Hebrews 4:15, could Jesus actually be tested?

[Angainor]

See [thread=33478]ask an Apologist[/thread].
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are - yet without sin.
The Apologist answered that Jesus “tried out” temptation, but was not actually tested. I take this to mean that Jesus never felt any tug at all on his heart to submit to the temptation, for any reason. It seems Jesus is almost taking the role of a scientific observer.

At the very least, I think the temptations Jesus faced in the wilderness by the devil (Matthew 4:1-11) were relevant to Jesus. On some level, I think Jesus did see the logic and understood the sort-term personal gains offered. Of course Jesus recognized that any personal gains the temptations may have offered were selfish personal gains and Jesus chose to trust in God’s plan.

The temptation account would seem empty to me if Jesus were merely “trying out” temptations.

I do feel comforted knowing I have a high priest who has been tempted in every way, just as we are - but without sin.

 

[Grace_and_Glory]

This is just my own opinion, so I don’t know how accurate it is, but I think that Jesus, being free of the effects of original sin, was free from concupiscence (the desire for sin). That said, I think that the devil did tempt him in a similar way to how he tempts us. He tried to appeal to Jesus’ desires, but because Jesus did not desire sin, he had to appeal to desires Jesus had that were good (for example, in the desert): the desire to eat, the desire to demonstrate the Father’s love, and the desire to free the world from Satan’s dominion.

For an opinion from someone much holier and more knowledgeable than myself, here is what Fulton Sheen says in The Life of Christ about the tempation in the desert, which he links to Hebrews 4:15:

An inward tendency toward evil, such as man has, is not a necessary condition for an onslaught of temptation. The temptation of Our Blessed Lord came only from without, and not from within as ours so often do. What was at stake in the trial of Our Lord was not the perversion of natural appetites to which the rest of men are tempted; rather, it was an appeal to Our Lord to disregard His Divine Mission and His Messianic work.

 

[Angainor]

Grace and Glory:

This is just my own opinion, so I don’t know how accurate it is, but I think that Jesus, being free of the effects of original sin, was free from concupiscence (the desire for sin). That said, I think that the devil did tempt him in a similar way to how he tempts us. He tried to appeal to Jesus’ desires, but because Jesus did not desire sin, he had to appeal to desires Jesus had that were good (for example, in the desert): the desire to eat, the desire to demonstrate the Father’s love, and the desire to free the world from Satan’s dominion.

Very well put. I think we pretty much agree.
Fulton Sheen:

An inward tendency toward evil, such as man has, is not a necessary condition for an onslaught of temptation. The temptation of Our Blessed Lord came only from without, and not from within as ours so often do. What was at stake in the trial of Our Lord was not the perversion of natural appetites to which the rest of men are tempted; rather, it was an appeal to Our Lord to disregard His Divine Mission and His Messianic work.

What about the third temptation? I’m just speculating, but might the third temptation offered a different (and flawed) path to take his Messianic work instead of tempting to disregard it?

 

[gomer_tree]

I think the answers here are good. It’s always a struggle to understand (for me, anyways) how Jesus’s divine nature and Jesus’s human nature were perfectly compatible. This is a good example. As God, Christ not only would never sin, but cannot sin. It is against His divine nature to do so. But as a human being, it was not against His nature. Even without original sin, Adam proved that human nature can be thrown into sin.

So, Jesus had a divine nature that prevented Him from desiring to sin, or ever falling into sin. His divine nature, in essence, protected His human nature. His divine nature wanted nothing to do with sin, was repulsed by it, and in fact could never engage in it. So in this way, He was fully protected against actually sinning or engaging in sin.

At the same time, Jesus had a human nature that - while protected because of His divine nature - nevertheless could sense the effects of temptation. By being tested in a very real way with a human nature, Jesus completely understands how alluring sin can be to us human. He understands how those of us who are not divine can be drawn in by the temptations of the devil.

Of course, it does not excuse our failings. But this is such a wonderful act of mercy by our God. He wants to know us so well, that He became man not only because of the necessity of it by His sacrifice, but it enabled Him to fully understand all that we go through.

 

[MaggieOH]

Might I suggest that you do not stop at the temptation in the wilderness. Angainor we are in agreement on this one, and I think that you can go a little deeper into examining the other occasions on which Jesus was tempted.

Another occasion that is recorded is that of Peter’s remark after Jesus had explained to the Apostles that he would die. Peter remarked: Never Lord, we will not allow it (or something like that - paraphrase) and to this remark Jesus said: Get behind thee Satan. He was not calling Peter Satan, but he was responding to the remark which was a temptation to Him.

Yet another example of temptation is in the Garden of Gethsame when Jesus went through His agony. His prayer said that he did not want the cup of suffering, and yet He said "Not my will, but Your Will be done).

Can we learn from the response of the New Adam to temptation? Yes we can. We can see that on the occasions when the devil tried to influence Jesus, Satan was defeated by the refusal of Jesus to be tempted. This is an example to all of us.

God Bless
MaggieOH

 

[Angainor]

gomer tree:

As God, Christ not only would never sin, but cannot sin. It is against His divine nature to do so. But as a human being, it was not against His nature. Even without original sin, Adam proved that human nature can be thrown into sin.

So, Jesus had a divine nature that prevented Him from desiring to sin, or ever falling into sin. His divine nature, in essence, protected His human nature. His divine nature wanted nothing to do with sin, was repulsed by it, and in fact could never engage in it. So in this way, He was fully protected against actually sinning or engaging in sin.

How does this work? Was Jesus aware he could not sin?

I don’t know what it would be like to have his true God part, but I do know what it is like to be true man. True man has no safety net that prevents us from sinning. I believe one of the things Jesus was was true man.

I would not think someone who climbs an artificial rock-wall with a safety harness that prevents him from falling would really know what it would be like to climb an actual mountain. Likewise, I do not think Jesus, if he had a safety net to prevent him from sinning would know what it was like to face an actual temptation.

I do not believe Jesus was prevented from sinning. I think he possessed the capacity to sin. I could not believe Jesus was in any way true man otherwise.

Every time he faced a temptation he held fast and followed his Father’s will.