The title should really be "The Temptation of the Messiah".
I am surprised that despite all the preaching and exposition on this subject out there, I have not seen one individual nor scholar question WHY are these called "temptations" especially the first one?
It looks like no one has even ever noticed that two of the three temptations from Satan were not even bad at all if Satan did the same thing to us mere humans.
If Satan told me, "If you are really the son of your father, command your servants to serve me for a couple of days". You know what I would tell Satan? I would without hesitation say, "Gladly, just don't bother me afterwards". Now, would I have sinned? Would I be conscience stricken because I said "Yes" to Satan's request. No way, he did not tell me to do anything against the Word of God, no sir, no conscience there for me, I would gladly do as Satan would ask.
If Satan came back to me and said, "Why don't you drink a little more brandy than your usual and it will not harm your body." or "Why don't you join me for a good rare cuban cigar, and it will not harm your health?" I would without hesitation say "Be glad to, just don't bother me anymore after that". Would I be conscience stricken because I said "Yes" to Satan's request. No way, he did not tell me to do anything against the Word of God, no sir, no conscience there for me, I would gladly do as Satan would ask.
Even God Himself said YES to Satan when the adversary requested to mess with Job!
On his third request, Satan could come back to me and say, "I will give you anything this world can offer if only you fall down on your knees and worship me." Well, that is another story, I would have answered exactly the same answer that the Lord Jesus gave to Satan.
OK, so let's remove the third temptation. What about the first two? "Command that these stones be made into bread" and "Jump from this high place since anyway the angels will catch you".
Why would the first temptation be called a TEMPTATION? If I needed to do something within my power to help myself, why would it be considered a sin? That was exactly what Satan was trying to make Jesus do.
Why would the second temptation be called a TEMPTATION? Christ said, "You should not tempt the Lord your God". Which God? Who was Christ referring to? God the Father?...or Himself? It is pretty obvious from the plain language that Satan was asking Jesus to tempt God the Father. In this case, the sin was to tempt the Father. Hence, based on the previous logic we have put forward regarding the drinking of brandy or the smoking of a cuban cigar, there is really nothing wrong nor sinful about the second temptation had it been a case of tempting Christ Himself since that is no temptation at all had Christ been just an ordinary human being.
That means if I myself possessed the power to command the angels to catch me if I jumped from a high place to the rocks below, that would not be a temptation at all. In fact, I would do that to display my powers! So, why is it a temptation for Christ based on the Biblical writers' accounts of the events?
To understand this, one has to understand the real meaning and implications of the Kenosis declared by Paul in Philippians 2:7. We have discussed this concept on other blogs in this site but here is another angle that would make the concept of kenosis or the "emptying" of Christ in the Incarnation quite clear.
Actually such concept is quite clear if read by an honest Bible student with honest hermeneutics. I believe, in my case, the only reason I was not able to see this angle clearly earlier in my spiritual journey was because of the clouding and confusion of alternative theologies (I call them "alternative" but they are the mainline Christian theologies which did not sprout until the 16th century (1600 years after the first century church).
The kenosis is that actual and intentional act of the Lord Jesus Christ to surrender the right to use His powers for His own benefit during the Incarnation. In fact, this is already quite evident just reading the paragraph containing Philippians 2:7 in any Bible version.
This is one reason I do not blame the Jehovah's witnesses and similar cults for what they declare about the Incarnation, that Christ was obviously a man. Unfortunately, the Jehovah's Witnesses are entirely wrong in what they deny - the Deity of Christ.
Having digressed lengthily, we go back to why the first two "temptations of Christ" are called temptations by the bible writers. It should now be obvious that Christ in these 2 temptations was being given challenges by Satan to use His divine powers for His Own benefit and thus violate the act of kenosis described by Paul. So whereas, ordinarily, if not for the kenosis, these two temptations are not temptations at all! The turning of stones into bread was Satan's suggestion AFTER the 40 day fast of Christ. There is no hint at all that this temptation occured DURING the 40 day fast. The second temptation was just a display of Christ's own powers BY RIGHT! So, what was wrong with that?
Well, in the second temptation, it was not Christ who was tempted to use His powers but it was a suggestion from Satan for Christ to tempt THE FATHER to protect Christ if He willfully makes any careless or carefree attempt to expect divine intervention into his capricious or frivolous acts. THAT is why it was a temptation.
Furthermore, it is a model for Christians to follow in the relationship and prayer life with God. For example, it is like a heavy cigarette smoker praying to God to give him strong lungs. Or a diabetic praying for healing but always using high-potency sugar in pure "processed" form (white sugar, high fructose corn syrup, aspartame and most processed diet sugars) for sweetener. Both are cases of actually tempting God and these are prayers that God the Father will definitely frown upon and NOT answer.
As for the third and final temptation, there is no contest here. It is the Lord God only who should be worshipped AND served by any Kingdom-minded child of God.
I am surprised that despite all the preaching and exposition on this subject out there, I have not seen one individual nor scholar question WHY are these called "temptations" especially the first one?
It looks like no one has even ever noticed that two of the three temptations from Satan were not even bad at all if Satan did the same thing to us mere humans.
If Satan told me, "If you are really the son of your father, command your servants to serve me for a couple of days". You know what I would tell Satan? I would without hesitation say, "Gladly, just don't bother me afterwards". Now, would I have sinned? Would I be conscience stricken because I said "Yes" to Satan's request. No way, he did not tell me to do anything against the Word of God, no sir, no conscience there for me, I would gladly do as Satan would ask.
If Satan came back to me and said, "Why don't you drink a little more brandy than your usual and it will not harm your body." or "Why don't you join me for a good rare cuban cigar, and it will not harm your health?" I would without hesitation say "Be glad to, just don't bother me anymore after that". Would I be conscience stricken because I said "Yes" to Satan's request. No way, he did not tell me to do anything against the Word of God, no sir, no conscience there for me, I would gladly do as Satan would ask.
Even God Himself said YES to Satan when the adversary requested to mess with Job!
On his third request, Satan could come back to me and say, "I will give you anything this world can offer if only you fall down on your knees and worship me." Well, that is another story, I would have answered exactly the same answer that the Lord Jesus gave to Satan.
OK, so let's remove the third temptation. What about the first two? "Command that these stones be made into bread" and "Jump from this high place since anyway the angels will catch you".
Why would the first temptation be called a TEMPTATION? If I needed to do something within my power to help myself, why would it be considered a sin? That was exactly what Satan was trying to make Jesus do.
Why would the second temptation be called a TEMPTATION? Christ said, "You should not tempt the Lord your God". Which God? Who was Christ referring to? God the Father?...or Himself? It is pretty obvious from the plain language that Satan was asking Jesus to tempt God the Father. In this case, the sin was to tempt the Father. Hence, based on the previous logic we have put forward regarding the drinking of brandy or the smoking of a cuban cigar, there is really nothing wrong nor sinful about the second temptation had it been a case of tempting Christ Himself since that is no temptation at all had Christ been just an ordinary human being.
That means if I myself possessed the power to command the angels to catch me if I jumped from a high place to the rocks below, that would not be a temptation at all. In fact, I would do that to display my powers! So, why is it a temptation for Christ based on the Biblical writers' accounts of the events?
To understand this, one has to understand the real meaning and implications of the Kenosis declared by Paul in Philippians 2:7. We have discussed this concept on other blogs in this site but here is another angle that would make the concept of kenosis or the "emptying" of Christ in the Incarnation quite clear.
Actually such concept is quite clear if read by an honest Bible student with honest hermeneutics. I believe, in my case, the only reason I was not able to see this angle clearly earlier in my spiritual journey was because of the clouding and confusion of alternative theologies (I call them "alternative" but they are the mainline Christian theologies which did not sprout until the 16th century (1600 years after the first century church).
The kenosis is that actual and intentional act of the Lord Jesus Christ to surrender the right to use His powers for His own benefit during the Incarnation. In fact, this is already quite evident just reading the paragraph containing Philippians 2:7 in any Bible version.
This is one reason I do not blame the Jehovah's witnesses and similar cults for what they declare about the Incarnation, that Christ was obviously a man. Unfortunately, the Jehovah's Witnesses are entirely wrong in what they deny - the Deity of Christ.
Having digressed lengthily, we go back to why the first two "temptations of Christ" are called temptations by the bible writers. It should now be obvious that Christ in these 2 temptations was being given challenges by Satan to use His divine powers for His Own benefit and thus violate the act of kenosis described by Paul. So whereas, ordinarily, if not for the kenosis, these two temptations are not temptations at all! The turning of stones into bread was Satan's suggestion AFTER the 40 day fast of Christ. There is no hint at all that this temptation occured DURING the 40 day fast. The second temptation was just a display of Christ's own powers BY RIGHT! So, what was wrong with that?
Well, in the second temptation, it was not Christ who was tempted to use His powers but it was a suggestion from Satan for Christ to tempt THE FATHER to protect Christ if He willfully makes any careless or carefree attempt to expect divine intervention into his capricious or frivolous acts. THAT is why it was a temptation.
Furthermore, it is a model for Christians to follow in the relationship and prayer life with God. For example, it is like a heavy cigarette smoker praying to God to give him strong lungs. Or a diabetic praying for healing but always using high-potency sugar in pure "processed" form (white sugar, high fructose corn syrup, aspartame and most processed diet sugars) for sweetener. Both are cases of actually tempting God and these are prayers that God the Father will definitely frown upon and NOT answer.
As for the third and final temptation, there is no contest here. It is the Lord God only who should be worshipped AND served by any Kingdom-minded child of God.
No comments:
Post a Comment