Re: [XTalk] Matt 4:3//Lk. 4:3
>Fair point about temptation and testing: I'm aware of the argument, but
> Dear Jeffrey, you wrote:
> First of all, he is not tempted. He is tested. And there is absolutely
> no hint in the "temptation" story that Jesus is in need of, or is in any
> way concerned about, having it proved that he is the object of God's
> special favour. That he is -- and that he and the Devil know it -- is
> the presupposition of the story.
just followed the traditional (and majority) translation.
If Jesus is being paralleled with Israel, however, I suggest that builds
in the question of God's favour. That both Jesus and the Devil know that
Jesus is God's "son" is true; but unless we opt for a simple appeal for
hunger, what is the Devil supposed to be hinging the test on? "Go on, if
you're really God's (beloved) Son, prove it! Tell him to turn these
stones into bread, then you'll have something to eat!". I'm aware, as
you suggest in the following paragraph (below) that the issue at stake
is trust -but the nature of testing/temptation is that the real issue is
veiled (it's not very effective to say, "I'm going to test your trust
> Jesus is tested to see if he will refuse to do what Israel did when
> under the hardship of 'hunger', they, contrary to what Deut. 8: (cf.
> esp. vv. 15-17; cf. Deut. 6:16) says they should have done, put god to
> the test and demanded that God fulfill his obligations to "his son" by
> feeding them.
Major (The Salvation Army)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]