Christ Tempted, but God Cant Be tempted?

  • Thread starter Thread starter patmorrison
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

patmorrison

Guest
In working with my Youth Group the other day, we ran into seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible:

Matthew 4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

We all know that Jesus was tempted in the 3 ways. But how do we reconcile this with the following passage from James:

James 1: 13-15 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.

If God cannot be tempted then how was it that Christ was tempted?

Thanks!
Pat
 
40.png
patmorrison:
In working with my Youth Group the other day, we ran into seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible:

Matthew 4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

We all know that Jesus was tempted in the 3 ways. But how do we reconcile this with the following passage from James:

James 1: 13-15 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.

If God cannot be tempted then how was it that Christ was tempted?

Thanks!
Pat
Keep in mind that Christ was fully human as well as fully divine.
 
Jesus Christ, the Messiah, is both true God and true man. God can’t die, can he? But Jesus died, because His human nature was subject to all human experiences.

In His human nature, Jesus was just as subject to temptation as any other human being. Being tempted is not a sin–giving in to the temptation of evil is. Jesus never gave in.

Does that make sense? After all, the temptation is the LEAST of it for “contradiction” . Surely it is far more of a contradiction to say that God cannot die, so how could Jesus die?

I know it is SO easy to come up with these “contradictions”. Lots of times we really don’t WANT to have to deal with mystery. We want to KNOW IT ALL. And we wind up not seeing the forest for the trees, or focusing on contradictions that really ARE NOT THERE.

Blessings!
 
Tantum ergo:
Jesus Christ, the Messiah, is both true God and true man. God can’t die, can he? But Jesus died, because His human nature was subject to all human experiences.

In His human nature, Jesus was just as subject to temptation as any other human being. Being tempted is not a sin–giving in to the temptation of evil is. Jesus never gave in.
Piggy-backing on this, here is how Scripture explains it in the context of Jesus being our High Priest, and thus a fitting mediator between God and man:
…We have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way, yet without sin. So let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive mercy and to find grace for timely help.
Every high priest is taken from among men and made their representative before God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.
He is able to deal patiently with the ignorant and erring, for he himself is beset by weakness and so, for this reason, must make sin offerings for himself as well as for the people.
No one takes this honor upon himself but only when called by God, just as Aaron was.
In the same way, it was not Christ who glorified himself in becoming high priest, but rather the one who said to him: “You are my son; this day I have begotten you”; just as he says in another place: “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.”
In the days when he was in the flesh, he offered prayers and supplications with loud cries and tears to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered; and when he was made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, declared by God high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 4:14-16, 5:1-10
 
Also note this is a common JW line when they try to get people to deny His divinity by saying “can God be tempted”?
 
I may be wrong here, but I have had the belief that it is very important to understand that there are two modes of temptation.

One can be tempted by someone, such as the devil harassing Jesus. This is where the person being tempted is not actively tempted, does not feel an urge to do so, but one has approached him in such a way that they would say he was tempting the person.

Another is to feel tempted, that is, feel as if the urge is there and actually desire to do so.

Any fool can “tempt” God, that is challenge God, but that does not mean God will manifest an urge toward that person’s tempting. God is not subject to temptation, although some may wish to harass him.

God bless,
Aaron
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
I may be wrong here, but I have had the belief that it is very important to understand that there are two modes of temptation.

One can be tempted by someone, such as the devil harassing Jesus. This is where the person being tempted is not actively tempted, does not feel an urge to do so, but one has approached him in such a way that they would say he was tempting the person.

Another is to feel tempted, that is, feel as if the urge is there and actually desire to do so.

Any fool can “tempt” God, that is challenge God, but that does not mean God will manifest an urge toward that person’s tempting. God is not subject to temptation, although some may wish to harass him.

God bless,
Aaron
Hello aaronjmagnan,

Are you denying that Jesus possessed human free-will? The most important atribute man posesses is his freedom from being controled by the will of God. Free from the will of God human obedience to the will of God is love for God. This is how one fulfills the great commandment. Did Jesus use human free will to choose to obey the Father and die on the cross, out of love for the Father and love for fellow man, or did He have no free will in the matter?

Do you believe that Adam had free will to choose between hate and love for the Father but Jesus had no free will to do so? Would it be fair to compare Jesus as righteous and Adam as unrighteous if Adam were the only one capable of choosing between obedience and disobedience to the Father?

Please visit Jesus Loves God

NIV 1JO 5:3****This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.NAB LUK 22:42

"Father, if it is your will, take this cup from me; yet not my will but yours be done."NAB JOH 10:17

“The Father loves me for this: that I lay down my life to take it up again. No one takes it from me; I lay it down freely.” NAB JOH 15:12

This is my commandment: love one another as** I have loved you. There is no greater love than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.** You are my friends if you do what I command you.**NAB JOH 14:30 **

“I shall not go on speaking to you longer; the Prince of this world is at hand. He has no hold on me, but the world must know that I love the Father and do as the Father has commanded me.” NAB JOH 4:34

**“Doing the will of him who sent me and bringing his work to completion is my food.” **NAB HEB 4:14

Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our profession of faith. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weakness, but one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet never sinned. So let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive mercy and favor and to find help in time of need.NAB HEB 2:14

Now, since the children are men of blood and flesh, Jesus likewise had a full share in ours, that by his death he might rob the devil, the prince of death, of his power, and free those who through fear of death had been slaves their whole life long. Surely he did not come to help angels, but rather the children of Abraham; therefore he had to become like his brothers in every way, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest before God on their behalf, to expiate the sins of the people. **Since he was himself tested through what he suffered, he is able to help those who are tempted.**NAB ISA 7:14

Therefore the LORD himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. He shall be living on curds and honey by the time **he learns to reject the bad and choose the good. **NAB ROM 5:18

To sum up, then: just as a single offense brought condemnation to all men, **a single righteous act brought all men acquittal and life. **Just as through one man’s disobedience all became sinners, so through one man’s obedience all shall become just.
 
The Catholic Church teaches (I don’t have the exact paragraph of the Catechism on hand) that the will of a man can be directed toward any effort.

I know Jesus had free will, but he resigned that to the Father. To have free will and not do evil is to resign one’s will to the will of the Father. However, technically, Jesus is the Father, and is always committed to the free will of the Father, so although he has free will, he has perfect will.

This is just a logical conclusion.

I am still not clear as to what you mean by asking if I am saying Jesus had no free will. I don’t think Jesus participated in His own temptation. If the devil tempted him, it was through the process in which the devil attempts to tempt him, though Jesus does not consider what the devil says. Jesus says, “Do not tempt the Lord your God,” which makes a clear division between being tempted and tempting someone.

Thanks for the question, and I don’t know about the website…I won’t contradict Bible passages, and you leave them sort of vague.

God bless,
Aaron
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
I am still not clear as to what you mean by asking if I am saying Jesus had no free will. Aaron
Hello Aaron,

Could Jesus have chosen to sin? Trees, rocks, stars, worms, cats, excetera, cannot sin because they do not have freedom from God’s will. Nor do they have the capacity to love God. Only man can choose to sin through freedom from the control of God’s will. Man has the capacity to love God through choices of obedience to the will of God.

Jesus did not sin. Do you believe this is because He could not sin or because, though He was free to choose to sin, He used free will to choose not to sin out of love for the Father and love for fellow man? Was Jesus free to choose sin?
 
I’m sure he was free to do so by his humanity, but would never do so by his nature and office.

Aaron
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
I’m sure he was free to do so by his humanity, but would never do so by his nature and office.

Aaron
Hello Aaron,

So what would have been the outcome of Christ’s humanity choosing to sin?

Or are you stating that Jesus could not sin but saying it in a way that makes it sound like He could sin to cover all the bases, like say scripture indicating that He could sin, for instance.
 
Steven Merten:
Hello Aaron,

So what would have been the outcome of Christ’s humanity choosing to sin?

Or are you stating that Jesus could not sin but saying it in a way that makes it sound like He could sin to cover all the bases, like say scripture indicating that He could sin, for instance.
I don’t think it is as simple as you want it to be. I explained the logic that I am confident holds true to my faith. There are two different possibilities inherent in the idea of “to be able to do something.” The first, is that He had the capacity, and the second is that He might do so given certain cercumstances. I believe He had the capacity to sin in His human form, but He never would have done so.

Scripture may say so. I think there was a post before saying that He became sin, and the conclusion was that He became an offering.

The thing is, I don’t like to speculate on trivial fantasies like the possibility of Him deciding to sin. He did not sin according to scripture, and that’s good enough for me.

God bless,
Aaron
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
The thing is, I don’t like to speculate on trivial fantasies like the possibility of Him deciding to sin. He did not sin according to scripture, and that’s good enough for me.

God bless,
Aaron
Hello Aaron,

One cannot love without the option to choose not to love. One cannot be faithful to God without the option to choose to be unfaithful to God. God gave man freedom for the control of His will to give man the capacity to choose to love Him. This is the reason for creation. Human choices of free willed love for God is the reason God allows human free willed choices of hatred, sin and damnation. Had God not allowed free will there would be no damnation. If there is a way to love God without the risk of eternal damnation to man, then why did God not make this path available to all men and not only Jesus?

If Jesus had no free willed option to choose not the will of the Father but Adam had the free willed option to choose bettween obedience and disobedience to the will of the Father, is it fair to compare the two. Is it fair to say Adam is unrighteous and Jesus is righteous, if Adam is the only one the Father allows to choose unrighteousness?

Did Jesus freely choose to love us or did the Father simply allow Him no other option than to die on the cross? The question as to whether or not the Father gave Jesus the capacity of human free will to choose between obedient love and disobedient hatred is not a trivial question.

Jesus Loves God
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
However, technically, Jesus is the Father, and is always committed to the free will of the Father, so although he has free will, he has perfect will.
I just wanted to point out that Jesus is not technically the Father. He is the second Person of the Trinity; the Father is a different Person. He possesses the divine will, as does the Father (and the Spirit). His will and the Father’s will are one.
In the Incarnation, Jesus also possesses a human will. From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
The effect of the Incarnation on the human will of Christ was to leave it free in all things save only sin. It was absolutely impossible that any stain of sin should soil the soul of Christ. Neither sinful act of the will nor sinful habit of the soul were in keeping with the Hypostatic Union. The fact that Christ never sinned is an article of faith (see Council, Ephes., can. x, in Denzinger, 122, wherein the sinlessness of Christ is implicit in the definition that he did not offer Himself for Himself, but for us). This fact of Christ’s sinlessness is evident from the Scripture. “There is no sin in Him” (I John, iii, 5). Him, who knew no sin, he hath made sin for us" i. e. a victim for sin (II Cor., v, 21). The impossibility of a sinful act by Christ is taught by all theologians, but variously explained. G¨nther defended an impossibility consequent solely upon the Divine provision that He would not sin (Vorschule, II, 441). This is no impossibility at all. Christ is God. It is absolutely impossible, antecedent to the Divine prevision, that God should allow His flesh to sin. If God allowed His flesh to sin, He might sin, that is, He might turn away from Himself; and it is absolutely impossible that God should turn from Himself, be untrue to His Divine attributes. The Scotists teach that this impossibility to sin, antecedent to God’s revision, is not due to the Hypostatic Union, but is like to the impossibility of the beatified to sin, and is due to a special Divine Providence (see Scotus, in III, d. xiii, Q. i). St. Thomas (III:15:1) and all Thomists, Suarez (d. xxxiii, 2), Vasquez (d. xi, c. iii), de Lugo (d. xxvi, 1, n. 4), and all theologians of the Society of Jesus teach the now almost universally admitted explanation that the absolute impossibility of a sinful act on the part of Christ was due to the hypostatic union of His human nature with the Divine. The will of Christ remained free after the Incarnation. This is an article of faith. The Scripture is most clear on this point. “When he had tasted, he would not drink” (Matt., xxvii, 34). “I will; be thou made clean” (Matt., viii, 3). The liberty of Christ was such that He merited. “He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. For which cause God also hath exalted him” (Phil., ii, 8). “Who having joy set before him, endured the cross” (Heb., xii, 2). That Christ was free in the matter of death, is the teaching of all Catholics; else He did not merit nor satisfy for us by His death. Just how to reconcile this liberty of Christ with the impossibility of His committing sin has ever been a crux for theologians. Some seventeen explanations are given (see Summa Theologica III:47:3, ad 3; Molina, “Concordia”, d. liii, membr. 4).
From Summa Theologica:
Whether there was free-will in Christ?
Objection 3. Further, free-will is indifferent. But Christ’s will was determined to good, since He could not sin; as stated above (15, 1] ,2). Hence there was no free-will in Christ.
On the contrary, It is written (Is. 7:15): “He shall eat butter and honey, that He may know to refuse the evil and to choose the good,” which is an act of the free-will. Therefore there was free-will in Christ.
**…**Reply to Objection 3. The will of Christ, though determined to good, is not determined to this or that good. Hence it pertains to Christ, even as to the blessed, to choose with a free-will confirmed in good.
 
A couple of things about Christ being tempted.

First, as part of our human nature, God has given all humans Free Will, this includes Our Blessed Mother and Jesus. Both, Mary and Jesus in His humanity were Free to do or reject God’s Will.

However, neither experienced the effects of Original Sin, so their nature’s were not fallen are were not subjected to concupiscence which should not only be considered as sexual desire but the a weakness towards sin itelf.

Therefore, Jesus (and Mary) could be tempted, yet is just wasn’t in their Natures to “Say No” to God - also known as sin.

One further point. Some commentaries on Jesus’ temptation in the desert stress how these three temptations we all face and this could lead some to believe that they never actually took place, that is they represent the temptations of us all. But many scholars in Christology (especially those who seek to discover the historical Jesus from the Gospels) hold that the nature of the three temptation were such that Jesus most likely faced them through out his ministry and may have even discussed His temptations with his disciples. So they weren’t just stories but real temptations perhaps but in narrative form.
 
Could Jesus have sinned in a pre-begotten of God, state? We Catholics believe that Jesus is eternally begotten of God. The Father differs from Jesus in that the Father is not eternally begotten.

Jesus Loves God
 
That His will was determined to the good is what I was trying to explain.

Grace and Glory:
Thank you for the clarification on his place in the Trinity, but isn’t the trinity both three and one at the same time? In the same sense, Mary was the Mother, Spouse, and Daughter of God.

Mr. Merten
As far as the triviality…it is not trivial whether Jesus had free will, but speculating “what if” questions that are not really implicit nor explicit in scripture is trivial. It may entertain the intellect to ask these things, but it does no good to the faith to ask things like, what if Jesus did what we believe he didn’t do.

God bless.
 
40.png
aaronjmagnan:
Mr. Merten
As far as the triviality…it is not trivial whether Jesus had free will, but speculating “what if” questions that are not really implicit nor explicit in scripture is trivial. It may entertain the intellect to ask these things, but it does no good to the faith to ask things like, what if Jesus did what we believe he didn’t do.

God bless.
I never suggested that Jesus “did what we believe he didn’t do” sinned. Jesus did not sin.

I do suggest that if God did not make it possible for Jesus to have free will, and the result of it, obedient love or hatred, sin and damnation, then it is not fair to compare Jesus to we who do have free will as St. Paul does. In a situation where, not Jesus, but only Satan, Adam and the rest of mankind are the only ones God gave the capacity to choose unrighteousness, it is not fair to compare Jesus as righteous and Adam as unrighteous. Even Satan would have done the will of God like Jesus if God would have not allowed him any other option.

If the Father gave human Jesus no free willed option to refuse to die on the cross, then is it really fair to say Jesus lays His life down freely out of love for the Father and love for fellow man? Is it fair for Jesus to say “not my will but yours be done” if the Father does not allow Jesus to do His own will instead of the Father’s will?
 
Thanks for clairfying everything. I think you didn’t get when I said that Jesus had free will but (in the other words posted) it was determined toward the good.

We supposedly have spirit, and body.

Jesus had the same.

That’s the furthest we can go, I guess.

God bless,
Aaron
 
I see the question about the possibility of Jesus being able to sin in a pre-begotten of God state. The answer is quite simple no. In His “Pre-Begotten” state Jesus only in His Divine Nature - The Word, The Second Person of the Trinity.

Jesus the Human didn’t exist until His miraculous conception when Mary conceived of the Holy Spirit. It was only then that Jesus’ two natures were brought into the hyperstatic union of the incarnation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top