The Testing of Jesus

[paradox3]

Have seen the theory about Q before. It says that where Matthew and Luke share material that is not in Mark, they had another source. No one knows if it was a written or an oral source.

Why does no one think Matthew copied Luke or vice versa?

 

[Mystic]

Have seen the theory about Q before. It says that where Matthew and Luke share material that is not in Mark, they had another source. No one knows if it was a written or an oral source.

Definitely a written source because of all the word for word and word order agreements. Before there were Gospels, there were sayings of Jesus collections.
Q and the Gospel of Thomas are 3 such first century sayings collections.

Why does no one think Matthew copied Luke or vice versa?

(1) Matthew and Luke often alternate in the more orginal wording of their shared material.
(2) It seems inconceivable to scholars that Matthew and Luke would omit so much of the other's material if one Gospel used the other.

 

[jimkenney12]

Scholars sound like astronomers in the time of Galileo for whom it was inconceivable that the earth orbited the sun. What makes it inconceivable? Luke is often thought to be about ten years after Matthew. Followers of Jesus visited each others communities. All of the gospel writers had lots of stories to choose from and each chose the ones they wanted to use.

 

[Mystic]

This is perhaps the most neglected text in the 3 Temptation narratives:

"When the Devil had finished every test, he departed from Him UNTIL AN OPPIRTUNE TIME (Luke 4:13)."

Some Christians are under the false impression that Jesus was only tested in the wilderness. Luke is the only Gospel whose temptation narrative makes it clear that Jesus was in fact tested throughout his life. Tomorrow is Ash Wednesday, the supposed start of a 40 period of personal reflection and testing.
Here are just 4 NT texts that demonstrate how Jesus was tested throughout His ministry:

(1) "Abba Father. for you all things are possible; remove this cup from me; yet, not what I want, but what you want (Mark 14:36)."

Most pastors stress Jesus' ultimate submission to God's will. What gets lost is His initial demand that God get Him out of His fate!
It was a struggle for Jesus to embrace the mission of His atoning death via the agony of crucifixion.

(2) "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me (Matthew 27:46)?"

On the cross, Jesus is tempted to feel that the mission of His atoning death is a failure and that God doesn't really care about Him.

(3) "We have one (a high priest, Jesus) who in every respect has been tested, just as we are, yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15)."

Many Christians have a hard time embracing the implications of Jesus' full humanity. Jesus had to combat every human weakness just like us.

(4) "Son though He was, He had to learn obedience through the things He suffered (Hebrews 5:8)."

Discovering and obeying God's will was a lifelong struggle for Jesus, just as it is for us.

 

[paradox3]

The wilderness stories don't really portray Jesus struggling. They read more like Jesus easily passing 3 tests.

Forty days in the wilderness with no food would have meant considerable hardship. So we can't think of it as an easy time. But I don't see any indication he was actually tempted to give in to Satan.

 

[Waterfall]

The wilderness stories don't really portray Jesus struggling. They read more like Jesus easily passing 3 tests.

Forty days in the wilderness with no food would have meant considerable hardship. So we can't think of it as an easy time. But I don't see any indication he was actually tempted to give in to Satan.

Unless "Satan" represents his own thoughts he was battling.

 

[Mendalla]

The wilderness stories don't really portray Jesus struggling. They read more like Jesus easily passing 3 tests.

Forty days in the wilderness with no food would have meant considerable hardship. So we can't think of it as an easy time. But I don't see any indication he was actually tempted to give in to Satan.

Yeah, he kind of aces the test, eh. Guess that's the "Son of God" thing kicking in. Obviously, if I was writing this, there would be lots of angsty internal struggle. Think Jesus as emo.

 

[Mendalla]

Unless "Satan" represents his own thoughts he was battling.

Again, how I would probably play it. I might still have Satan appear, but it would be more symbolic. Maybe a hallucination caused by hunger and thirst or something.

 

[unsafe]

The wilderness stories don't really portray Jesus struggling. They read more like Jesus easily passing 3 tests.

You are right on here ------He was defeating the three Temptation that Satan uses on people ------

The First is ------ Lust of the Flesh ----Hunger -----

I say -----Jesus had not eaten and was hungry ----Satan uses this as his weapon to get Jesus to denounce His Sonship ---and Jesus uses God's Word as His weapon to defeat Satan's Attempt to do so -------

Matthew 4:1-11 NIV
3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”


I say ----The Sword of the Spirit is God's Word ----that cuts and divides and defeats our enemies -----Satan can and does use Scripture to Tempt us ---so we have to be knowledgeable of Scripture to defeat the enemy -----

God's word is our weapon against the enemy -------


The Second -----Pride of life -----

Satan uses Psalms 91:11-12 here to tempt Jesus and Jesus comes back with Deuteronomy 6:16 ---

Matthew 4:5-7 NIV

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple.

6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[c]”

7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[d]”


The 3rd Temptation -------The Lust of the Eyes -------

we humans love to look at beautiful things and lust after them -----adultery is a big one here ---

Matthew 4:8-10 NIV

8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.

9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[e]”

11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

I say ----So with this last one ---Satan is trying to get Jesus to avoid the Cross as Satan knows his defeat is coming if Jesus fulfils the Prophecy in the Old testament ----of being crucified -----

So the temptation of Jesus is an important event for believers ----------

 

[paradox3]

This is quite a different story depending on how we conceptualize Satan. I suspect for the Gospel writers, Satan was a real presence and not a metaphor for internal thoughts.

 

[Waterfall]

This is quite a different story depending on how we conceptualize Satan. I suspect for the Gospel writers, Satan was a real presence and not a metaphor for internal thoughts.

That thought may be what's called "presentism" or not.

 

[paradox3]

That thought may be what's called "presentism" or not.

Wouldn't it be called presentism if we projected our present day understanding on the gospels and said they must be metaphorical?

Or am I get muddled up with the concept of presentism? It's a new word for my vocabulary.

I have certainly heard of using present day morality to judge historical events.

 

[GordW]

Have seen the theory about Q before. It says that where Matthew and Luke share material that is not in Mark, they had another source. No one knows if it was a written or an oral source.

Why does no one think Matthew copied Luke or vice versa?

 

[Redbaron]

View attachment 7735

Would've been funnier if it had been George Santos.

 

[Mystic]

The wilderness stories don't really portray Jesus struggling. They read more like Jesus easily passing 3 tests.

The fact that the Spirit had to be "driven" or "cast" Jesus "into" the wilderness already implies resistance and struggle.

Forty days in the wilderness with no food would have meant considerable hardship. So we can't think of it as an easy time. But I don't see any indication he was actually tempted to give in to Satan.

The Greek "peirazo" means both "tempt" and "test" and implies that the temptation was very real. Don't forget that this Q text is a highly condensed account that is only interested is Jesus' biblically based responses to each temptation. A more accurate display of His temptation can be found in the report that He is "highly distressed and agitated" in Gethsemane when He demands to be released from His crucifixion fate (Mark 14:33, 36). Hebrews 5:7 says Jesus "offered up prayers and supplications with loud cries and tears to the one who was able to save Him from death."
His faith is sorely tested on the cross when He demands an answer to why God has abandoned Him.

 

[Waterfall]

Wouldn't it be called presentism if we projected our present day understanding on the gospels and said they must be metaphorical?

Or am I get muddled up with the concept of presentism? It's a new word for my vocabulary.

I have certainly heard of using present day morality to judge historical events.

No your definitions fine IMO, I just think we underestimate the ancients reliance on the supernatural, especially when they are surrounded by knowledgable and somewhat current philosophers. But that could be mixed with my version of presentism, lol.

 

[Mendalla]

I would say that while they may have been written with a literal supernatural in mind, there is still non-literal meaning even in the original context. E.g. the encounter with the Devil in this story might have been believed to have actually happened, but the Devil's actions are pretty clearly symbolic even in historical context. The difference between ancient and modern is that we might believe the Devil himself is symbolic, not just his actions. Same with the appearance of Elijah and Moses at the transfiguration. The significance for Jesus' ministry does not change that much if it is literal or symbolic, it is still clearly setting Jesus up as heir to the Hebrew/Jewish law and prophets. The difference is that in the case of the ancient understanding, it is God actually doing the setting up while in the modern, we believe it was the author putting in the symbolism for their understanding of Jesus.

 

[Mystic]

Let's look at the actual application of the 3 temptations to our situation.
(1) The temptation to change stones into bread exemplifies the temptation to take illicit shortcuts to gratification.
e. g. an unwillingness to pay the price of developing healthy and ethical habits because this interferes with the pursuit of immediately available pleasures; premature sexual pressure.

(2) The temptation to test divine protection by jumping off the Temple pinnacle exemplifies the temptation to set up a test for God to pass to earn your devotion and service.
e. g. "God, if you heal this physical condition or get me this job or romantic relationship, or solve this personal problem, then I'll serve your church with total devotion."
(3) The temptation to worship Satan in exchange for expanded political rulership reflects Jesus' temptation to be the political Messiah of Jewish expectation rather than the Suffering Servant that is truly Jesus' divine mission. 2 modern applications: (a) the prosperity Gospel; (b) the temptation to pursue success and prosperity at the expense of an ambition to find God's will for a life that serves God and helps others.

 

[paradox3]

Interesting that Mark alone has Jesus being driven into the wilderness. In Matthew and Luke, Jesus is led there.

In all cases it is the spirit providing the impetus. Luke alone tells us that Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Mark gives us no details about the actual temptations. Matthew and Luke describe them the same way although not in the same order.

There are angels to tend to Jesus in Mark and Matthew but not in Luke.

Luke alone has the devil departing until an opportune time.

Whew! No wonder it's so easy to conflate different biblical accounts of the same story! Luke is often the most descriptive writer of the three and Mark the most terse.

Other than writing style, I am not coming up with any reasons to explain the differences.

 

[Mystic]

Scholars sound like astronomers in the time of Galileo for whom it was inconceivable that the earth orbited the sun. What makes it inconceivable? Luke is often thought to be about ten years after Matthew.

AGAINST THE VIEW THAT LUKE USED MATTHEW:

(1) For the 2 Q sayings below scholars agree that Matthew has changed the offensive Hebraic Semitism "hate" to its true meaning, "love more than" to remove the apparent implication that chjldren should hate their parents.

"Whoever comes to me and does not HATE father and mother...cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:26)."
"Whoever LOVES father and mother... MORE THAN ME is not worthy of me (Matthew 10:37)."

(2) Scholars agree that Matthew has spiritualized Q's 4 beatitudes found in simpler form in Luke and expanded them to 9 from his special source material.
Thus, "Blessed are the poor" is spiritualized in Matthew to "Blessed are the poor in Spirit" and "Blessed are you who are hungry now" is spiritualized to "Blessed are you who hunger and thirst after righteousness."

AGAINST THE VIEW THAT MATTHEW USED LUKE

(3) In the next pair of Q verses, scholars agree that Matthew has changed the archaic Hebrew expression "finger of God" to his preferred expression, "the Spirit of God."
"But if it is by the FINGER OF GOD that I cast our demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you (Luke 11:20)."
"But if it is by the SPIRIT OF GOD that I cast our demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you (Matthew 12:28)."

AGAINST THE VIEW THAT MATTHEW USED LUKE

Conversely, in the 2nd pair of verses scholars agree that Luke has changed the vague "good things" to "the Holy Spirit."

"If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give GOOD THINGS to those who ask Him (Matthew 7:13)!"
"If you, then, who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give THE HOLY SPIRIT to those who ask Him (Luke 11:13)!"

Followers of Jesus visited each others communities. All of the gospel writers had lots of stories to choose from and each chose the ones they wanted to use.

Pontificated without evidence for the the relevant period--2nd half of the first century! If you were right, there should be evidence from contemporary literature for use of more than one Gospel, not just of the Gospel composed in that area. So where is your evidence from The Didache, Ignatius of Antioch's 7 epistles, and 1 Clement? You didn't know about Papias' important work on Gospel origins. So am I correct in assuming you haven't studied these other early Christian works either?