Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 4:7
Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
7. Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God ] Deu 6:16. The verse ends “as ye tempted him in Massah.” The reference to Massah (Num 20:7-12) shews the true meaning of the Saviour’s answer. Moses and Aaron displayed distrust in God when they tried to draw to themselves the glory of the miracle instead of “sanctifying the Lord.” Jesus will not glorify Himself in the eyes of the Jews by a conspicuous miracle. His work as the Son of Man is to glorify the Father’s name through obedience. Cp. Joh 12:28.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Jesus said unto him, It is written again – Again the Saviour replied to Satan by a text of Scripture – a passage which expressly forbade an act like this.
Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God – This is quoted literally from Deu 6:16. The meaning is, thou shalt not try him; or, thou shalt not, by throwing thyself into voluntary and uncommanded dangers, appeal to God for protection, or trifle with the promises made to those who are thrown into danger by his providence. It is true, indeed, that God aids those of his people who are placed by him in trial or danger; but it is not true that the promise was meant to extend to those who wantonly provoke him and trifle with the promised help. Thus, Satan, artfully using and perverting Scripture, was met and repelled by Scripture rightly applied.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Mat 4:7
Not tempt the Lord thy God.
I. The essential difference between faith and presumption.
II. The possibilities of presumption.
1. When we undertake to settle questions which axe beyond our range.
2. When we look for bodily health without obeying the laws of nature.
3. When we expect sufficient means without sufficient labour and moderation in enjoyment.
4. When we hope for admission into the kingdom of God, and postpone earnest application for entrance.
5. When we expect steadfastness and growth, while we neglect the sources of spiritual strength.
III. Its heavy penalties. (W. Clarkson, B. A.)
Proving
God is different from tempting Him. (Wiseman.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 7. Thou shalt not tempt] To expose myself to any danger naturally destructive, with the vain presumption that God will protect and defend me from the ruinous consequences of my imprudent conduct, is to tempt God.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This is written Deu 6:16. To make an undue and unwarrantable trial of God, is to tempt God, whether the trial respecteth his power or his goodness; thus the word is used, Num 14:22; Psa 78:18; Isa 7:12; Mat 16:1. By this answer Christ lets the devil know that he abused Scripture in his quotation of it; such as casting of himself down, when he had a plain way to go down by the stairs, would not have been an act of faith, but presumption; not a trusting God upon his word, but a tempting of God, expressly contrary to his command, Deu 6:16.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
7. Jesus said unto him, It iswritten again (De 6:16),as if he should say, “True, it is so written, and on thatpromise I implicitly rely; but in using it there is another Scripturewhich must not be forgotten.”
Thou shalt not tempt the Lordthy God“Preservation in danger is divinely pledged: shallI then create danger, either to put the promised securityskeptically to the proof, or wantonly to demand a display of it? Thatwere ‘to tempt the Lord my God,’ which, being expressly forbidden,would forfeit the right to expect preservation.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Jesus saith unto him, it is written again,…. Christ takes no notice of the false and wrong citation of scripture made by the devil, nor of any misapplication of it; but mildly replies, by opposing another passage of scripture to him, De 6:16
ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, thereby tacitly showing, that he had produced scripture to a very wrong purpose, since that could never contradict itself; and also, that for a person to neglect the ordinary means of safety, and to expect, that as God can, so he will, preserve without the use of such means, is a tempting him. The Hebrew word “tempt”, as Manasseh ben f Israel observes, is always taken in an ill part, and is to be understood of such who would try the power, goodness, or will of God. And which, as it is not fitting it should be done by any man, so not by himself; and perhaps he hereby intimates too, that he himself was God; and therefore as it was not right in him to tempt God the Father, by taking such a step as Satan solicited him to; nor would it be right in any other; so it was iniquitous in the devil to tempt him who was God over all, blessed for ever.
f Conciliat. in Deut. Quaest. 3. p. 223.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Thou shall not tempt ( ). Jesus quotes Deuteronomy again (De 6:16) and shows that the devil has wholly misapplied God’s promise of protection.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Again [] . Emphatic, meaning on the other hand, with reference to Satan ‘s it is written (ver. 6); as if he had said, “the promise which you quote most be explained by another passage of scripture.” Archbishop Trech aptly remarks, “In that ‘It is written again’ of Christ, lies a great lesson, quite independent of that particular scripture which, on this occasion, he quotes, or of the use to which he turns it. There lies in it the secret of our safety and defence against all distorted use of isolated passages in holy scripture. Only as we enter into the unity of scripture, as it balances, completes, and explains itself, are we warned against error and delusion, excess or defect on this side or the other. Thus the retort, ‘It is written again, ‘ must be of continual application; for indeed what very often are heresies but one – sided, exaggerated truths, truths rent away indeed from the body and complex of the truth, without the balance of the counter – truth, which should have kept them in their due place, co – ordinated with other truths or subordinated to them; and so, because all such checks are wanting, not truth any more, but error.”
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Jesus said unto him,” (ephe auto ho lesous) “Then Jesus replied or responded to his ulterior motive address,” in a ready manner, from the Scriptures, 1Pe 3:15.
2) “It is written again,” (palin gegraptai) “Again (may I advise you, in context setting) it has been (also) written,” a quotation taken from the Scriptures which “can not be broken” Joh 10:35; Deu 6:16.
3) “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” (ouk ekpeitaseis kuriou ton theon sou) “You shall not over-tempt or presume to tempt the Lord your God,” as you are trying to tempt me to be subject to you, Satan, rather than my Father who sent me, Joh 10:29-38; Joh 20:21. When one passage of Scripture is isolated from it’s contextual setting for a premise to establish a point of belief it is a distortion or perversion of the passage, out of harmony with the testimony and intent of the Word of Truth. Such is called wresting the Scriptures to ones own destruction, 2Pe 3:16. Tempt not God, Exo 17:2; Exo 17:7; Num 14:22-23; Mal 3:15.
These arrayed themselves against the Divinity of Jesus:
1) The Scribes and Pharisees and Elders, Luk 5:21; Luk 20:1-2.
2) The Jewish people, Joh 5:18; Joh 8:53; Joh 10:33.
3) This parade scoffed at His Deity while He hung on the cross:
a) The rabble, Mat 27:39-40. b) The rulers, Luk 23:35.
c) The soldiers, Luk 23:36-37.
d) One of the thieves, Luk 23:39.
e) The chief or administrative priests, Mr 15:31,32.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
7. It is written, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. The reply of Christ is most appropriate. There is no other way, in which we have a right to expect the assistance promised in that passage, than when believers humbly submit themselves to his guidance: for we cannot rely on his promises, without obeying his commandments. God is tempted in many ways: but in this passage, the word tempt denotes the neglect of those means which he puts into our hands. Those who leave the means which God recommends, and resolve to make trial of his power and might, act as absurdly as if one were to cut off a man’s arms and hands, and then order him to work. In short, whoever desires to make an experiment of the divine power, when there is no necessity for it, tempts God by subjecting his promises to an unfair trial.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(7) It is written again.The words are, as already stated, from the chapter that contains one of the passages written on the phylacteries, that were probably used by our Lord Himself. As the words stand in Deu. 6:16, their general meaning is specialised by an historical reference, Ye shall not tempt the Lord thy God, as ye tempted Him in Massah. In the history thus referred to, the sin of the people had been that they questioned the presence of God with them until they saw a supernatural proof of it. They asked, Is Jehovah among us, or not? and that question sprang from unbelief. To have demanded a like proof of His Fathers care now would have identified the Son of Man with a like spirit of distrust, and the history of that temptation was therefore a sufficient answer to this. Here, too, a light is thrown on the future teaching of the Christ. The lessons of the wilderness taught Him (the word may seem bold, but it is justified by Heb. 5:8) to commit Himself absolutely to His Fathers will. We find almost an echo of what is recorded here in the words which tell us that He forbore to pray for the twelve legions of angels which the Father would have sent him (Mat. 26:53).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
7. It is written again One text should limit, modify, and explain another. Promises are not to be wantonly presumed upon. They are to be interpreted in the spirit of the divine Promiser. The promise of God to keep us presumes that we soberly and truly desire to be kept.
It would be well for those who maintain the infallible perseverance of all saints to ponder this point. They quote God’s promises to keep and preserve the converted man in every case, omitting to note that all such promises of God are conditional. He will keep us, under proviso that we rationally and voluntarily will to be in his holy keeping. Tempt Or put to the test. To assume to draw at will upon the fund of his Father’s omnipotence, to perform a capricious experiment, would be a presumptuous tempting and insulting God.
The first temptation, as we showed, (in Mat 4:3,) appealed to the animal appetites. This second rises to the higher sentiment, the love of show the gratification of admiration. All those who are carried away from God by the love of pomp, the gratification of mental taste, the pleasures of imagination, the gaieties of fashion, the enthusiasm for fame, and are induced to pervert for these objects powers given by God for rightful use, fall by this temptation. They tempt God by expending the powers he has given for ostentatious, wanton, selfish, and destructive purposes. The first temptation was animal, the second aesthetical.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, You shall not make trial of the Lord your God.” ’
But Jesus again drew on the reserves of Scripture, this time found in Deu 6:16. His years of careful study of the Scriptures was standing Him in good stead. And He declared, “Again it is written, You shall not make trial of the Lord your God.” It was true that He had powers to use in God’s purposes and in God’s way, but not in order to make a trial of God. That could never be right. That would again be to misuse what God had given Him.
The passage has in mind the testing of Israel at Massah when Israel, desperately short of water, had said, ‘Is the Lord with us or not?’ It gives Jesus’ reply to the Devil’s similar attempt to throw doubt in His mind. He did not need to test God. He knew that the Lord was with Him and would accomplish His will.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
This is implied in the answer of the Lord. Note that He does not even take the trouble of rebuking Satan for misquoting Scriptures:
v. 7. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord, thy God. He offers, not a contradiction, but a qualification, to emphasize the necessity of explaining Scripture through Scripture. A significant fact: Jesus quotes the passage to which He refers, Deu 6:16, in the singular, thus making application of its truth to Himself in this instance. The leap from the pinnacle just then would not only have meant seeking escape from the cross at the cost of duty, but it would have been a bold challenge of Providence upon false understanding of the Bible, and so sinful in itself. The Lord’s method of handling the situation must be that of every Christian. “Now, this is such a temptation as no one understands unless he has tried it. For just as the first drives to despair, so this one drives to presumption and to such works as surely do not have God’s word and command. There a Christian should choose the golden mean that he neither despair nor be bold, but remain simply with the Word in true trust and faith. Then shall the good angels be with him; otherwise not.”
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mat 4:7. It is written again Or also. So here elegantly signifies, in opposition to the quotation that the tempter had made, which was indeed very imperfect: but many, after St. Jerome, have observed, that Satan made his advantage of quoting Scripture imperfectly and by scraps. The cause of truth, and sometimes of common sense, has suffered a great deal by those who have followed his example. Jesus repels his attack by Scripture also; which, like that cited in his former answer, again relates to the children of Israel, exercised in circumstances not unlike his own, in the wilderness, when, murmuring and impatient for want of water, as they had been before for want of food, they tempted the Lord, saying, Is Jehovah among us, or not? See Exo 17:7. They questioned his presence with them, and wanted proofs of it by a new miracle. To tempt, is to try; and the trial they would make argued their doubt and distrust. See the note on Deu 6:16. The perfect faith of Jesus excluded all diffidence, and therefore would not admit any act on his part whereby to put the divine goodness to the test, since he already had the fullest assurance of it, “I will not provoke God, either by acting otherwise than he has appointed, or by requiring proofs of his power and veracity, after such as are sufficient, and have already been given.” See Heylin, and Wetstein.
But Dr. Campbell reads, Thou shalt not make trial of, instead of, Thou shalt not tempt. What we commonly mean, says he, by the word tempting, does not suit the sense of the Greek word in this passage. The English word means properly either to solicit to evil, or to provoke; whereas the import of the Greek verb in this and several other places is to assay, to try, to put to the proof. It is thus the word is used, Gen 22:1 where God is said to have tempted Abraham, commanding him to offer up his son Isaac for a burnt-offering. God did not solicit the patriarch to evil, for, in this sense, as the apostle James tells us, chap. Mat 1:13 he neither can be tempted, nor tempteth any man. But God tried Abraham, as the word ought manifestly to have been rendered, putting his faith and obedience to the proof. His ready compliance, so far from being evil, was an evidence of the highest faithand the sublimest virtue. And on the present occasion, it was God’s love to his only Son and faithfulness in the performance of his promise, that the devil desired our Lord, by throwing himself headlong from a precipice, to make trial of.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 4:7 . ] rursus , never signifies in the N. T., not even in 2Co 10:7 , Gal 5:3 , 1Jn 2:8 , at quoque, e diverso , a meaning which it frequently has in classic writers (Ellendt, Lex. Soph . II. p. 485), as Erasmus, Er. Schmid, Schleusner, B. Crusius, have interpreted it; but here means, on the other hand , looking back to the of the devil in Mat 4:6 , and introducing another passage of Scripture as something which again has been written; comp. Mat 5:33 . Bengel well says: Scriptura per scripturam interpretanda et concilianda.
] future, as in Mat 1:21 ; the compound strengthens the meaning; comp. on 1Co 10:9 .
The meaning is: “ Do not let it be a question whether God will save thee from dangers on which thou hast entered uncalled .”
Flacius: Si habuisset expressum mandatum dei, non fuisset tentatio. Deu 6:16 (LXX.), comp. Exo 17:2 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Ver. 7. Jesus answered and said, It is written again ] Christ rejects not the Holy Scriptures, although perversely alleged and abused by Satan, but openeth them, by laying one place to another. So did those holy Levites in Neh 8:7 , and St Paul in Act 9:22 . , Collatis testimoniis demonstrans. Parallel texts, like glasses set one against another, cast a mutual light. And, as the lapidary brighteneth his hard diamond with the dust shaved from itself; so must we clear hard Scriptures by others that are more plain and perspicuous.
Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God ] Trust him we must, tempt him we may not. Now God is tempted, either when men are too much addicted to the means, as Thomas; or when they reject them, as Ahaz, who refused a sign and ran to unlawful means, hiding all under this, I will not tempt God, Isa 7:12 . Heathens could say, Admota manu invocanda est Minerva, and they noted him for a foolish carter, that when his cart stuck fast, cried to his god, and moved his lips, but not his hands to help himself. “If thou callest for knowledge,” saith Solomon, “and criest for understanding”-there is prayer to God; “if thou seekest her as silver, and searcheth for her as for hidden treasures”-there is man’s endeavour in the diligent use of the means; “then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God”-there is the happy success,Pro 2:3-5Pro 2:3-5 . Ora et labora Ask and work, was an emperor’s motto. (Reusneri Symb.) St Augustine sets it down as a vanity of his youth, that he prayed God to help him against some special sins whereunto he was strongly addicted, but should have been full sorry that God should have heard him, because he was loth to part with them. How much better was that prayer Sir Thomas Moore, Domine Deus, fac me in iis com sequendis operam collocare, pro quibus obtinendis soleo ad te orare; ” Lord God, make me to bestow pains in getting those things, for obtaining whereof I use to pray unto thee.”
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
7. ] not ‘contra,’ which it never simply means, not even in Gal 5:3 ; 1Jn 2:8 ; but ‘rursus’ or ‘iterum,’ as the versions rightly render it. The addition of a second Scripture qualifies and interprets the first; but does not refute it.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Thou, &c. Quoted from Deu 6:16 (App-107. c).
not. Greek. ou. See App-105.
tempt. Note the words which follow: “as ye tempted Him in Massah”. A reference to Exo 17:7 shows that there it was to doubt Jehovah’s presence and care. It was the same here.
the LORD = Jehovah.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
7. ] not contra, which it never simply means, not even in Gal 5:3; 1Jn 2:8; but rursus or iterum, as the versions rightly render it. The addition of a second Scripture qualifies and interprets the first; but does not refute it.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 4:7. , it is written again) Although Satan retorted the phrase, It is written, Jesus does not suffer it to be forcibly taken from Him as something trite, but employs it three times. Scripture is to be interpreted and reconciled by Scripture.- , …) thou shall not tempt, etc.-Thus the LXX. in Deu 6:16. According to the usage of those interpreters, is not a word of stronger signification than .-Jesus, however, means, It is not Mine to provoke God by tempting Him.-, the Lord) This is put as a proper name.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
It: Mat 4:4, Mat 4:10, Mat 21:16, Mat 21:42, Mat 22:31, Mat 22:32, Isa 8:20
Thou: Exo 17:2, Exo 17:7, Num 14:22, Deu 6:16, Psa 78:18, Psa 78:41, Psa 78:56, Psa 95:9, Psa 106:14, Mal 3:15, Act 5:9, 1Co 10:9, Heb 3:9
Reciprocal: Psa 17:4 – word Luk 4:12 – Thou Act 15:10 – Why Eph 6:17 – which
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
4:7
The word for tempt is similar to the one in verse 1 but is a stronger word and is defined by Thayer, “To prove , test, thoroughly tempt.” Jesus quoted Deu 6:16 and thus it will be well to look at that passage and consider the connection. It says not to tempt God as they tempted him in Massah. That refers to Exo 17:2; Exo 17:7 where the people complained because of their thirst and questioned if the Lord was among them. It was trying (one meaning of tempt) on the patience of God to hear such attacks upon His power and goodness. That justifies the comment of Thayer in his definition of the word when he says, “by irreligion and immorality to test the patience or avenging power of Christ.” God’s long-suffering is infinite for people who sincerely rely on Him for help, even to the last degree of indulgence for their unusual requests. But He will not suffer being approached in the spirit of challenge just to see if He can and is willing to gratify their disrespectful curiosity.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 4:7. Again it is written. Not written again. In another place; Deu 6:16. Our Lord corrects the misinterpretation of poetic Scripture by citing a plain statement of the law. The original has ye, but Jesus answers: Thou shalt not tempt, turning it directly upon the tempter, for every tempting of God is caused by Satan.
The Lord thy God. By such rash confidence God would be tempted. The direct address involves another thought: that Satan in thus tempting Him was tempting the Lord his God. Religious fanaticism is a tempting of God.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, Though the devil had wrested and abused scripture, yet still Christ alleges scripture. The abuse of the holy scriptures by heretics and seducers is no argument against the use of them. We must not throw away our Bibles because the devil quotes scripture: but as Christ here compares scripture with scripture, so should we, in order to find out the true sense and meaning of it; for scripture is the best interpreter of itself; scripture is nost clearly expounded by scripture . This Satan knew full well, and therefore dares not make any further reply.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 7
Deuteronomy 6:16. By a comparison of these passages, the sin of tempting God would seem to be that of presumptuously, or with an improper spirit, calling for or expecting miraculous interpositions from him.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not {c} tempt the Lord thy God.
(c) Literally, “Thou shalt not go on still in tempting.”