesus suffered to become humanity’s High Priest who was tempted so that “he is able to succor them that are tempted (Heb. 2:17-18).
Offer of Victory! ——Politica1 Messiah Versus King
This third temptation (or test) offers Jesus what would ultimately cost him his life to receive. He was King of Kings, Mighty God who came in the form of man who laid aside his Godly attributes for the salvation of humankind. This earth is under the control of the Devil because of the Fall, yet Jesus can have it all back right now. “Resume your title, there is no need to go through this earthly existence, no need to experience hunger, pain, tiredness, death. Just bow to me and worship.” Liberation Theology wants this type of messiah. Nothing personal, just political freedom for the group involved.
All of these trials have the fulfillment of genuine needs and desires as their goal. Yet the shortcut route yields shortcut results. The ultimate goals are never reached. People who settle for one of the three lesser messiahs are short changed. Having a Christ who is not Prophet, Priest and King is having no Christ at all. Christ cannot be fully one of these without being all of them. The physical person settles for stone soup instead of a banquet. The fanatic is always needing a sign so he may believe. The political one settles for physical, political freedom when he really needs spiritual release.
Common Elements in Temptations
There are a number of common elements in the temptations of Jesus as compared with the trials of other men of faith. There are forty days of fasting for both Moses and Elijah. Forty days of rain during the flood, forty years of wandering in the wilderness. Forty is a number which stresses preparation.13 Andrews sees Old Testament elements and parallels with the temptations as forty days (and years), wilderness, hungering, ministering angels, Elijah, mountain, Moses, Israel.14
The Hero’s Test
The temptations of Christ are more than just the three which are recorded in Matthew chapter four and Luke chapter four and Mark chapter one. It seems to be that these temptations could be viewed as testings of a hero or a righteous one who is about to embark on his mission or quest which will involve more danger in the same form as trials themselves. Psalm 11:5 states, “The Lord tests the righteous, not the wicked.” The hero is tested to see what he (or she) is made of and how he (or she) will perform under danger, enticement, and in the face of death. It is not that these first trials are not real, since the hero could fail these before ever setting out on the mission.
Heroes in other religions and mythology have been tried under similar circumstances. Houghton compares Christ and Zarathushtra where both are offered reward if they will worship their opponent. Christ opposes Satan whereas Zarathushtra opposes Angra Mainyu.15
Rabbinic literature tells of the ten trials of Abraham. Montefiore states that there are “parallels in other religions and temptation stories of Buddha which may have influenced the Gospel narratives.”16 Of course for Montefiore, the Gospel narratives seem to be mythical (even if he states they have historical origin) putting the temptations into ideas better grasped by first century people. The inner struggles would be personified in Satan (as stated by Lachs in his second view cited above), whether by Jesus himself or by the narrators. “The whole story is ‘Rabbinic’ in form. Jesus at each temptation overcomes the devil by a quotation from Scripture, exactly in the Rabbinic manner.”17
Vann and Meagher list five reasons for temptation. First, is to test the virtue of the just person and enlighten that person since God knows all. Second, temptation checks a person’ s tendency to pride since God’s goodness can also be an occasion to sin. Next, temptation shows the devils that they are powerless against God’s grace. It also builds strength and character in the one tempted. Last, (according to St. Thomas) temptation shows the “greatness which grace bestows.”18
The Reality of the Temptations
If the temptations of Christ were not real then he would not have been “tempted as we are,” and therefore the temptations would have been false. It would not matter if he were sinless since there would be no temptation to overcome.
If the temptations were real but Christ (being God Almighty) was incapable of sin, the temptations would still not be real. They would only be a ritual which the Son of God had to go through in a program with a predestined outcome no matter what anyone did. As a play is written and acted out by the actors, the participants would have no choice in their roles. Everything is under the omnipotent hand of God who in this scenario would be unwilling and too insecure to allow any deviation from His script which has been planned down to the most minute detail to assure His victory. This God risks nothing to gain what He has never released.
If, on the other hand, Jesus’ temptations were actually real, the reality of them would necessitate a possibility of failure. This seems to be Young’s position also.19 God in His desire to create humans in His own likeness must create them first with the ability to choose between good and evil. This is played out in the Garden of Eden as the choice between eating the forbidden fruit in disobedience or abstinence in obedience to God. As every good theologian knows, this test was very real——so real in fact that it cost the first couple their fellowship with God, their innocence, and there very existence in the Garden. cost them their very lives. Jesus’ temptations were just as real, and with the same possible outcomes——His very existence as one knows it.
Jesus had more temptations throughout his career. When confronted by John the Baptist he was tempted to think of himself more highly than he ought. Peter acted in the devil’s behalf when he tried to deny the sufferings of the Lord. Also on the cross Jesus was not free of temptation. “Come down, and then we will believe,” was the cry of soldier and high priest alike. Temptations come to all, Christ overcame all of them so that he could bring ail into fellowship with the Father through Himself as High Priest who himself is the Sacrifice offered for sin. He is the Prophet who meets all need with the Bread of God. He is the King who rules in the life of the one who has been freed from sin and death and yields all authority to Him.
NOTES
1 Dr. Brad Young, Jesus the Jewish Theologian (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995) 27—28.
2 Alastair Kennedy, The Temptations of Jesus (Achimota, Ghana : Africa Christian Press, 1979) 10.
3 Young, 29.
4 F. L. Anderson, ed. James Orr, “Temptations of Christ, “
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. V 1976 ed. . 2943 , 2944 .
5 Gerald Vann, Meagher, The Temptations of Christ (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1957 ) , 25-27.
6 Samuel Tobias Lachs, A Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke (Hoboken: KTAV Publishing House, 1987) 50.
7 Ralph Earle, “Matthew, ” Beacon Bible Commentary, (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1964) ed. 55,56.
- 8 I have not found this idea elsewhere.
9 Vann and Meagher, 114.
10 ISBE, 2943.
11 Young, 30.
12 Vann and Meagher, 97. Yet they do not state where this is exactly.
13 Vann and Meagher, 54—55.
14 Mary E. Andrew, “Peirasmos”, Anglican Theological Review XXIV/3 (July, 1942): 230.
15 H. P. Houghton, “On the Temptations of Christ and
Zarathushtra,” Anglican Theological Review XXVI/3 (July, 1944):
166-175.
16 C. G. Montefiore, The Synoptic Gospels. ed. Harry M. Orlinsky, vol. 2 (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1968) 19-22.
17. Montefiore, 22.
- 18 Vann and Meagher, 46—49.
19 Young, 28.
