Temptation
TEMPTATION
The enticement of a person to commit sin by offering some seeming advantage. There are four things, says one, in temptation:
1. Deception.
2. Infection.
3. Seduction.
4. Perdition. The sources of temptation, are Satan, the world, and the flesh. We are exposed to them in every state, in every place, and in every time of life. They may be wisely permitted to show us our weakness, to try our faith, to promote our humility, and to learn us to place our dependence on a superior power: yet we must not run into them, but watch and pray; avoid sinful company: consider the love, sufferings, and constancy of Christ, and the awful consequences of falling a victim to them. The following rules have been laid down, by which we may in some measure know when a temptation comes from Satan.
1. When the temptation is unnatural, or contrary to the general bias or temper of our minds.
2. When it is opposite to the present frame of the mind.
3. When the temptation itself is irrational; being contrary to whatever we could imagine our own minds would suggest to us.
4. When a temptation is detested in its first rising and appearance.
5. Lastly, when it is violent.
See SATAN. Brooks, Owen, Gilpin, Capel and Gillespie on Temptation; South’s Seven Sermons on Temptation, in the 6th vol. of his Sermons; Pike and Hayward’s Cases of Conscience; and Bishop Porteus’s Sermons, ser. 3 and 4, vol. 1:
Fuente: Theological Dictionary
Temptation
(Lat. tentare, to try or test).
Temptation is here taken to be an incitement to sin whether by persuasion or by the offer of some good or pleasure. It may be merely external, as was the case of Christ’s encounter in the desert after the forty days’ fast; or it may be internal as well, inasmuch as there is a real assault upon a person’s will power. It arises sometimes from the propensity to evil inherent in us as a result of original sin. Sometimes it is directly chargeable to the intervention of the Devil, who can furnish the imagination with its sinful subject-matter and stir up the lower powers of the soul. Not infrequently both causes are at work. Temptation is not in itself sin. No matter how vivid the unholy image may be, no matter how strong the inclination to transgress the law, no matter how vehement the sensation of unlawful satisfaction, as long as there is no consent of the will, there is no sin. The very essence of sin in any grade is that it should be a deliberate act of the human will. Attack is not synonymous with surrender. This, while obvious enough, is important especially for those who are trying to serve God sedulously and yet find themselves beset on all sides by temptations. They are apt to take the fierceness and repetition of the onset as proof that they have fallen. A wise spiritual guide will point out the error of this conclusion and thus administer comfort and courage to these harassed souls.
Temptations are to be combated by the avoidance, where possible, of the occasions that give rise to them, by recourse to prayer, and by fostering within oneself a spirit of humble distrust of one’s own powers and of unbounded confidence in God. The resistance which a Christian is bound to offer need not always be direct. Sometimes, particularly when there is question of reiterated evil interior suggestions, it may be useful to employ an indirect method, that is, to simply ignore them and quietly divert the attention into another channel. Temptations as such can never be intended by God. They are permitted by Him to give us an opportunity of practising virtue and self mastery and acquiring merit. The fact of temptation, no matter how large it looms in a person’s life, is not an indication that such an one is under the ban. Indeed those whom God calls to special heights of sanctity are just those who may expect to have to wrestle bravely with temptations more numerous and fearsome than fall to the lot of the average mortal.
LEHMKUHL, Theologia moralis (Freiburg, 1887); MÜTZ, Christliche Ascetik (Paderborn, 1907); HENSE, Die Versuchungen (Freiburg, 1884); SCARAMELLI, Directorium asceticum.
———————————–
JOSEPH F. DELANY Transcribed by Douglas J. Potter Dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIVCopyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, July 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Temptation
(, , both meaning trial) in the modern usage of the term, is the enticement of a person to commit sin by offering some seeming advantage. There are four things, says one, in temptation (1) deception, (2) infection, (3) seduction, (4) perdition. The sources of temptation are Satan, the world, and the flesh. We are exposed to them in every state, in every place, and in every time of life. They may be wisely permitted to show us our weakness, to try our faith, to promote our humility, and to teach us to place our dependence on a superior Power; yet we must not run into them, but watch and pray; avoid sinful company; consider the love, sufferings, and constancy of Christ, and the awful consequences of falling a victim to temptation. The following rules have been laid down, by which we may in some measure know when a temptation comes from Satan:
1. When the temptation is unnatural, or contrary to the general bias or temper of our minds;
2. When it is opposite to the present frame of the mind;
3. When the temptation itself is irrational, being contrary to whatever we could imagine our own minds would suggest to us;
4. When a temptation is detested in its first rising and appearance;
5. Lastly, when it is violent. See Brooks, Owen, Gilpin, Capel, and Gillespie on Temptation; South, Seven Sermons on Temptation, in vol. 6 of his Sermons; Pike and Hayward, Cases of Conscience; and Bishop Porteus, Sermons, vol. 1, ser. 3 and 4.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Temptation
(1.) Trial; a being put to the test. Thus God “tempted [Gen. 22: 1; R.V., ‘did prove’] Abraham;” and afflictions are said to tempt, i.e., to try, men (James 1:2, 12; comp. Deut. 8:2), putting their faith and patience to the test. (2.) Ordinarily, however, the word means solicitation to that which is evil, and hence Satan is called “the tempter” (Matt. 4:3). Our Lord was in this way tempted in the wilderness. That temptation was not internal, but by a real, active, subtle being. It was not self-sought. It was submitted to as an act of obedience on his part. “Christ was led, driven. An unSee n personal force bore him a certain violence is implied in the words” (Matt. 4:1-11).
The scene of the temptation of our Lord is generally supposed to have been the mountain of Quarantania (q.v.), “a high and precipitous wall of rock, 1,200 or 1,500 feet above the plain west of Jordan, near Jericho.”
Temptation is common to all (Dan. 12:10; Zech. 13:9; Ps. 66:10; Luke 22:31, 40; Heb. 11:17; James 1:12; 1 Pet. 1:7; 4:12). We read of the temptation of Joseph (Gen. 39), of David (2 Sam. 24; 1 Chr. 21), of Hezekiah (2 Chr. 32:31), of Daniel (Dan. 6), etc. So long as we are in this world we are exposed to temptations, and need ever to be on our watch against them.
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Temptation
The word ‘tempt,’ or ‘temptation,’ occurs sixteen times in the O.T in Mal 3:15 the Hebrew word is Bachan (), to prove or test, as metals are tested in the crucible (see verse 10, where the same Hebrew word is rendered prove in the remaining passages we find Nasah (), literally ‘to test by the smell,’ hence ‘to put to the proof.’ in all these passages (with one exception, namely, Gen 22:1, where we are told that God tempted or tested Abraham) the word is used with reference to the way in which man has put God’s power or forbearance to the test. Thus in Exo 17:2; Exo 17:7, we are told that Israel ‘tempted’ God in the wilderness, and the place was therefore called Massah, a name derived from the word Nasah in Psa 78:41 we read, ‘They turned back, and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.’ this limitation was the setting an imaginary boundary to God’s power and goodness, and thus calling Him forth to step over that boundary. The temptations in the wilderness are referred to several times both in the Pentateuch and Psalms, and usually in the same sense in three passages, however, namely, Deu 4:34; Deu 7:19; Deu 29:3, reference is made not to the provocations which God endured when his forbearance was put to the test in the wilderness, but to the mode in which his purpose towards Israel and his power of working wonders were proved and demonstrated by his conduct towards Pharaoh and his people.
The usage of the two words will be more clearly seen if we compare other passages where they occur.
Bachan is found in the following passages:–Gen 42:15-16, ‘Here by ye shall be proved . that your words may be proved, whether there be any truth in you.’ 1Ch 29:17, ‘Thou triest the heart.’ Job 23:10, ‘When he hath tried me, I shall come fort has gold.’ Psa 7:9, ‘The righteous God trieth the hearts and reins;’ so Jer 11:20. Psa 11:4-5, ‘H is eyelids try the children of men. The Lord trieth the righteous.’ Psa 17:3, ‘Thou hast proved mine heart.’ Psa 81:7, ‘I proved thee at the waters of Meribah.’ Psa 139:23, ‘Try me, and know my thoughts.’ Pro 17:3, ‘The fining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold; but the Lord trieth the hearts.’ Isa 28:16, ‘Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone;’ the LXX, as quoted in the N.T., adopts the word elect () in this passage. Jer 17:10, ‘I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways;’ see also chap.20:12. Eze 21:13, ‘It is a trial.’ Zec 13:9, ‘I will try them as gold is tried.’ Mal 3:10, ‘Prove me now herewith’ –an idea taken up in the fifteenth verse, where the same word is used in the words, ‘They that tempt God are even delivered.’
Nasah occurs in Exo 15:25, ‘There he proved them;’ Exo 16:4; Exo 20:20; Deu 8:2; Deu 8:16; Deu 13:3; Jdg 2:22; Jdg 3:1; Jdg 3:4; 2Ch 32:31 in Deu 4:34 it is rendered ‘assay’ as well as ‘temptation;’ and in Deu 28:56, it is rendered ‘adventure’ in the A. V in Jdg 6:39 Gide on says, ‘Let me prove, I pray thee, but this once with the fleece.’ 1Sa 17:39, David girded on his armour and he assayed [It would have been better to put ‘he essayed.’] to go (lit. he was on the verge of starting), but he put the armour off again, ‘ for he had not proved it.’
1Ki 10:1, the Queen of Sheba came to Solom on ‘to prove him with hard words.’ Compare 2Ch 9:1.
It is also used in Job 4:2 (‘assay’); Job 9:23 (‘trial’); Ecc 2:1; Ecc 7:23; also in Dan 1:12; Dan 1:14, where it is rendered ‘prove.’
The two words occur together in Psa 26:2, ‘Examine (bachan) me, O Lord, and prove (nasah) me;’ and in Psa 95:9, ‘When your fathers tempted (nasah) me, proved (bachan) me, and saw my work.’
A consideration of these passages leads to the conclusion that the various evils and struggles and difficulties which are prompted from within, or which befall man from without, are ordered by God as part of the great system of probation or testing to which every child of Adam is being subjected. The agency of the Evil One is permitted for the purpose of bringing a man into that sort of contact with evil which will serve to test his real principles.
The LXX translates Bachan by , , , , , , , (the most usual word), (Eze 21:13), , , and (Pro 17:3 and Isa 28:6).
Nasah is always translated by , or one of its compounds.
Temptation in the NT
The word does not occur in the N.T., but is used three times to represent accurate, scrutinising search (Mat 2:8; Mat 10:11; Joh 21:12); is used to indicate the result of such scrutiny in 2Co 13:7; and so is found in the sense of being brought to the test in Luk 8:17, ‘There is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest;’ 1Co 3:13, ‘H is work shall be made manifest;’ see also 1Co 11:19; 1Co 14:25; 1Jn 3:10.
There is some difficulty in giving a consistent rendering to in the N.T. It often answers, both in sense as well as etymology, to the word discern, as in Mat 16:3, ‘Ye can discern the face of the heavens ;’ 1Co 11:31, ‘If we discerned ourselves (i.e. our own motives) we should not be judged of the Lord.’ in other passages the word is used in a causative sense, as when we read, ‘Who maketh thee to differ,’ in 1Co 4:7; so perhaps we should understand 1Co 11:29, ‘Not making a distinction between ordinary food and that which represents the body of Christ.’
In Jud 1:9 we read of Michael contending () with Satan; but in the twenty-second verse, where the same part of the verb occurs, it has been rendered, ‘ on some have compassion, making a difference;’ might it not be rendered ‘contending with them,’ in accordance with the previous passage? [But the text is uncertain. See R. V.] The verb has this sense also in Act 11:2, where we read that they after circumcision contended with Peter.
In the passive voice the word has come to signify doubting, i.e. the subjection of the mind and will to fluctuations and contending impulses. Thus we read in Mat 21:21, ‘If ye have faith and doubt not;’ so Mar 11:23; Act 10:20; Rom 4:20 (where the A. V. reads, ‘He staggered not at the promise’); Rom 14:23; Jam 1:6; Jam 2:4.
The word is also used of the process of scrutiny whereby a man is brought to the test. It is sometimes used as a substitute for , as in Luk 12:56, which may be compared with Mat 16:3, quoted above. So the man says of his yoke of oxen, ‘I go to prove them,’ Luk 14:19; Rom 2:18, ‘Thou discernest what is excellent.’ Compare Rom 12:2, ‘That you may make proof of what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God;’ 1Co 3:13, ‘The fire shall test every man’s work;’ 1Co 11:28, ‘Let a man scrutinise himself;’ compare the thirty-first verse, where is used. Compare also 2Co 8:8; 2Co 8:22; 2Co 13:5; Gal 6:4; Eph 5:10; Php 1:10; 1Ti 3:10; 1Jn 4:1.
Sometimes the verb signifies that the scrutiny has been satisfactory; it is then rendered to approve. So we read in 1Th 2:4, ‘We have been approved of God.’ Compare Rom 1:28, ‘They did not approve of the retaining God in their knowledge.’ in this verse the Apostle carries on the idea contained in the verb a little further, for he proceeds, ‘Wherefore God gave them up to a reprobate mind’ ( ) They rejected Him, so He rejected them. The word has usually been rendered reprobate, as in 2Co 13:5, where we have the same connection of words as in the passage last quoted, ‘Prove () your own selves . unless ye be reprobate’ () in one place, however, and that a very remarkable one, our translators have preferred to render by ‘castaway,’ namely, in 1Co 9:27, where St. Paul says, ‘I bring my body into subjection, lest, whilst I have preached to others, I myself should be unable to pass the scrutiny (of the last day).’
St. James and St. Peter concur in using the expression ‘the trial of your faith.’ Here the word is (Jam 1:3; 1Pe 1:7), and the idea suggested is that the faith which a Christian professes has to be submitted to the test of affliction and temptation, just as gold is put into a crucible and passed through the fire.
The word is used several times by St. Paul, and signifies the condition of him who has stood the test and is approved. See 2Ti 2:15, and compare Jam 1:12, ‘When he is tried,’ i.e. approved in accordance with these passages, we can understand Rom 5:4, where we read that ‘Patience worketh experience’ (). this doubtless means that as tribulation is the occasion whereby endurance or patience is developed, so this endurance becomes a test or proof that our faith is living and true.
When we turn from these various Greek words which stand for the Hebrew word Bachanto , which always represents the word Nasah, we notice a marked difference of sense. The scrutiny or testing process which we have been considering is exercised by men, aided by the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, in this life, and will be brought to bear up on the hearts and lives of all men by God hereafter. But is almost always represented in the N.T. as the work of the devil or of those who are following his guidance. Thus Christ during his earthly ministry ‘suffered, being tempted,’ and those temptations, which were of various kinds, were thrown in his path sometimes by Satan himself, and sometimes by the Pharisees and others, who sought to entangle Him in an offence against God or man in the Acts we read of Anani as and Sapphira tempting the Spirit of God (Act 5:9), and of Peter asking the brethren why they tempted God by imposing the law of Moses on the Gentile converts (15:10) in Jam 1:13-14, we have the whole history of temptation, so far as the operations of the human heart are concerned. Satan’s operations are implied, but not directly stated. A man is said to be led away when he is baited () by his own passions. But who is it that uses these things as a bait? Not God. Let no man say, in this sense, I am tempted of God. Not man; for he cannot bait the hook with which he himself is to be beguiled and destroyed. It must, then, be the Evil One, who makes use of the inclinations of the heart as a means of dragging him to ruin.
When we ask God not to lead us into temptation, we mean, Lead us not into that position, and put us not into those circumstances, in which we should be in danger of falling an easy prey to the assaults of Satan in connection with this prayer, we have the promise that with every temptation in which God permits us to be placed, He provides a way of escape that we may be able to go through without falling. He allows the way in, and He makes the way out ( ), 1Co 10:13.
One or two passages only in which the verb occurs are to be interpreted differently in 2Co 13:5, ‘tempt yourselves’ means put yourself to the test, as we see from the context, which shows that the word is used as a parallel to the verb in this sense we must understand the use of the word in Heb 11:17, where the writer refers to the temptation of Abraham in the matter of the offering of Isaac. God put Abraham’s faith and obedience to the test, whilst Satan tempted him to disobey.
Fuente: Synonyms of the Old Testament
TEMPTATION
In the original languages of the Bible, the words commonly translated temptation had a range of meanings. These words were concerned basically with testing. In some cases the purpose of the testing may have been to prove the genuineness or quality of a person or thing. In other cases the purpose may have been to persuade a person to do wrong. In todays language, temptation is usually used in the latter sense, and it is this sense that is the subject of the present article. (For other meanings of the word see TESTING.)
To be expected
God may allow people to meet temptations and trials in order to test their faith, but he will never tempt them to do evil. Rather he wants to deliver them from evil (Mat 6:13; 1Co 10:13; Jam 1:13; 2Pe 2:9). Satan, not God, is the one who tempts people to do wrong (Gen 3:1-6; 1Co 7:5; 2Co 11:3; Eph 4:27; Eph 6:11; 1Pe 5:8-9). Some people blame God when they give in to temptation. The Scriptures point out that the source of their problem lies not with God, but with the sinful desires within their own hearts (Jam 1:13-14).
Sinful human nature creates within people a natural tendency towards sin. This increases the opportunities for temptation and makes them more likely to give in to it (Rom 7:11; Rom 7:14; Rom 7:21; Gal 5:17; Eph 4:22; 1Jn 2:15-16; see FLESH).
But the temptation itself is not necessarily a sin. Jesus nature was not corrupted by sin, and his behaviour was never spoiled by sin, yet he met temptation constantly (Luk 4:1; Luk 4:13; cf. Mat 16:23; Mat 22:15; Mar 14:35; Luk 22:28; Joh 6:15; Joh 12:27). In fact, the absence of sin in Jesus was the reason Satan attacked him all the more. Satan had tempted the sinless Adam, and now he tempted the sinless Jesus. But where Adam failed, Jesus triumphed (Mat 4:1-10; cf. Gen 3:1-6).
Israel failed temptation in the wilderness, but Jesus, the true fulfilment of Israel, triumphed over temptation in the wilderness (Mat 4:4; Mat 4:7; Mat 4:10; cf. Deu 6:13; Deu 6:16; Deu 8:3). Jesus suffered the sorts of temptations that are common to human beings in general, but because he was victorious over them, he is able to help his people when they are tempted (Heb 2:18; Heb 4:15).
No excuses
Temptation comes in many forms. Satan has many cunning methods, and people can easily get caught in his trap (2Co 2:11; 1Th 3:5; 1Ti 6:9). But there can be no excuse for giving in to temptation, as some way of escape is always available (1Co 10:13).
Christians should not be over-confident in their own ability to overcome temptation (1Co 10:12). Instead they should be aware of the weakness of sinful human nature, and give it no opportunity to satisfy its desires (Rom 6:12; Rom 13:14).
Although the sin lies in giving in to temptation rather than in the temptation itself, Christians must do all they can to avoid those situations likely to produce temptation (1Co 15:33; 2Ti 2:22). This will require self-discipline as they develop better habits in their behaviour (Col 3:12-13; Gal 5:16), thinking (Rom 8:5; 2Co 10:5; Php 4:8), talking (Eph 5:11-12; Tit 2:8) and praying (Mat 6:13; Mar 14:38). The guiding influence in helping Gods people develop these better habits is the Word of God (Psa 119:11; 2Ti 3:16-17).
The struggle against temptation is more than merely a struggle with the problems of everyday life. It is a battle against the evil powers of Satan (Eph 6:10-12). God has given his Word to his people to equip them for this battle (Mat 4:3-7; Eph 6:16-17), and he has given them the assurance of victory, provided they make the effort to resist the tempter. Each victory strengthens them and enables them to live more confidently and positively in a world still full of temptations (Jam 4:7; 1Pe 5:9-10).
Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary
Temptation
TEMPTATION.The word (noun , Luk 4:13; Luk 8:13; Luk 22:28, Mat 6:13; Mat 26:41; intensive form , Luk 10:25, Mat 4:7) has a neutral, a good, and a bad sense. It may mean simply to try, make trial of, test, for the purpose of ascertaining the quality of a man, what he thinks, or how he will behave himself; but usually there is either a good (Joh 6:6, perhaps also Mat 22:35) or a bad intent. In the latter case it means to solicit to sin, to tempt. That the word may be used in the wider sense, even when rendered tempt, must not be forgotten. In Jam 1:12 temptation is used of trial generally, the issue of which is intended to be the crown of life; but in Jam 1:13 tempted is used in the sense of solicited to sin; and the writer very emphatically asserts, God cannot be tempted () with evil, and he himself tempteth no man. This statement seems to be contradicted by Jesus quotation from Deu 6:16 in His answer to the second temptation in Mat 4:7, as well as by the sixth petition of the Lords Prayer (Mat 6:13); but tempting God does not mean soliciting Him to sin, but trying His justice and patience, challenging Him to give proof of His perfection to such a degree as to incur His displeasure, and to expose oneself to His judgment; and the temptations into which God is asked not to lead us, are the circumstances or the states of mind which, though to the strong they might prove the opportunities of winning the crown of life (Jam 1:12), to weakness may be the occasions of failure and transgression. This weakness of His disciples, while admitting their good intentions, Jesus recognizes in His warning in Gethsemane (Mat 26:41), and commends their fidelity to Him in the trying experiences they had shared with Him (Luk 22:28). To the enthusiastic but shallow hearers of His words He affirmed that trials (persecution, etc.) would prove morally fatal (Luk 8:13). The cares and riches and pleasures of this life (Luk 8:14) He regarded as hindrances to the higher life. Noteworthy is the emphasis He lays on the peril of wealth (Mat 19:23-24). That Jesus discovered the moral peril in which Judas was placed from the very first indications of distrust and disloyalty to Himself, is suggested by Joh 6:70-71, which shows also the danger He feared for the other disciples. His repeated references to His coming betrayal (Mat 17:22; Mat 20:18; Mat 26:2), His plain allusion to the presence of the traitor at the Last Supper (Luk 22:21), His giving the sop to Judas (Joh 13:26), may all be regarded as loving endeavours to strengthen him against temptation; and even when all these efforts had proved vain, what good was still in him was appealed to in the pathetic reproach, Betrayest thou the Son of Man with a kiss? (Luk 22:48). Peter, too, was warned against the temptation that threatened him (Luk 22:31-32); and Jesus, who feared his fall through his self-confident weakness, hoped for his recovery, and the help he could be to others after his recovery, because He believed in the power of His own intercessory prayer.
Jesus Himself was both tried and tempted. He seems to confess His own liability to temptation when He refuses the epithet good (Luk 18:19), although He never confesses to have fallen before temptation; and the attitude He assumes to sinners implies His own sinlessness. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 4:15) states His moral position in the words, in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin; and St. Paul seems to indicate this liability to temptation without the actuality of sin in the phrase in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). St. Lukes statement that the tempter departed from him for a season (Luk 4:13), and Jesus own reference to the temptations (Luk 22:28) which His disciples had endured with Him, show that the experience in the wilderness was not solitary. It is not improbable even that the narratives of the Temptation (Mat 4:1-11, Mar 1:12-13, Luk 4:1-13) are a summary of a succession of moral trials through which Jesus in the course of His ministry passed, or at least that this record of an early experience has been coloured by reminiscences of later experiences. Be this as it may, we can find in the Gospels indications of similar trials of His fidelity to God. The desire of the people for healing (Joh 4:48) and bread (Joh 6:28), the demand of His enemies for a sign (Mat 16:1), the attempt to make Him a king (Joh 6:15), may be regarded as illustrations of the three kinds of temptation recorded. A careful study of the record of the early ministry (in John 2-4) warrants the assumption that Jesus was tempted by His enthusiasm (which see) to force the issue between Him and His enemies prematurely, and that the reserve in language and restraint in action He displayed as soon as He had discovered this peril, are to be regarded as a conquest over temptation. His escapes, as Bruce calls them (With Open Face, ch. vii.), were intended, in the later part of His Galilaean ministry at least, not only to secure quiet for the training of the Twelve, but to withdraw Him from the danger threatened by His enemies. Had He run risks before His hour, He would have fallen before what seems to be indicated by the Second Temptation (Mat 4:5-6). His own family were a source of moral peril to Him. His words to His mother in Cana (Joh 2:4) are explicable only if in her request He found a suggestion of evil, that He should use His miraculous power at the bidding of His natural affection instead of at Gods command alone. The completeness of His repudiation of the claims of His mother and brethren upon Him in relation to His public ministry indicates how intensely He felt this peril (Mat 12:48-49). The attempt to influence Him was nevertheless renewed by His brethren, when they advised Him to go up to the feast and so manifest Himself to the world (Joh 7:3-4). Peter was rebuked as the Tempter (Mat 16:23) almost immediately after being commended as the Confessor, because he sought to turn Jesus from His sacrifice. May His refusal of the request of the Syrophnician woman (Mat 15:24-27) not have been due to the fear lest a ministry of healing among the Gentiles might divert Him from the path of sacrifice to which He knew that His Father called Him? The request of the Greeks also (Joh 12:21) stirred so deep emotion, because it seemed to suggest the possibility of an escape from the Cross, which had to be rejected as a temptation. The same temptation in its most acute form presents itself in the Agony (which see) in Gethsemane.
Tests or trials which were not felt by Jesus as temptations, but which were intended by His enemies either to discredit Him with the multitude or to obtain some ground of accusation against Him, were the questions addressed to Him about the tribute to Caesar, the resurrection, and the greatest commandment (Mat 22:15-40), and divorce (Mat 19:3). The man with the withered hand in the synogogue (Luk 6:6-7) was a trap set for Him, to involve Him in the guilt of Sabbath-breaking; so also was the woman taken in adultery (Joh 8:6), that He might either by His severity estrange the people, or by His laxity be shown to be in opposition to the Mosaic law. The sufferings and sorrows Jesus passed through were Divinely appointed trials that He might learn obedience, and so be made perfect (Heb 5:8; Heb 2:10); but it is not necessary here to illustrate this discipline in detail (see Struggles of Soul). To the data from the Gospels here presented, a few observations may be added regarding the possibility, the necessity, and the nature of temptation in Jesus life.
As God cannot be tempted, the liability of Jesus to temptation proves that there was a Divine Kenosis (which see) involved in the incarnation of the Son of God. Jesus could be tempted, because He was limited in knowledge, subject to emotion, and undergoing a moral development. Omniscience has an insight into the moral character of all conduct, and a foresight into the moral issues of all choice, which exclude even the possibility of temptation; omnipotence has such a command over all its moral resources that its moral efforts, can never involve any moral strain, such as is experienced in temptation; omniscience and omnipotence, therefore, cannot know the disturbance of feeling which is possible to limited knowledge and power. To ascribe these Divine attributes to the incarnate Son of God is to deny His liability to temptation, and to make His moral development a semblance and not a reality. Liability to temptation, necessary to moral development, does not, however, imply any necessity to sin. There may be growth unto perfection, with a constant choice of good. Temptation does not arise only in a sinful nature. Natural instincts and appetites, which are morally neutral, become sinful only when seen to be in conflict with the will of God as revealed in conscience. The opinions, sentiments, and desires of sinful men may become the occasions of temptation to a sinless nature. Temptation is not sin, involves no necessity of sin, although it brings the possibility of sin.
It was necessary for the fulfilment of Christs vocation as the Saviour of men that He should be tempted without sin. His moral teaching gains force from His moral example, and He can be a moral example to us only because He passed through a human moral development. His own moral struggles enable Him to feel with us in ours (Heb 4:15). To condemn the sin of mankind (Rom 8:3) it was needful for Him not only to suffer for sin, but also to overcome sin by withstanding its assaults.
The nature of His temptation was determined by His unique vocation. The lower passions and appetites seem never to have assailed Him. He was tempted to abuse His miraculous power, His privileged position, His supreme authority as Son of God, to fulfil the popular expectations instead of His own ideal of the Messiahship, to shrink from the agony and desolation of the Cross. His temptations transcended the common experience as much as He Himself did; but, though possible to Him alone, they were as real for Him as are the lower temptations for other men. See, further, the following article.
Literature.Butler, Anal. ch. v.; Dods, The Prayer that Teaches to Pray, 143 ff.; Liddon, BL [Note: L Bampton Lecture.] 3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] 512; Ullmann, Sinlessness of Jesus, 123 ff., 264 ff.; W. C. E. Newbolt, Gospel of Experience, 98; J. D. Jones, Elims of Life, 92; D. Fairweather, Bound in the Spirit, 33; W. H. M. H. Aitken, Temptation and Toil, 1205; G. A. Smith, Forgiveness of Sins, 51; J. Stalker, The Four Men, 29.
Alfred E. Garvie.
Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels
Temptation
TEMPTATION (in the Wilderness).[On the general subject of temptation see preced. article]. The continuousness and variety of our Lords temptations have probably been obscured by the circumstance that attention has been concentrated upon one episode in His life which is distinctively known as The Temptation. This very significant incident is fully related in Mt. (Mat 4:1-11) and Lk. (Luk 4:1-13), mentioned in Mk. (Mar 1:12-13), and omitted from the Fourth Gospel. St. Marks account is of the briefest: And straightway the Spirit urges him forth into the desert. And he was in the desert forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to him.* [Note: The desert is possibly that known as Quarantania, from the forty days, and since the 12th cent. traditionally accepted as the same, a few miles from Jericho; or it may have been, as Conder thinks, some miles farther souththe dreary desert which extends between the Dead Sea and the Hebron mountains. See his picturesque description, pp. 213 to 214 of his Handbook.] The mention of wild beasts, which is peculiar to Mark, is usually supposed to be introduced for the purpose of accentuating the solitariness of Jesus, and His remoteness from all human aid. But Professor Bevan (Trans. of Soc. of Hist. Theol. 19012) finds in this mention the key to the whole incident. It seems that in the East, or at any rate in Persia, there is a traditional custom, called the subjugation of the jinn. In order to achieve this victory the candidate retires to a desert place, fasts for forty days, and when the jinns appear in the forms of a lion, a tiger, and a dragon, he must hold his ground fearlessly. Doing so, power over the demons is attained. The conclusion, says Professor Bevan, which we may draw from these facts is that the story of the Temptation, in its original form, was a description of a practice by means of which it was believed that man could acquire the power of controlling the demons. The analogy is interesting. Our Lord in this critical conflict with Satan did bind the strong man, and secured that in all future encounters He would conquer. But is there any evidence at all that the Persian custom prevailed among the Jews? Is there any ground for supposing either that our Lord would follow such a custom, or, on the other hand, that there is no foundation for the story of the Temptation in the facts of His career? And is not the simple expression, , inadequate to suggest such a conflict as is supposed?* [Note: Besides, as O. Holtzmann (Life of Jesus, 143) says: In old Israelitish times lions still inhabited the thickets beside the Jordan (Jer 49:19); in the age of Jesus the chief beast of prey in Palestine was, as it still is, the jackal. But Marks sole object in making this addition would appear to have been the desire to bring into greater relief Jesus complete severance from human society, with the idea of imparting more body to his description. Dr. Abbotts Clue, p. 115, is suggestive in this connexion.]
Order of Temptations.In Mt. and Lk. the order of the second and third temptations is inverted, while the substance of them remains identical. The order followed by Mt. is generally accepted as correct. There seems to be an ascending scale in the temptations as recorded in the First Gospel, though Plummer (Luk 4:5) says: The reasons given for preferring one order to the other are subjective and unconvincing. Perhaps neither Evangelist professes to give any chronological order.
Source of the story.As, according to all the accounts, Jesus was not accompanied by anyone during His temptation, the question naturally arises, How did the knowledge of what took place become public property? To this there can be but one answer: Our Lord informed His disciples of what had taken place. That He should have done so is probable. At first, perhaps, they might not be prepared to understand the incident; but after they had acknowledged Him as Messiah many questions as to His procedure must have arisen in their minds, and to these questions an account of His initial temptations was the best answer.
Character of the incident.The more clearly the reality of the Temptation is grasped, the less need does there seem for supposing that the tempter took a visible shape, or that any bodily transport to the high mountain or the wing of the temple took place. It is more difficult to determine whether such bodily transport was thought of by the Evangelists or is implied in their words. In Lk. the high mountain is omitted except in so far as reference may be found to it in the word . In the Gospel of the Hebrews there occurs a characteristic apocryphal embellishment: Forthwith my Mother the Holy Spirit took me by one of the hairs of my head and carried me away to the high mountain of Tabor.
Its connexion.In all the Synoptic Gospels and in the development of our Lords life, the Temptation follows upon the Baptism. In His Baptism He had been proclaimed Messiah, called out of private into public life, summoned to take among men a place which could be filled by Himself alone. He was called from the carpenters shop to redeem a world. The village youth was to represent in His person the wisdom, the holiness, the love, the authority of the Highest. How could He face this task? By what hitherto untried methods accomplish it? He had no counsellor, example, or guide. None had as yet attempted or even adequately conceived the part He was to play.
Its necessity.The burden and glory, the hazard and intricacy and responsibility of His vocation must have stirred in His soul a ferment of emotions. O. Holtzmann may overstate the risk when he says (Life of Jesus, English translation 141): There was a grave danger of His personal life being disturbed by so august a revelation, of its causing Him to plunge headlong into fantastic dreams of the future, and into acts of violence, with the object of realizing His dreams. Our Lord was not unprepared for the great vocation; He must often have considered how He could best bring light and life to His fellow-countrymen, but now that He was actually launched on the work, all past thoughts must have seemed insufficient, and He felt that still His decisions were to be made. Solitude was necessary. The Spirit that came upon Him in Baptism compelled Him to contemplate action, and in order that He might finally choose His path and His methods He must turn away from the expectant gaze and eager inquiries of Johns disciples and seek the solitude of the desert.
Its conditions.The intensity of our Lords emotion and the difficulty of decision are conveyed by the Evangelists statement that for forty days (i.e. for an unusually long period, forty being used as a round number indicative of magnitude)* [Note: It is only by travelling that one becomes aware how universal is the application of the number 40 to the features of Oriental architecture. If there is a famous building with something over a score of columns, or a town with a like number of minarets, it will be styled the hall of 40 columns or the city of 40 towers (Arthur Arnold in Academy, 12 March 1881). Forty means many (Angus, Bible Handbook).] He forgot to eat. This gives us the measure of His absorption in thought. The temptations indeed are spoken of as if they occurred at the close of the forty days fast; naturally, because then only out of the turmoil of thought did these three possible lines of conduct become disengaged and present themselves as now finally rejected. To one who adequately conceives the stupendous task a waiting our Lord and the various methods of accomplishing it which He had often heard discussed, no statement of His absorption in thought or of the strife of contending pleas will seem exaggerated.
Lines on which the Temptation proceeded.The key to the Temptation is found in the necessity laid upon Jesus of definitely determining the principles and methods of the great work that a waited Him. There were necessarily present to His mind as possible courses the various expectations current among the people. Eventually these presented themselves in three great questions: Am I as Messiah lifted above human needs and trials? What means may I legitimately use to convince the people of my claims? What kind of Messianic kingdom and Messianic King am I to represent? To each of these questions there was an answer present to the mind of the Lord, cherished by most of the people He was now to influence, and with much which superficially commended it, but which He recognized as Satanic.
The absence of the article before has given rise to the idea that the temptations were not Messianic. Against this it has been pointed out that the predicate is regularly anarthrous. But Middleton (Gr. Article, p. 62) shows that we sometimes find that the predicate of the has the Article, where the subject is a personal pronoun or demonstrative, , , , etc. This rule is borne out by NT usage: see Mat 16:16; Mat 26:63; Mat 27:11, Mar 3:11 etc. For this and other reasons we should expect the Article here, if the meaning were, If thou art the Son of God, or, the Christ. The meaning rather is, If thou art Gods Son [the emphatic place being given to , . ], if this relationship to God be the determining element in your life. But this by no means excludes reference to His Messianic dignity, it rather implies it. It was as Gods Son He had been hailed at His baptism proclaiming His Messianic vocation, and fitly, because Divine Sonship was that out of which the Messiahship sprang, and which underlay the whole vocation of Jesus as the Christ.
First temptation.The first temptation was to use for His own comfort and preservation the powers committed to Him as Messiah. The circumstances in which He found Himself lent immense force to the appeal. He found Himself faint and ready to perish. What a fiasco would His Messianic calling seem if He died here in the wilderness, and how easy apparently the means of relief: Say the word. How oft the sight of means to do ill deeds makes ill deeds done! Once only in His life can He have suffered more acutely from this same temptation: only when He knew He could command twelve legions of angels to His aid, only when He was taunted, He saved others, himself he cannot save. The use He might legitimately make of His powers as Gods Son must once for all be settled: and He settles it by recognizing that having taken human nature He must accept human conditions, and elevate human life not by facing lifes temptations on wholly different terms from the normal, but by accepting the whole human conflict: Man livesand I, being man, therefore livenot by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. He accepted absolutely the human condition with its entire dependence on God. Duty was more than food. His life was to be ruled by intimations of Gods will, not by fear of death by starvation. He, like all other men, was in Gods hand.
Second temptation.The second temptation was to establish the Messianic claim by the performance of some astounding feat, such as leaping from the roof of the wing of the temple into the crowded courts below. Once for all our Lord had to settle by what methods His claim could be made good. That which the people so frequently demanded, a sign, must have suggested itself as a possible means of convincing them. And it was an easy means, for was it not written in the book He had pondered as His best guide: He shall give his angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone (Psa 91:11 f.)? Were these words not prepared for this Messianic manifestation? Could the people, ever craving for signs, be in any other way led to accept Him as Gods messenger? Might not His whole mission fail, might He not miss the accomplishment of Gods purpose, if He did not condescend to the weakness of His countrymen and grant them a sign? But now, as always, He saw the incongruity and insufficiency of such signs: an evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign, and no sign shall be given to it (Mat 12:39 ||). But that which settles the matter in His own mind is the consideration that to attempt the performance of any such feat would be a tempting of God. He rebuts the temptation with the words, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. He perceived that He had no right to expect the protection of God in any course but the highest, in any course which His own conscience told Him was a short cut to His end. To abandon the region of mans actual needs and work wonders not for their relief and as the revelation of Gods love, but for mere display, was, He felt, to trespass the Fathers intentions. He could not count upon the Fathers countenance and help if He departed in the slightest degree from His own highest ideal. Spiritual ends must be attained by spiritual means, however slow and uncertain these seem.
Third temptation.The third question which had now once for all to be settled was, What kind of kingdom must the Messiah establish? Shall it be a kingdom of this world, such as many expected and would promptly aid Him to secure? The glory of the kingdoms of the earth had a present lustre all its own. There was in their power and opportunity an appeal to beneficent ambition not easily resisted. What might not be accomplished for the down-trodden, the heavily-taxed, the outcast, the despairing? He had Himself groaned with the rest of His countrymen under the unrighteous exactions of fraudulent publicans; why not win for His people the blessings of freedom? More than once this temptation returned in the attempts of the multitude to make Him a king. But our Lord recognized that for Him to depart from the idea of founding a spiritual kingdom in which God should be acknowledged would be to serve Satan. The craving for earthly dominion was inextricably mixed up with worldly ambitions, and could only be gratified by the use of means alien to the Divine Spirit. He felt such a kingdom to be incompatible with the sole and exclusive service of Godnot that all earthly kingdoms are necessarily Satanic, but His calling was to introduce the true reign of God among men. He saw that in order to win earthly dominion He would require to appeal to evil passions and use such means as the swordin a word, to avail Himself of the aid of evil. This was impossible.
Literature.The various Commentaries on the Gospels, and the Lives of Christ; Liddon, Bamp. Lect.8 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] p. 512 f.; Expos. Times, iii. [1891] 118 ff., xiv. [1903] 389 ff.; Expositor, i. iii. [1876] 321 ff.; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 1; W. H. Brookfield, Serm. 252, 262, 275; T. Christlieb, Memoir with Serm. 219, 238, 255; A. B. Davidson, Waiting upon God, 107; H. Wace, Some Central Points of our Lords Ministry, 59132; Th. Zahn, Bread and Salt from the Word of God (1905), 1.
Marcus Dods.
Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels
Temptation
TEMPTATION.The English words tempt and temptation are in the OTwith the exception of Mal 3:15, where a synonym bchan is used,the tr. [Note: translate or translation.] of various forms of the root nissh, which is most frequently rendered prove. In Gen 22:1 RV [Note: Revised Version.] tr. [Note: translate or translation.] God did prove Abraham. But RV [Note: Revised Version.] retains temptation for (a) Gods testing of Pharaohs character and disposition (Deu 4:34, RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] trials or evidences; cf. Deu 7:19; Deu 29:3); (b) Israels distrustful putting of God Himself to the proof (Deu 6:16; cf. Exo 17:2; Exo 17:7, Num 14:22, Psa 78:18; Psa 78:41; Psa 78:56). In Psa 95:8 RV [Note: Revised Version.] rightly keeps Massah as a proper name, the reference being to the historic murmuring at Rephidim (Exo 17:1 ff.; cf. Deu 33:8, Psa 81:7).
Driver (ICC [Note: CC International Critical Commentary.] , on Deu 6:15) points out, in a valuable note, that nissh is a neutral word, and means to test or prove a person, to see whether he will act in a particular way (Exo 16:4, Jdg 2:22; Jdg 3:4), or whether the character he bears is well established (1Ki 10:1). God thus proves a person, or puts him to the test, to see if his fidelity of affection is sincere (Gen 22:1, Exo 20:20, Deu 8:2; Deu 13:3; cf. Psa 26:2); and men test, or prove Jehovah when they act as if doubting whether His promise be true, or whether He is faithful to His revealed character (Exo 17:2; Exo 17:7, Num 14:22, Psa 106:14; cf. Isa 7:12).
2. The Gr. word peirasmos is the usual LXX [Note: Septuagint.] rendering of massh. It is also a neutral word, though in the NT it sometimes means enticement to sin (Mat 4:1, 1Co 7:5, Rev 2:10 etc.; cf. the tempter, Mat 4:3, 1Th 3:5). In the RV [Note: Revised Version.] it is almost always tr. [Note: translate or translation.] temptation, with the occasional marginal alternative trial (Jam 1:2), 1Pe 1:6); the exceptions are Act 20:19, Rev 3:10, where trial is found in the text. The Amer. RV [Note: Revised Version.] substitutes try or make trial of (trial) for tempt (temptation) wherever enticement to what is wrong is not evidently spoken of (see Appendix to RV [Note: Revised Version.] , note vi.); but temptation is retained in Mat 6:13 = Luk 11:4, where the range of the petition cannot be thus limited; cf. Jam 1:2.
3. In expounding the prayer Bring us not into temptation, and other passages in which the word has a wider meaning than enticement to sin, the difficulty is partially, but only partially, to be ascribed to the narrowing of the significance of the English word since 1611. If, as Driver thinks, to tempt has, in modern English, acquired the sense of provoking or enticing a person in order that he may act in a particular way (= Heb. hissth), there is no doubt that tempt is often a misleading rendering. Into such temptation the heavenly Father cannot bring His children; our knowledge of His character prevents us from tracing to Him any allurement to evil. The profound argument of St. James (Jam 1:13) is that God is Himself absolutely unsusceptible to evil, and therefore He is incapable of tempting others to evil (Mayor, Com., in loc.). But the difficulty is not removed when the petition is regarded as meaning bring us not into trial. Can a Christian pray to he exempted from the testing without which sheltered innocence cannot become approved virtue? Can he ask that he may never be exposed to those trials upon the endurance of which his blessedness depends (Jam 1:12)? The sufficient answer is that He who was in all points tempted like as we are (Heb 4:15) has taught us to pray after this manner. His own prayer in Gethsemane (Mat 26:42), and His exhortation to His disciples (Mat 26:41), prove, by example and by precept, that when offered in subjection to the central, all-dominating desire Thy will be done, the petition Bring us not into temptation is always fitting on the lips of those who know that the flesh is weak. Having thus prayed, those who find themselves ringed round (Jam 1:2, peri) by temptations will be strengthened to endure joyfully. Their experience is not joyous, but grievous; nevertheless, Divine wisdom enables them to count it all joy as being a part of the discipline which is designed to make them perfect and entire, lacking in nothing.
On the Temptation of our Lord see Jesus Christ, P. 447a.
J. G. Tasker.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Temptation
This word is perfectly understood in relation to the act itself as exercised by the devil, or bad men, upon the hearts of the Lord’s people. It invariably means exciting them to sin. But when the word is made use of in respect to the Lord’s exercises of his people, it invariably means the reverse. I beg the reader to turn to the memorable instance of Abraham, and consider the result of that interesting transaction, Gen 22:1-24 throughout; and read also what the apostle James hath said concerning temptation; and I venture to hope, under the Holy Ghost’s teaching, the truth will appear very plain and obvious. (Jam 1:2-15)
In addition to these precious things from Scripture I would beg to subjoin an observation, and from the same authority, that the exercises of the Lord’s people ought not to be considered in the light of probation, as some affect to call the present life, but as so many proofs of divine love. “As many as I love I rebuke and chasten, said Jesus to the church of Laodicea.” (Rev 3:19) But this is not as if to see how those whom Jesus loves will improve the trials and temptations by which he is exercising their gifts and graces; for if this were the case it would be to make the event of his grace to depend upon their use or abuse of the mercies given them, and instead of a covenant of his grace, render their final hope dependent upon a covenant of their good works. Not so the grace of God which bringeth salvation. Jesus by his death hath purchased redemption for his people; and God the Father hath engaged to bestow all the blessings of it in his covenant. The Lord therefore may, and the Lord will, bring his people as he himself was led up before them into the wilderness of temptation to try their spirits, and to prove his faithfulness: but the issue is not doubtful. The covenant stands firm as the ark did in the waters of Jordan, amidst all the beating waves, until the people are all clean gone over. And that sweet promise which belongs to the covenant, and is a part of it, never hath failed, neither can fail to every one of the people-“There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man, but God is faithful, who will not suffer yon to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (1Co 10:10)
Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures
Temptation
General references
Gen 3:1-13; Gen 20:6; Exo 34:12-16; Deu 7:25; Deu 8:11-14; Deu 8:17-18; Deu 13:3; 1Ch 21:1; 2Ch 32:30-31; Psa 119:165; Pro 1:10-17; Pro 2:10-12; Pro 2:16; Pro 4:14-15; Pro 5:6-21; Pro 6:27-28; Pro 7:7-23; Pro 9:15-17; Pro 12:26; Pro 14:27; Pro 13:14; Pro 16:29; Pro 19:27; Pro 28:10; Ecc 7:26; Isa 33:15-16; Jer 2:24-25; Jer 35:5-7; Hos 7:5; Amo 2:12; Mat 4:1-11; Luk 4:1-13; Mat 5:19; Mat 12:45; Mat 13:22; Luk 8:13-14; Mat 18:6-9; Mat 26:31; Mat 26:41; Luk 22:40; Mar 4:15; Mar 4:17; Mar 10:21-25; Mar 13:21-22; Luk 11:4; Luk 22:3; Luk 22:31-32; Luk 22:46; Mar 14:38; Joh 16:1-2; Rom 6:12-14; Rom 7:5; Rom 8:35-39; Rom 12:21; Rom 14:13; Rom 14:15; Rom 14:21; 1Co 7:5; 1Co 8:9-13; 1Co 10:13; 1Co 10:28-32; 2Co 2:11; 2Co 11:3; 2Co 11:14-15; 2Co 12:7; Gal 4:14; Gal 5:17; Eph 4:27; Eph 6:11; Eph 6:13-17; 1Th 3:5; 1Ti 5:15; 1Ti 6:9-10; 2Ti 3:13; Heb 2:18; Heb 4:15; Heb 12:3-4; Jas 1:2-4; Jas 1:12-16; Jas 4:7; 1Pe 1:6-7; 1Pe 4:12; 1Pe 5:8-9; 2Pe 2:9; 2Pe 2:18; 2Pe 3:17; 1Jn 2:16; 1Jn 2:26; 1Jn 4:4; Rev 3:10; Rev 12:10-11; Rev 12:17 Demons; Faith, Trial of; Satan
A test:
– General references
Gen 22:1-14; Heb 11:17; Deu 8:2; Deu 8:5; Deu 13:1-3; 2Ch 32:31; Job 1:8-22; Job 2:3-10; Psa 66:10-13; Dan 12:10; Zec 13:9; Jas 1:2-3; Jas 1:12; 1Pe 1:6-7 Affliction, Design of; Faith, Trial of
Prayer against being led into temptation
Mat 6:13; Luk 22:40
Instances of leading into temptation:
– Abraham leads Pharaoh
Gen 12:18-19
– Abimelech
Gen 20:9
– Balak tempts Balaam
Num 22
– The old prophet of Beth-El tempts the prophet of Judah
1Ki 13:15-19
– Gideon leads Israel into sin
Jdg 8:27
– Jeroboam leads Israel into sin
1Ki 15:30
Resistance to temptation
Gen 39:7-10; Neh 4:9; Job 31:1; Job 31:5-17; Job 31:19-34; Job 31:38-40; Psa 17:4; Psa 73:2-26; Psa 94:17-18; Psa 119:101; Psa 119:110; Amo 4:12; Mat 4:1-11; Luk 4:1-13; Mat 24:42-44; Mat 25:13; Mat 26:38-42; Mar 13:33-37; Mar 14:37-38; Luk 12:35-38; Luk 21:33-36; 1Co 16:13; 1Pe 4:7; Rev 3:2-3
Instances of resisting temptation:
– Joseph resists the temptation to commit adultery
Gen 39:7-12
– Balaam, in refusing to curse the children of Israel
Num 22:7-18; Num 24:12-13
– The prophet of Judah
1Ki 13:7-9
– Micaiah
1Ki 22:13-28
– Job
Job 1:6-21; Job 2:4-10
– Rechabites
Jer 35
– David, to injure Saul
1Sa 26:5-25
– The people of Jerusalem, not to trust Jehovah
2Ki 18:30-36
– Jesus
Mat 4:1-11
Instances of yielding to temptation:
– Adam and Eve
Gen 3:1-19
– Sarah, to lie
Gen 12:13; Gen 18:13-15; Gen 20:13
Isaac, to lie
Gen 26:7
– Jacob, to defraud Esau
Gen 27:6-13
– Balaam
Num 22:15-22; 2Pe 2:15
– Achan
Jos 7:21
– David:
b To commit adultery
2Sa 11:2-5
b To number Israel
1Ch 21
– Solomon, to become an idolater through the influences of his wives
1Ki 11:4; Neh 13:26
– The prophet of Judah
1Ki 13:11-19
– Hezekiah
2Ki 20:12-20; Isa 39:1-4; Isa 39:6-7
– Peter
Mat 26:69-74; Mar 14:67-71; Luk 22:55-60
Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible
TEMPTATION
(A) MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS relating to
(1) Satan the Chief Agent in
Gen 3:1; 1Ch 21:1; Mat 4:3; 2Co 2:11; 2Co 11:3; 1Th 3:5
1Ti 6:9; Jam 1:14; 2Pe 2:18
(2) Voluntary entering into
Gen 3:6; Gen 13:12; Mat 26:41; Luk 22:40
–SEE Allurements of Sin, SIN
(3) Encouragement to those in the Midst of
1Co 10:13; Heb 2:18; Jam 1:2; Jam 1:3; Jam 1:12; 2Pe 2:9; Rev 3:10
–SEE Promises to Tempted, PROMISES, DIVINE
(B) TEMPTATION OF CHRIST
Mat 4:1; Luk 4:2; Luk 22:28; Heb 2:18; Heb 4:15
(C) YIELDING TO TEMPTATION, the allurements which lead to
The Lure of Forbidden Fruit
Gen 3:6
The Lure of Fertile Fields
Gen 13:10; Gen 13:11; Gen 13:13
The Lure of Appetite
Gen 25:29; Gen 25:30; Gen 25:33
The Lure of Silver and Gold
Jos 7:21; Jdg 14:17; Jdg 16:17; 1Sa 13:12
The Lure of Women
1Ki 11:1; 1Ki 11:4
The Lure of Ambition
Mar 10:35-37; 2Pe 2:20
–SEE Allurements of Sin, SIN
(D) RESISTING TEMPTATION
(1) Examples of
Abraham, by Refusing a Reward for service rendered
Gen 14:23; 1Ki 13:8
Elisha, by Reusing Payment for Healing
2Ki5:16
Job, by rejecting Evil Counsel
Job 2:9; Job 2:10
The Rechabites and Daniel, by Refusing Wine
Jer 35:5; Jer 35:6; Dan 1:8
Christ, by refusing Worldly Honour
Luk 4:5-8; Joh 6:15
Peter, by Refusing a Bribe
Act 8:20
–SEE Overcomers, BATTLE OF LIFE
(2) The Duty of Resisting
Pro 1:10; Pro 4:14; Luk 21:34; Rom 6:13; Eph 6:13; 2Pe 3:17
–SEE Resist the Devil, SATAN
(E) TEMPTATION TO DECEIT, examples of
Gen 12:13; Gen 26:7; 1Sa 21:2; 1Sa 21:3; 2Ki 10:18; Mat 26:73; Mat 26:74
(F) SPECIAL SOURCES OF
(1) Worldly Snares
— False Gods
Exo 23:33
— Sinful Covenants
Exo 34:12
— Silver and Gold
Deu 7:25
— Evil Associations
Jos 23:13
— Idolatry
Psa 106:36
— Broken vows
Pro 20:25
— Friendship with violent men
Pro 22:25
— Scoffing
Pro 29:8
— Avarice
1Ti 6:9
–SEE Net, NET
(2) Enticers
Deu 13:6; Pro 1:10; Pro 16:29; Pro 28:10; 2Pe 2:18
(F) SPECIAL SOURCES OF
(3) Seducers
2Ki21:9; Eze 13:10; Mar 13:22; Act 20:30; 1Ti 4:1
2Ti 3:13; 1Jo 2:26
–SEE Deceivers, FALSEHOOD
Evil Influence, EVIL
(4) Evil Companionships, ruinous Influence of
— Injured Lot
Gen 13:12; Gen 13:13
— A Detriment to Israel
Num 11:4
— A Snare to Jehoshaphat
2Ch 18:1; 2Ch 19:2
— Devoured the strength of Ephraim
Hos 7:9
— Corrupt good morals
1Co 15:33
–SEE Allurements of Sin, SIN
Satan, TEMPTATION
The Flesh, FLESH, THE
Temptresses, WOMEN
Fuente: Thompson Chain-Reference Bible
Temptation
akin to A, above, is used of (1) “trials” with a beneficial purpose and effect, (a) of “trials” or “temptations,” Divinely permitted or sent, Luk 22:28; Act 20:19; Jam 1:2; 1Pe 1:6; 1Pe 4:12, RV, “to prove,” AV, “to try;” 2Pe 2:9 (singular); Rev 3:10, RV, “trial” (AV, “temptation”); in Jam 1:12, “temptation” apparently has meanings (1) and (2) combined (see below), and is used in the widest sense; (b) with a good or neutral significance, Gal 4:14, of Paul’s physical infirmity, “a temptation” to the Galatian converts, of such a kind as to arouse feelings of natural repugnance; (c) of “trials” of a varied character, Mat 6:13; Luk 11:4, where believers are commanded to pray not to be led into such by forces beyond their own control; Mat 26:41; Mar 14:38; Luk 22:40, Luk 22:46, where they are commanded to watch and pray against entering into “temptations” by their own carelessness or disobedience; in all such cases God provides “the way of escape,” 1Co 10:13 (where peirasmos occurs twice). (2) Of “trial” definitely designed to lead to wrong doing, “temptation,” Luk 4:13; Luk 8:13; 1Ti 6:9; (3) of “trying” or challenging God, by men, Heb 3:8.