Blog

Hebrews 4:15 says “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.” (NIV)

In this essay, we will look at the temptations of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 4, and expositionally go through each of the temptations of Jesus, asking crucial questions and seeing how Jesus dealt with temptation can encourage us today when we find ourselves alone on the battlefield fighting spiritual battles. But first, we will look at a couple of philosophical objections to the idea that God incarnate could experience real temptations to sin. Once these apologetic preliminary issues are dealt with, we will then look at the biblical text and see how the first temptation of Jesus mirrors Israel’s lack of trust in God in their demands for bread, and specifically what Jesus’ quotation of Deuteronomy 8:3 has to do with Satan’s doubt-planting suggestion “IF you are The Son Of God”, turn these stones into bread. The second temptation involves an interesting discussion of what Satan was trying to achieve, and how his tactics can involve using the Sword Of The Spirit on ourselves. How Satan misuses scripture and how Jesus parries his attack is a warning that (1) Satan will try to use God’s word against us, so we mustn’t just memorize it, but properly understand it. And (2) Jesus was implicitly endorsing a principle of the Grammatico-Historical interpretation of scripture; namely the principle to let clear passages interpret the unclear. Finally, I will answer a question that has puzzled readers for ages; why does Satan think he owns the whole world, such that he can offer to give it to Jesus in exchange for worship?

How Could God The Son Be Tempted In The First Place? – The Problem Of James 1:13

Before we get into the text, it’s important we address an important apologetics issue pertaining to the doctrine of the incarnation. Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Arian groups try to argue that Jesus can’t be God on the basis of connecting Matthew 4 with James 1:13. In James 1:13, we read “When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;” (NIV) If God cannot be tempted, and Jesus was tempted, then it would seem to follow that Jesus can’t be God, but merely a human or an incarnate angel.

However, this inference is a problem for a number of reasons. First and foremost is that the deity of Christ is abundantly attested in virtually every book of The New Testament, either explicitly or implicitly, with the most explicit passages being John 1:1-3, John 8:58, John 10:30, and Philippians 2:5-10. But there are many examples even in a book like the gospel of Mark. ^[1]It would take me too far afield to mount a biblical defense of the deity of Jesus Christ in this article. To see where I mount a defense from the gospel of Mark in particular, see my video “The … Continue reading The biblical attestation to Jesus’ divinity is too abundant and clear to take this option. So how do we reconcile James 1:13 with Matthew 4? Well, I see two interpretive options. The first is that James is using “God” not to refer to the entire divine nature, but simply of The Father. As philosopher and theologian Dr. William Lane Craig writes “In the pages of the New Testament, then, we find the raw data which the doctrine of the Trinity later sought to formulate in a systematic way. The New Testament church remained faithful to its heritage of Jewish monotheism in affirming that there is only one God (Mk 12.29; Rom. 3.29-30a; I Cor. 8.4; Jas. 2.19; I Tim. 2.5). In accord with the portrayal of God in the Old Testament (Is. 63.16) and the teaching of Jesus (Mt. 6.9), Christians also conceived of God as Father, a distinct person from Jesus His Son (Mt. 11.27; 26.39; Mk. 1.9-11; Jn. 17.5ff). Indeed, in New Testament usage, ‘God’ (ho theos) typically refers to God the Father (e.g., Gal. 4.4-6). Now this occasioned a problem for the New Testament church: If ‘God’ designates the Father, how can one affirm the deity of Christ without identifying him as the Father? In response to this difficulty, the New Testament writers appropriated the word for God’s name (Yahweh) in the Old Testament as it appears in Greek translation in the Septuagint (kyrios = Lord) and called Jesus Lord, applying to him Old Testament proof-texts concerning Yahweh (e.g., Rom. 10.9, 13). Indeed, the confession ‘Jesus is Lord’ was the central confession of the early church (I Cor. 12.3), and they addressed Jesus in prayer as Lord (I Cor. 16.22b).” (emphasis mine in bold) ^[2]Dr. William Lane Craig, “A Formulation and Defense Of The Doctrine Of The Trinity”, — … Continue reading In other words, to walk the fine-line between affirming Jesus is God yet not making modalistic sounding statements, they typically referred to the Father as “God” and affirmed the deity of Jesus by calling Him “Lord”, crediting Him with the creation of the universe, applying OT texts about Yahweh and basically saying “This is about Jesus”, etc. Although, as Craig himself later points out in his essay, sometimes they threw caution to the wind and explicitly called Jesus God (e.g John 1:1). Given this, there is a good chance that James is just referring to The Father. And if that’s the case, then of course God The Father cannot be tempted! God The Father doesn’t have a human nature! It was not the Father who longed to fill His stomach with bread, but The Son!

A second way of reading this is to say that God cannot feel the force of the temptation. This is what I put forth in my very old blog article titled “Does James 1:13 Contradict Jesus’ Deity?” In that article, I said that there are two senses in which God could be said to be tempted, one of which would be possible, and the other impossible. It would be impossible to make God feel the force of the temptation. But you could still tempt God in the sense of trying to persuade him to commit such an act. I could try to persuade God to sin, but He would not feel the pull of temptation throughout my persuasion efforts. For example, you might hate ice cream, and I could try to persuade you to buy some. In this sense, I’m “tempting” you to ruin your diet. But because you hate ice cream, you don’t feel the force of the temptation. Likewise, Satan could tempt Jesus by trying to persuade him to turn rocks into bread, throw him off the temple roof, and bow to him, but that doesn’t mean he felt the force of that temptation.

I’ve since come to favor the first of the two options, as I don’t want to say that Jesus just scoffed at all the devil’s temptations and blew them off like smoke. If that were so, then the words of Hebrews 4:15 would be of little comfort. “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.” (NIV)

How Could God The Son Be Tempted In The First Place? – The Metaphysical Modality Problem

Another issue is what I’ve decided to call “The Metaphysical Modality Problem”. Although it’s a very fancy-sounding name, this problem is that since Jesus is God, how could he, actually sin? If He is God, and God is incapable of doing anything evil (Deuteronomy 32:4, Psalm 145:17-19, James 1:13), then it seems like Jesus’ victory over these temptations was inevitable! It was broadly logically impossible for Jesus to give into any of the devil’s temptations! ^[3]Philosophers distinguish between two kinds of logical possibility. Strict logical possibility and broad logicaly possibility. For something to be strictly logically impossible, it would mean that it … Continue reading If Jesus was incapable of sinning, then how are the temptations not just divine showboating? How can we be inspired by his trumphs over his temptations if, unlike we ourselves, he wasn’t even capable of giving in?

Before I respond to this objection, allow me to give a preliminary explanation of what type of philosophical model I adhere to in order to “make sense” of the incarnation. ^[4]I use scarequotes here because, despite this model showing how the doctrine of the incarnation is logically coherent, that doesn’t mean I fully understand how Yahweh could become a true, … Continue reading That model is Dr. William Lane Craig’s model which has become dubbed by some Neo-Apollonarianism. Dr. Craig’s model consists of three “planks.” The first is that Jesus is one person with two natures (a human nature and a divine nature). The second plank is that the Logos was the rational soul that animated Jesus’ body. When the Logos was conjoined with a human body, Jesus assumed a full human nature. As certain attributes of humanity (rationality, will, emotion) were present in the Son already before the incarnation, and all that was needed for a full human nature to be actualized was to conjoin these with every other attribute that a human has, but that the Son did not have prior to his conception in Mary’s womb. The third plank is that the divine aspects of Jesus are largely subliminal. Time doesn’t permit a full defense of this model, readers are urged to check the following footnote for sources to learn more. ^[5]For my own defenses of Craig’s model, see my blog post “Is The Doctrine Of The Incarnation Coherent?” as well as a one hour lecture I did on YouTube by the same name. “Is The … Continue reading What is pertinent for this subject is that last feature. When harmonizing Christ’s human nature and divine nature, most of the time, it’s pretty easy. How could Jesus be omnipresent, but he had to walk everywhere? Well, because He’s omnipresent in His divine nature (the Logos), but his human body is spacially located. How could God be eternal and yet have a beginning in the womb of Mary? The Logos pre-existed the birth of the body of Jesus of Nazareth. In other words, he had a beginning in his human nature, but not in his divine nature. etc. The conscious life of Jesus, on the other hand, has always been a lot stickier. Jesus is God, God is omniscient, and yet Jesus didn’t know the time of his second coming (Mark 13:32) nor do we have the impression that he was speaking in full sentences in the manger. This is where Dr. Craig’s model really shines, in my opinion. Jesus’ knowledge of everything from auto mechanics to quantum mechanics was largely tucked away in His subconscious. As Jesus grew up and learned more and more, or when The Holy Spirit enabled him, that which was already present subconsiously becomes conscious. In this way, Jesus could simultaneously know something and not know something. The beauty of this is that this isn’t at all foreign to our own cognitive experiences. We all have experiences in which we know that we know something, like a person’s name, but we just can’t bring it to our conscious awareness. We know that the name of that celebrity, or that Pokémon, or that adjective you want to use is in your mind somewhere. But you just can’t seem to make yourself remember it. If someone were to ask you “What was that actor’s name?” you could honestly say “I don’t know.” Maybe you Google the movie you and your friend are watching, look at the cast on IMDB, and then it hits you! “Oh yeah! Leonardo DeCaprio!” This very nicely accounts for how the omniscient second person of The Trinity could, during his earthly tenure, display an ordinary human conscious life, prophesies of future events excluded.

This plays into the temptation of Christ because, while Christ was literally incapable of committing sin, it may not be the case that He was aware that He was incapable. Dr. William Lane Craig gives a nice analogy; “…suppose you’re in a mad scientist’s lab and you really believe that he has a time traveling DeLorian. He leaves you to guard the lab with strict instructions, “Do not take the DeLorian out on a spin through time!” Now you might be sorely tempted to take a journey through time during his absence—after all, you could come back as soon as you left so that no one would be the wiser! You might have to really struggle to resist that temptation. Little did you know that the scientist was a quack and there was no possibility of your taking a jaunt through time! But you did your duty; you resisted temptation and might even deserve to be commended for it and might have been strengthened in your moral life by this exercise of your will.” ^[6]Dr. William Lane Craig, “Question Of The Week #73: Temptations Of Christ”, September 8th 2008, –> https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/temptations-of-christ Dr. Craig also gives the analogy of someone being on a diet and strongly resisting the urge to eat chocolate that they mistakenly think is in the refrigerator. Despite being unable to violate their dieting plan (since the cake is not in the fridge to eat in the first place) this person doesn’t know that, and yet still overcomes their urge to give in. Dr. Craig concludes that “Examples like these show very convincingly, I think, that in order to be tempted to do something, we needn’t be actually able to do the thing we’re tempted to do.” ^[7]Ibid.

Given this, I cringe whenever I hear a Christian say something like “Well, of course Jesus didn’t sin. He’s God!” This really downplays the humanity of Christ and pictures Jesus casually shrugging these temptations off like they were nothing. I don’t at all think such a view is philosophically required of us, and I don’t think such a view does justice to the biblical text.

The First Temptation – Turn These Stones Into Bread

With these apologetic issues dealt with, let us now turn to an examination of the biblical account of Jesus’ temptations in the wilderness. In Matthew 4:1-4, we read “Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.’ But he answered, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God’.” (ESV)

Jesus fasts for 40 days! That’s a long time to go without food! This is when Satan decides to come and attack the incarnate Logos, when he is weak and vulnerable. We should probably imagine Jesus being light-headed and weak-kneed. He is grossly malnourished. Whatever he weighed during his baptism, he likely lost a lot of weight. This is when Satan decides to strike. This is when Satan always strikes. Satan doesn’t strike you when you’re at your strongest; he comes after you when you are vulnerable. He comes after you when you have your guard down. He comes after you when he thinks you’re most likely to give into your fleshly desires rather than obey God. That has been true in my own life, but here we see it in the life of Christ. And it makes special sense here; since Jesus is no ordinary human. Satan surely thought that in order for this to be a fair fight, Jesus had to been brought to this weakened state. So he waited…and waited…and waited, patiently stalking his prey as the lion that roams the Earth searching for souls to devour (1 Peter 5:18). Now is the time to strike!

“IF you are The Son of God,” Satan says, “turn these stones into bread.” Notice what Satan says here; “IF”. If, if, if. It’s one tiny little word, but it makes a big difference! The word is “ei” in Greek. Not “Since you are the son of God”, not “Because you are the son of God”, “If you are the son of God.” It is a conditional word. Satan is saying “If it is really true that you are the son of God, then prove it. Prove it to me. Prove it to yourself. How do you know that you aren’t some deluded cult leader who thinks he’s divine? You’re THE son of God? And yet you’re out here starving to death? If that were really the case, prove it here and now by using those divine powers of yours! Turn these stones into bread!” Although I think that the term “crafty” is an appropriate translation of he Hebrew word “arum” in Genesis 3:1, I do like the King James rendering of that verse, which says “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.” ^[8]For those who would dispute that the serpent in the garden of Eden is Satan, I urge you to check out my essay “The Serpent In Eden: A Case For A Seraph Named Satan” in which I argue … Continue reading “Subtil is an archaic spelling of subtle, mostly found in older English literature or the King James version of the Bible meaning the same i.e., cunning or crafty,” ^[9]Marcus Froland, “Subtle VS. Subtil – What’s The Difference?” September 16th 2024 –> https://twominenglish.com/subtle-vs-subtil/ And using the word “if” (ei in Greek) was a very subtle way of getting Jesus to doubt His identity.

Jesus responds with a citation of Deuteronomy 8:3, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God’.” and decides not to turn gravel boulders into gravy biscuits. However, what does this Torah verse have to do with anything? Sure, there is a reference to bread – “man shall not live by bread alone” – so it’s kind of relevant, but what about the part about living “by every word that comes from the mouth of God”?

First, it should be noted that Jesus doesn’t quote the entire verse. If you look up Deuteronomy 8:3 in your own Bible, you’ll get a much longer verse. “And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.“ (ESV, emphasis mine in bold)It is pretty common among pastors and Bible scholars to teach that Jesus’ 40 day wilderness fastings, and the temptations he faced there, mirrored Israel’s 40 year wanderings in the desert (Matt. 4:1-11; Deut. 8:2; Heb. 3:7-11). In Israel’s case, they disbelieved God (Heb. 3:19; Num. 14:11). On multiple occasions, they accused Yahweh of taking them out from Egypt into the desert just to kill them (Ex. 17:3; Num. 14:2-3; 21:5). Even after he provided for them time and time again (Ex. 16:4-35; 17:6; Deut. 2:7), they doubted Yahweh (Ps. 78:19-20; 95:8-11). They completely forgot about Yahweh’s promise to Abraham to make a great nation through them (Gen. 12:2-3; 15:5). They completely forgot about His promises to lead them to a land flowing with milk and honey (commonly known as The Promised Land) (Ex. 3:8, 17; Num. 13:27; 14:8). They forgot that corporately, they were God’s Son (Ex. 4:22-23; Hos. 11:1). They doubted their identity. And this lack of faith (in both the trust and allegiance sense) lead them into all kinds of sin that angered Yahweh (1 Cor. 10:5-10; Ps. 78:40-41).

However, Jesus, as the eternally generated individual Son Of God (John 3:16), knew who he was. He knew of all of God’s promises both to Him and to the world. Jesus knew He was The Son Of God. His reference to Deuteronomy 8:3 was a subtle message to Satan “I am not going to doubt my identity. I know who I am and what God The Father has sent me into the world to do. If I really, truly needed bread to keep from dying right here, right now. My Father would turn these stones into bread. He would provide bread for me in this wilderness just as He did to the people of Israel long ago.” Now, what Jesus really needed in this instance wasn’t bread, but “every word that came from the mouth of God.” This word would refute the enemy’s doubt-planting seed that maybe, perhaps, Jesus isn’t really the son of God after all.

If you turn back in your Bible a measly one chapter to the temptation narrative, we read that “Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, ‘I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?’ But Jesus answered him, ‘Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.’ Then he consented. And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'” (Matthew 3:13-17, ESV)

The word from God that gave Jesus sustenance was “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Jesus had only recently heard these words a mere month prior to this temptation. Surely, like John The Baptist, Jesus Himself heard the booming voice from God the Father announcing Jesus’ sonship. It was this word that Jesus relied on, not the bread that his stomach was craving. It would not have inherently been a sin for Jesus to miraculously cause stones to turn into bread. However, if Jesus had done this, he would have been relying on Himself and not on God. He would have been acting on the doubt that Satan may have (successfully or unsuccessfully) planted in His mind about Who He was.

Although the parallel here is clearly between righteous Jesus and unrighteous Israel, I can’t help but draw a parallel to Satan’s temptation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. That temptation also involved food, the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and it also involved God’s word. First, Satan asked Eve “Did God really say you couldn’t eat from any of the trees in the garden?” (Genesis 3:1). The suggestion is absurd on its face. If God had prevented Adam and Eve from eating from literally any of the trees in the garden, they would have starved! Eve responded, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” (Genesis 3:2, ESV) Eve rightly countered the attack with a quotation from God’s word. She combatted the lie of the serpent with the truth of God’s word. However, she made two mistakes (1) She added to the words (God did not say they couldn’t touch it in Genesis 2:16-17 when he gave the command), and (2) She only quoted it. When the serpent contradicted what God said, rather than continue to believe and apply the word she just quoted, she decided to listen to the word of the serpent. Proverbs 3:5 says “Trust in The Lord with all your heart and do not lean on your own understanding.” Adam and Eve leaned on their own understanding, rather than trusting in the Lord.

I have written a lot about spiritual warfare lately (in fact, I’m doing it right now!), so for those who have read my past recent essays will likely anticipate that at this point, I’m going to bring up Paul’s Armor of God passage from Ephesians 6. In Ephesians 6:10-19, Paul commands the Ephesian believers (and us by extension) to suit up for battle and he gives the Christian several pieces of metaphorical armor. In Ephesians 6:10-19 (ESV), the Apostle Paul wrote “Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel,”

Among the pieces of the armor is The Sword Of The Spirit. The Sword of The Spirit, Paul says, is The Word of God. In my recent essay “Evangelism: Non-Violent Conquest Warfare”, I argued that the “Word of God” when used by a soldier in The Armor Of God as one soldier amist a massive army, most likely refers to the gospel message. The Gospel is preached all over the world, and the gods of the nations previously allotted to those nations (see Deuteronomy 4:19, Deuteronomy 32:8-9, cf. Genesis 10-11) will lose their ground, having their territory taken over by Jesus, the one true God and King. They lose ground as more people across the world, in every nation, give their allegience to King Jesus. However, I also said that our typical individualist interpretation of the sword was valid as well. Sometimes you are fighting spiritual battles as an individual follower of Christ against a small band of devils. And when they try to assault your mind with lies, doubts, fears, the scriptures are what we use to fight back. In Matthew 4, we see Jesus as a master swordsman parrying the strikes of the serpent, slashing the throat of the dragon, and impaling the father of lies! (Genesis 3, Revelation 12:9, John 8:44). Moreover, as I pointed out in “Evangelism: Non-Violent Conquest Warfare”, Jesus blocked the firey darts of the wicked one with “The Shield Of Faith (Allegiance)”. Jesus was loyal to His Father God, The King. His loyalty or allegience was what drove him to resist temptation. He refused to commit cosmic treason against His Father!

So, Christian, will you emulate your King and Master? He has shown you how to best the devil. You don’t need to outwit the devil. You cannot. The devil was more crafty than any other creature God had made at the very birth of humanity (see Genesis 3:1). And they say it takes 10,000 hours to master a craft. Satan has had thousands of years to perfect the art of deception. And if Dr. William Lane Craig’s ancient Adam model is correct, which he defends in his book “In Quest Of The Historical Adam: A Biblical and Scientific Exploration”, he possibly has had up to a million years to practice! You can’t outsmart a guy like this! Thankfully, you don’t have to. God your Father is infinitely smarter than Satan. If you know his word, you can beat him. Put on every piece of the armor, and practice your swordsmaship skills. Read The Bible, memorize it, study it. Know how to exegete it. Get into commentaries, listen to sermon series. Do all that you can to mine The Bible for all that it’s worth! As the Psalmist wrote, “I have hidden your word in my heart that I might not sin against you.” (Psalm 119:11). When the heat is on, you may not have time to grab your leather bound Bible and flip to a passage that you need. You may not have time to reach into your pocket and open your Bible app. The time for practicing sword training is during peace time, not during war! When things are going well, when the pressure is not on, when your heart and soul aren’t under attack, that is the time for you to study, study, study! Jesus wasn’t walking around that desert with a Torah scroll tucked under his arm. He had the scriptures correctly exegeted and committed to memory! Ergo, when the devil attacked him, he didn’t open a scroll, he pulled The Sword Of The Spirit directly from within his being! Jesus hid God’s word in his heart, and He did not sin against Him!

Maybe the devil is trying to get you to doubt your identity. The Bible teaches that if you’ve received Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then you have become a child of God (e.g John 1:12). Perhaps you’ve given into a terrible temptation recently, and the devil wants to condemn you. “If you really were a child of God, you wouldn’t have done such a terrible thing.” Like Jesus, you can respond with the word of God. “It is written ‘If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness’. (referencing 1 John 1:9). Jesus is our model spiritual warrior! Let us follow Him as our captain!

The Second Temptation – Throw Yourself Down From Here!

Matthew 4:5-7 says “Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written,’ ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’ and “ ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.’ Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’ ” (ESV)

This passage strikes many readers as odd. Why is Satan trying to get Jesus to jump off the roof of the temple? And what’s up with this tit for tat Bible verse exchange between Satan and Jesus?

First, Satan’s goal: I agree with the interpretation of the late Dr. Michael S. Heiser who said that the reason why Satan wanted Jesus to throw himself from the temple roof was that he was “fishing for information”. That if Jesus threw himself down from the temple roof, Jesus would either be caught by angels as Satan’s misuse of Psalm 91 implied, and this would show Satan that he couldn’t kill Jesus, or secondly, Jesus would hit the ground, die, and be raised from the dead. Or thirdly, he would go splat and not come back to life. But in no case would Jesus be able to jump and not give Satan the intel he’s vying for. Satan would either be informed that he couldn’t permanently kill Jesus or that he could. The only way for Jesus to win this one is to not take the bait. If Jesus doesn’t jump, Satan learns nothing. ^[10]One of the places that Dr. Michael S. Heiser talked about this was in this excerpt of a course lecture he gave on YouTube titled “Why Did Satan Quote Psalm 91 To Jesus?”, June 7th 2021 … Continue reading

Second; Satan’s misuse of scripture: in the footnotes of your English bible, or in a hyperlink in your Bible app, if you don’t know what scripture Satan is quoting, it will tell you. He is quoting Psalm 91:11-12. But why? Well, for Satan’s purposes, this prima facie sounds like a blanket guarantee of protection. Satan’s argument is essentially, “There’s no reason for you not to jump from the temple roof. You will be completely safe. After all, Psalm 91:11-12 says that angels will hold you up. You won’t so much as strike your foot against a stone! So go ahead! If you’re the Son Of God, you will be able to claim the promises of this Psalm.” I’ve been doing some research on the book of Psalms, especially Psalm 91. And I’ve concluded on the basis of a number of evidences within the text that Psalm 91 is a spiritual warfare psalm. Unlike a lot of psalms that make use of soldier and battlefield imagery, Psalm 91 is not merely a promise of protection to Israelite soldiers on a literal battlefield against flesh and blood warriors. This Psalm names several Canaanite deities (in Hebrew, but in English are seen as things like “Terror” and “Pestilence”). And a lot of animalistic imagery attributed to Satan in the biblical canon clusters together in verse 13 (i.e Lion, serpent, young lion, dragon of which will be crushed under the foot of the faithful Yahwist). Moreover, Psalm 91 was found among a number of exorcistic Psalms in the second temple period showing that this was recognized as pertaining to spiritual evil during the Second Temple Period. The Psalmist says not to be afraid of Deber and Quteb because Yahweh Most High would protect them. Any Christian today fighting external spiritual evil can claim the promises of this Psalm for himself, provided He’s abiding “in the secret place of The Most High” “under the shadow of The Almighty” (Psalm 91:1, KJV). The ultimate purpose of the Psalm is to comfort and encourage the hearer/listener/singer that whatever the context in which they are up against spiritual evil, they have a strong fortress in Yahweh that will keep them from being ruined by them. Hence, we can find ourselves in this Psalm, for we all fight these spiritual adversaries who are not of flesh and blood. Space does not permit a full defense of my view that Psalm 91 is a spiritual warfare Psalm. Interested readers are encouraged to check out my essay “Psalm 91: Your Battle Anthem Against The Devil” for an in-depth exegetical treatment. Given that this is a spiritual warfare Psalm, it makes Satan’s misuse of this Psalm especially heinous. It’s bad enough to twist God’s word to justify your own sinful agendas, but it’s even worse when he’s using the very Psalm that promises the faithful protection against himself!

One thing Jesus could have done was simply to exposit the entire Psalm and explain to Satan that “This Psalm promises me protection against YOU, Satan, and your forces, not against the force of gravity.” That would have been sufficient to refute the devil or anyone who takes verses out of context to make The Bible look like it’s teaching something it doesn’t actually teach. However, Jesus doesn’t do this. Instead, he responds to Satan’s quotation of Psalm 91:11-12 with a citation of Deuteronomy 6:16; “You shall not put the LORD your God to the test” (ESV) Was Jesus just too hungry and tired to bother giving a lecture on the meaning of Psalm 91 and decided to give a shorter response that would do the trick? That might have been one reason. However, I think something deeper was going on.

What does it mean to put The Lord to the test? The way some people have treated this text has tended to a very fideistic bent. Some have used this verse (Deuteronomy 6:16) as a proof text for Fideism. That we are not to test God, not to question him, not to think critically about his word, and so on. However, if you look at the immediate context, you can see that “test” isn’t meant to be taken in the scientific sense. Rather, it’s in the sense of “Don’t try my patience.” Because the preceding and proceeding verses (verses 14, 15, 17, and 18) are commands to the Israelites not to worship other gods and not to disobey his commandments, as they had done in the wilderness. It has nothing to do with putting the Bible under historical scrutiny or anything like that.

Indeed, this interpretation contradicts what Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 to “test everything, hold onto the good” and Jesus’ command to not believe him unless he does the work of his father (John 10:37). And you have Malachi 3:10 in which God commands the Israelites to test him. If we take the command not to put the Lord to the test in a scientific or intellectual sense (i.e the sense of confirming, or verifying something), then there is a contradiction between that verse and these other verses that I have mentioned. However, again, the context shows that God is telling Israel not to try his patience by sinning against him. Do not put God to the test by breaking his commandments, worshiping other, gods, and so on.

The thorny issues come in Matthew 4:7, in which Jesus uses this passage against Satan. Satan quotes from Psalm 91:11-12 and says “If you’re The Son Of God, throw yourself from this building.” Jesus’ response seems to apply Deuteronomy 6:16 in an epistemological way rather than in the way described above.

Saying that Jesus used this passage incorrectly is unthinkable since Jesus is God (John 1:1-3, 14, and other verses). If we say that Deuteronomy 6:16 has multiple meanings (like Psalm 45 quoted in Hebrews 1, for example), then we preserve the deity of Christ, but we face another problem. Yes, it has two meanings, but the second meaning contradicts other places in scripture. The best explanation seems to be that in throwing himself from the building, Jesus would be forcing the Father’s hand. Trying to manipulate God into doing what we want out of a spirit of doubt is sinful.

As D.A Carson writes “The second temptation (Luke’s third) is set in the ‘holy city’ (v. 5), Jerusalem (cf. Neh 11:1; Isa 48:2; Dan 9:24; Matt 21:10; 27:53), on the highest point of the temple complex (hieron probably refers to the entire complex, not the sanctuary itself, which Jesus, not being a Levite, would not have approached; but see on 27:5). Josephus (Antiq. XV, 412 [xi.v]) testifies to the enormous height from the structure’s top to the ravine’s bottom. Late Jewish midrash says that Messiah would prove himself by leaping from the temple pinnacle; but apart from its lateness, it mentions no spectators. So it is unlikely that this was a temptation for Jesus to prove himself to the people as a new “David” who will again rid Jerusalem of the “Jebusites” (i.e., Romans—contra Kirk, ‘Messianic Role,’ pp. 91–95).

Satan quoted Psalm 91:11–12 (Mt 4:6) from the LXX, omitting the words ‘to guard you in all your ways.’ The omission itself does not prove he handled the Scriptures deceitfully (contra Walvoord), since the quotation is well within the range of common NT citation patterns. Satan’s deceit lay in misapplying his quotation into a temptation that easily traps the devout mind by apparently warranting what might otherwise be thought sinful. Psalm 91:11–12 refers to anyone who trusts God and thus preeminently to Jesus. The angels will lift such a person up in their hands like a nurse a baby (cf. Num 11:12; Deut 1:31; Isa 49:22; Heb 1:14). At the temple, the place where God has particularly manifested himself, Jesus is tempted to test his sonship (‘If you are the Son of God’) against God’s pledge to protect his own. Deuteronomy 6:16 was Jesus’ reply.

Jesus’ hesitation came, not from wondering whether he or his Father could command the normal forces of nature (cf. 8:26; 14:31), but because Scripture forbids putting God to the test (v. 7). The reference alludes to Exodus 17:2–7 (cf. Num 20:1–13), where the Israelites ‘put the lord to the test’ by demanding water. So Jesus was tempted by Satan to test God; but Jesus recognized Satan’s testing as a sort of manipulative bribery expressly forbidden in the Scriptures (cf. esp. J.A.T. Robinson, Twelve, pp. 54–56). For both Israel and Jesus, demanding miraculous protection as proof of God’s care was wrong; the appropriate attitude is trust and obedience (Deut 6:17).” ^[11]D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 113–114.

So in summary, God is not against us “testing” to see whether or not he exists, is trustworthy, whether The Bible is from him if we have legitimate doubts and questions that need answering. What angers him is hard heartedness that results in an unbelief in which no amount of evidence would ever be sufficient. We see God The Son display this same exasperation when the people demand that He give a sign (after all the miracles, healings, and fulfilled prophesies he had already done!!!) and Jesus calls them “a wicked and adulterous generation” and tells them that no sign would be given to them except the sign of Jonah, which referred to his bodily resurrection. (Matthew 12:38-48). If anyone had adequate grounds to believe in God (in both mental assent, trust, and allegiance), it was Jesus! For Jesus to demand proof that He was The Son of God by throwing himself from the temple would have been a violation of putting God to the test. Jesus refused to be like hard-hearted Israel who would not trust Yahweh, no matter how much He did for them.

Think about it this way; it is not wrong (especially in this day and age) to demand proof that the girl you met on the dating site is not an AI generated fake. You meet her, verify that she’s real, and then that question is settled. But would she make a good wife for you? She needs to prove this. You need to verify that she is a good, kind, selfless woman who would love you and your potential children. So, you date for a while and find out that she is indeed a “woman of valor” (Proverbs 31). Then you propose to her and she says yes. At the alter, you say “I just don’t know about this. Do you REALLY love me? Would you REALLY make a good wife for me? Before we go through with this, can you give me some more evidence that you’re going to be a good wife?” What do you think would happen? She’d probably be very insulted, hurt, angry, and she’d probably storm off in tears. How do you think Yahweh feels when he’s given us all the reasons we need to believe in and trust him, but we still say “Not enough. Prove yourself to me.” This is when testing crosses the line from being intellectually responsible to being hard hearted. This is what distinguishes honest doubt from dishonest unbelief. And whereas Israel failed to trust God, Jesus succeeded.

The Third Temptation – Gain The Whole World By Worshipping Me!

Matthew 4:8-10 says, “Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, ‘All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.’ Then Jesus said to him, ‘Be gone, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” (ESV)

This portion of the text is probably the most widely misunderstood. Christians typically make fun of Satan here because he is offering God his own creation. After all, we have passages like Psalm 24:1 which says “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it;” (NIV) Satan doesn’t own this place? Or does he? Or rather, DID he? I won’t spend a lot of time on this as I’ve already explained this at length in other blog posts and essays, but for many years an entire spiritual framework has not been on Christian’s radar. It is increasingly coming back into the evangelical consciousness thanks to the work of the late biblical scholar Dr. Michael S. Heiser, as well as folks like Brian Godawa, Ronn Johnson, Mike Chu, Douglas Van Doorn, and others who have read and have been influenced by his scholarly work. It’s called The Divine Council Worldview.

The Divine Council Worldview is a framework for understanding the Bible that posits Yahweh (God) presides over an assembly of spiritual beings called the “divine council,” a concept reflected in passages like Psalm 82:1 and 1 Kings 22:19-22. This council is comprised of “gods” or “sons of God” (Hebrew: elohim or b’nei elohim)… [Ps 82:6; Job 1:6]. The Deuteronomy 32 Worldview is a critical component of this, explaining the origin of polytheism and wicked nations. After humanity rebelled at the Tower of Babel… [Gen 11:1–9], God judged them by disinheriting the nations and assigning them to these seventy elohim of his council… [Deut 32:8–9]. These appointed divine beings subsequently became corrupt and turned the nations toward false worship and evil… [Deut 32:16–17; Ps 82:6–7]. God then chose Israel as his own inheritance to redeem humanity and reclaim the disinherited nations, a mission ultimately fulfilled by Jesus Christ… [Isa 49:6; Col 2:15].

With this framework in mind, we can begin to see a little bit of what might be going on. But there’s more! It has been persuasively argued that Satan was Appolyon, the Roman sun god and was the head of the Roman pantheon. In his book “Tyrant: Rise Of The Beast (Chronicles Of The Apocalypse Book 1)” Brian Godawa writes “Satan is called ‘the ruler of this world’ (Jn. 12:31, 14:30-31, 16:11), in 2 Cor. 4:4, ‘the god of this world.’ In Eph. 2:2 he is called the ‘prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.” … It seems as if the satan is the only Watcher god in authority over the nations, like he has all the power.’ …” Much tradition identified Satan as the angel of Rome, thus adapting the angels-of-the-nations idea to the situation of Roman world hegemony. Since Rome had conquered the entire Mediterranean region and much else besides, its angel-prince had become lord of all other angel-princes of the vanquished nations. This identification was already explicit at Qumran, where Rome and the Romans (the ‘Kittim’ of the War Scroll) are made the specific allies and agents of Satan and his host. Similarly in the New Testament, Satan as the ‘archon of this world’ (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11) or ‘god of this aeon’ (2 Cor. 4:4) could scarcely avoid being identified as the special patron of Rome.” ^[12]Godawa, Brian. Tyrant: Rise of the Beast (Chronicles of the Apocalypse Book 1) (p. 318). Embedded Pictures Publishing. Kindle Edition.

If Rome ruled the world, and Appolyon ruled Rome, and Appollyon is Satan, then it would follow from the Deuteronomy 32 framework that Satan owned and ruled the world. So what Satan is basically saying to Jesus here is “You know you and your Father allotted the nations to all of us elohim at the Babel event, right? Well, I’ve risen to the head of them all. I am now the king of the gods. Even the gods of all these other nations bow to me, just as the humans of these nations bow to Rome. I remember what you said to me in the Garden. That some day a descendant of Eve would come to crush my head. I remember what you said to Abraham; that some day all the nations would be blessed through his seed. Well, since I own all of this, I can give this to you. All you need to do is bow.” Now, I do not think on the basis of 2 Corinthians 2:8 that Satan knew about the crucifixion and the resurrection. He probably did not know that Jesus was to die as a penal substitution as well as to ransom us from the power of death. ^[13]I adhere to both Penal Substitutionary Atonement and The Ransom Theory. The former teaches that Jesus was punished in our place. The agonizing, torturous death that would be inflicted on me in Hell … Continue reading However, Satan probably did know that the reclamation of the nations was going to be Messiah’s job. For Pete’s sake, so many of the Psalms talk about this from Psalm 2 to Psalm 82!

Jesus didn’t take the bait. He quoted Deuteronomy 6:3, which says, “You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.” (ESV) It is interesting that Satan didn’t preface his temptation with “If you are the Son Of God” as he did the previous two. Perhaps Satan had simply given up on trying to get Jesus to doubt his identity. He went straight for the jugular. It was now or never. Satan wanted Jesus to commit the ultimate sin; idolatry. To pay homage to a creature rather than the Creator. But once again, with the Shield of Allegiance and The Sword Of The Spirit, Jesus was protected from this attack.

If you thought we were done talking about what’s interesting about this temptation, think again. Have you ever wondered why Satan, the arch nemesis of Yahweh, is pretty much absent from The Old Testament narrative? Sure, we know on the basis of later Revelation that Satan was the serpent in Eden. ^[14]Again, if you disagree with this, I cannot stress enough that you should read my essay titled “The Serpent In Eden: The Case For A Seraph Named Satan” and he shows up in Job 1 and 2 to get permission from God to afflict Job, ^[15]I know that this is disputed. Dr. Michael S. Heiser in his writings (e.g “The Unseen Realm”, first edition, pages 56-58, Lexham Press) denies that the adversary in Job is the same Satan … Continue reading, but overall, the top cosmic villain seems to be absent for most of the biblical story. I submit to you that Satan was hidden in plain view. And the identity of the Old Testament Satan ties in with Israel’s failure to obey the first and second commandments.

Remember The Golden Calf Incident from Exodus 32? Well, biblical scholar John D. Currid in his commentary on Exodus writes “Bovines were commonly used to represent deity in the ancient Near East. Bovine cults flourished in ancient Egypt. Apis was the most important of the Egyptian sacred bulls; Isis, queen of the gods, bore cow’s horns on her head, and Hathor had a bovine head. The calf was also a religious icon associated with the worship of the Canaanite gods El or Baal. An example of a molten calf (made of silver) has been uncovered at the site of Ashkelon on the Mediterranean coast.” ^[16]Currid, John D. Exodus (Vol. 1): Chapters 1–18. Evangelical Press, 2000. (emphasis mine in bold).

Very general observations from Currid. Sarna gives us a little more detail. As far as the word calf, it’s… “calf Hebrew ʿegel is a young ox or bull. Thus, Psalm 106:19–20, in reference to this episode alternates ʿegel with shor, “ox.” Throughout the Near East the bull was a symbol of lordship, leadership, strength, vital energy, and fertility. As such, it was either deified and worshiped or employed in representation of divinity. Often the bull or some other animal served as the pedestal on which the god stood, elevated above human level… Rashbam and other medieval Jewish commentators have pointed out that the people ‘could not have been so stupid’ as to believe that this freshly manufactured image was itself a deity responsible for the Exodus from Egypt. Rather, they felt that the object was a potent symbol that acquired a numinous quality, and that they could invoke the Deity through it.” ^[17]Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. The JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

From these scholarly quotes, we can see that many deities were represented by bulls. However, I suspect that one particular deity might have been behind this infamous golden idol; Baal. I have a theory that the spiritual entity behind Baal in the Old Testament is the entity we know as Satan in the New. Think about it; Baal plays a pretty big role in tripping up the Israelites throughout a big chunk of The Old Testament history. Ugarit was just North of Israel. And when it comes to directly challenging God, capital S Satan has a tendency to leave the biggest showdowns to himself. It wasn’t just any fallen angel who tempted the incarnate Logos in Matthew 4, it was Satan. It would make sense that Yahweh’s main rival in The Old Testament (the pagan god who gets more screen time in the OT than any other) would be the adversary that the New Testament authors tell us to be on the lookout for in so many places in the New Testament. I.e. Satan. We know the gods are real, but we dont necessarily know what their real names are. We know what idolaters call them. Perhaps Baal the Satan we all know and hate.

For a time this was just a hunch, but I think there is more evidence to back this up than a mere hypothesis. The article “Echoes of Baal: The Baal Cycle, the Bible, and the War for the Throne” by John Daniels argues that the Canaanite god Baal is a manifestation of the biblical Satan, serving as a mask for the Adversary’s ancient rebellion. The argument is primarily based on four points: (1) The Baal Cycle is viewed as Satan’s propaganda, portraying Baal as a counterfeit king who seizes authority by force (defeating Yam and Mot) and whose rise to power, which intimidates even the high god El, mirrors Satan’s ambition to “ascend above the stars of God” and usurp the divine throne (Isa 14). (2) Baal’s palace on Mount Zaphon is a blasphemous imitation of Yahweh’s cosmic mountain and throne room (Ps 48; Ezek 28). (3) The Bible systematically engages in polemical reversals by taking Baal’s mythological claims—such as controlling the sea/chaos monster (Leviathan/Yam) and conquering death (Mot)—and applying them exclusively to the sovereignty of Yahweh (Ps 74; Isa 51), thereby unmasking Baal as a pretender. (4) Jesus himself solidifies this connection by referring to the power used to cast out demons as belonging to Beelzebul (“exalted Baal”), explicitly linking the ancient Canaanite deity to Satan (Matt 12). ^[18]This is just a summary of Daniels’ arguments. For a fuller treatment, see the article “Echoes Of Baal: The Baal Cycle, The Bible, and The War For The Throne” by John Daniels, … Continue reading

And so, with all of this said, I think we have a high antecedent probability that the bull at the base of Mt. Sinai was (even if unwittingly) a representation of Baal/Satan. Satan as usual, wanted to steal God’s thunder. ^[19]Pun intended, since Baal was a storm god. Since Jesus’ temptations mirror the temptations that Israel faced during the 40 days/years, here we come full circle! Satan is trying to Jesus to fall into the same trap that the Israelites at Sinai fell into! He is trying to get him to worship him. Jesus Christ, the true Israel, resists the temptation and remains faithful to God The Father alone!

Angels Came And Ministered To Him?

Matthew 4:11 says “Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to him.” (ESV)

This is such a short and sparsely detailed verse, that’s it’s often overlooked. The Holy Spirit helped me not to overlook this. I’ve read this verse before, and typically I’ve envisioned some angels showing up, embracing Jesus and basically going “There there. It’s over now. You’ve won.” However, two things stuck out to me this time; First is that angels showed up when Jesus needed them. Satan taunted Jesus with the prospect of angels showing up to His aid with his misinterpretation and misapplication of Psalm 91:11-12. Here, angels show up when the battle is over. Jesus really is the Son of God, and the angels immediately coming to his aid is evidence of that. Secondly, what does it mean when it says that they “ministered” to him? Does this simply mean they hugged him and said “There there?” Does it mean they gave a pep talk?

The Greek word for “ministered” is diakoneo. And The Lexham Theological Workbook explains that “διακονέω (diakoneō). vb. to attend, serve. Refers to actions associated with providing care, often in the form of humble service.
The verb diakoneō is related to the noun διάκονος (diakonos, “servant”) and similarly can refer to table service or another action associated with hosting. As Mary sits at Jesus’ feet listening to his teaching, Martha asks him, “Lord, is it not a concern to you that my sister has left me alone to make preparations (diakoneō)?” (Luke 10:40). More commonly in the NT, diakoneō describes the Church’s faithful service in response to God’s grace: “Just as each one has received a gift, use it for serving (diakoneō) one another, as good stewards of the varied grace of God. If anyone speaks, let it be as the oracles of God; if anyone serves (diakoneō), let it be as by the strength that God provides” (1 Pet 4:10–11).” ^[20]Eric Lewellen, “Servant,” in Lexham Theological Wordbook, ed. Douglas Mangum et al., Lexham Bible Reference Series (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014).

Given this data, there is a very good chance that the angels served Jesus food! And this reminds me of another faithful follower of Yahweh who took Baal head on; Elijah. If you remember the story of the showdown of Elijah with the prophets of Baal, you’ll know that after Elijah and Yahweh won the competition… [1 Kgs 18:38-40], Elijah fled for his life because Jezebel wanted to kill him [1 Kgs 19:1-3]. Elijah was despondent. He asked Yahweh to just go ahead and kill him… [1 Kgs 19:4]. Yahweh assured him that he was not the only faithful person left, and that he had reserved thousands for Himself who had not bowed the knee to Baal [1 Kgs 19:18]. Elijah went to sleep, and the next morning, an angel of The Lord served him food and water. He ministered to him [1 Kgs 19:5–8]. The chance of a culinary connotation of the word “ministered” is high! God the Father gave bread to his Son after all. God gave his Son food he so desperately needed. We don’t know how far away from civilization Jesus was, but it’s possible that without regaining his strength from food, he wouldn’t have been able to make it back. The Son trusted The Father and The Father came through.

Conclusion

The temptations of Christ as recorded in Matthew 4 is a brief but theologically dense portion of scripture, and I’ve barely even begun to scratch the surface of things we could talk about. I hope that you have been informed and edified. The days are evil, and supernatural evil is working on hyper drive. But Jesus has gone before us. The king of the devils has taken our King head on and Jesus has come out victorious. Jesus truly lived the life we couldn’t live, as well as dying the death we all deserve. This same Jesus, who was truly man and tempted in every way that we are, is willing to come to our aid when we face temptations of many kinds. This is His job as high priest in the order of Melchizidek. (Psalm 110:4, Hebrews 7:17). This same Jesus interceds to The Father on our behalf. He bridges the gap between God and humanity because he has the nature of both. Jesus can help us be more like Him, and He will if we are willing to be discipled by Him. Jesus is King, Priest, Rabbi, God, the atoning sacrifice for our sins, everything we need for salvation in its fullest sense (i.e justification, sanctification, glorification). As an old hymn goes

“In your hearts enthrone him; there let him subdue
all that is not holy, all that is not true:
crown him as your Captain in temptation’s hour:
let his will enfold you in its light and pow’r.” ^[21]The lyrics to the hymn “At The Name Of Jesus” were written by Caroline Maria Noel. She was an English hymnwriter who wrote the text in 1870, drawing inspiration from Philippians 2:9-11. … Continue reading