Archived
Post
|
Who
tempted Christ? Was it the "devil" of mainstream
Christianity, or a mortal enemy of Christ? A close
analysis of the temptation account will reveal
a number of clues which the average Bible student
has a tendency to overlook.
Let's begin our discussion with the evidence
of the tempter's own words:
Luke 4:3-9.
And the devil said unto him, If
thou be the Son of God,
command this stone that it be made bread.
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written,
That man shall not live by bread alone, but by
every word of God.
And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain,
shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world
in a moment of time.
And the devil said unto him, All this power will
I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is
delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I
give it.
If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be
thine.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee
behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt
worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on
a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If
thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from
hence:
Notice the refrain - "If
thou be the Son of God..."
Why is the tempter asking for proof that Jesus is
the Son of God? Because he's
not sure, and he wants confirmation one way or the
other. Would "Satan" truly be ignorant
of Christ's real identity? Not at all! If
Christ pre-existed, and if "Satan" is an evil, supernatural
being, then "Satan" would have known
that Jesus was
the Son of God, and he would not have asked such
a question - a question which only makes sense if
the questioner is a mortal human being.
Whoever the tempter might be, therefore, he must
be someone who does not
know if Christ is the Son of God, and
wants to know if he truly
is. Why is this significant? Let us peruse
the Gospel record:
- Mathew
26:63.
But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest
answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by
the living God, that thou tell us whether
thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
- Matthew
27:40-43.
And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple,
and buildest it in three days, save thyself.
If thou be the Son of God
,
come down from the cross.
Likewise also the chief priests mocking him,
with the scribes and elders, said,
He saved others; himself he cannot save. If
he be the King of Israel, let him now come
down from the cross, and we will believe him.
He trusted in God; let him deliver him now,
if he will have him: for he said, I am the
Son of God.
- Mark
14:61.
But he [Jesus] held his peace, and answered
nothing. Again the high priest asked
him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ,
the Son of the Blessed?
- Luke
22:66-67.
And as soon as it was day, the elders of
the people and the chief priests and the scribes
came together, and led him into their council,
saying,
Art thou the Christ? tell us.
And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will
not believe:
- Luke
22:70.
Then said they [the Sanhedrin] all, Art
thou then the Son of God?
And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
- John
1:19.
And this is the record of John, when the
Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem
to ask him, Who art thou?
- John
1:22-23.
Then said they [the priests and Levites] unto
him [John], Who art thou? that we may give
an answer to them that sent us. What sayest
thou of thyself?
And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed,
I am not the Christ.
- John
7:26.
But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing
unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that
this is the very Christ?
- John
8:25.
Then said they [the Jews] unto him [Christ],
Who
art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even
the same that I said unto you from the beginning.
- John
10:24.
Then came the Jews round about him, and
said unto him, How long dost thou make us
to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
John 10:24
requires some clarification before we move on. The
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary
has:
John 10:24 - Then came the Jews--
The rulers. (See on John 1:19).
This is consistent with the Gospel record. Many
other people also
enquired after the identity of Christ, but it was
the rulers (the chief priests and scribes) who had
asked first, and it was they who pursued him until
they finally received a direct answer.
Thus:
John 9:18-22.
But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that
he had been blind, and received his sight, until
they called the parents of him that had received
his sight.
And they asked them, saying, Is this your son,
who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now
see?
His parents answered them and said, We know that
this is our son, and that he was born blind:
But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or
who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of
age; ask him: he shall speak for himself.
These words spake his parents, because they feared
the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already,
that if any man did confess that he was Christ,
he should be put out of the synagogue.
We can be sure that "the Jews" of John
9 are members of the ruling class, because
the previous verses establish the context:
John 9:16-18.
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This
man is not of God, because he keepeth not the
sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is
a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division
among them.
They say unto the blind man again, What
sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine
eyes? He said, He is a prophet.
But the Jews did not believe concerning him,
that he had been blind, and received his sight,
until they called the parents of him that had
received his sight.
John Gill comments:
John 9:22 - These words spake his parents,....
These were the answers they returned to the three
questions put to them: and the reason why they
answered in the manner they did to the third,
was,
because they feared the Jews;
The Jewish sanhedrin, otherwise they were Jews
themselves:
for the Jews had agreed already;
The sanhedrin had made a decree, either at this
time, upon this account, or some time before...
Johnson likewise:
John 9:22 - Because they feared the Jews.
The rulers. They knew that it was agreed
to excommunicate any one who confessed Christ.
Hence they said, "He was born blind, he now sees,
you must ask him how he was cured. He is of age."
To be cast out of the synagogue was an awful punishment
to a Jew. It put him on a level with the heathen.
Now we must turn our attention to the other notable
part of the tempter’s speech:
Luke 4:5.
And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain,
shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world
in a moment of time.
Here we must ask a few questions:
- If
the tempter is “Satan”, why does he need to
climb a mountain in order to show Jesus “all
the kingdoms of the world”? Surely he can do
this by miraculous means!
- Is
there any mountain in Israel from which it is
possible to see “all the kingdoms of the world
in a moment of time”? I suggest not!
- What
is meant by “all the kingdoms of the world”,
if this passage does not refer to the entire
globe?
It is not for me to answer the first two questions,
but I shall concern myself with the third.
The Greek word for "world" here, is oikoumene.
It occurs only fifteen times in Scripture, and always
refers to the territory occupied by the Romans.
(This would have been easy to see from the height
of a mountain.) We can confirm this by reference
to the fourteen other
places where oikoumene
is found – although you must bear in mind the fact
that it is not always translated “world.”
- Matthew
24:14.
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached
in all the world
for a witness unto all nations; and then shall
the end come.
- Luke
2:1.
And it came to pass in those days, that there
went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that
all the world
should be taxed.
- Luke
21:26.
Men's hearts failing them for fear, and
for looking after those things which are coming
on the earth :
for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
- Acts
11:28.
And there stood up one of them named Agabus,
and signified by the spirit that there should
be great dearth throughout all the world
:
which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.
- Acts
17:6.
And when they found them not, they drew Jason
and certain brethren unto the rulers of the
city, crying, These that have turned the world
upside down are come hither also;
- Acts
17:31.
Because he hath appointed a day, in the which
he will judge the world
in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained;
whereof he hath given assurance unto all men,
in that he hath raised him from the dead.
- Acts
19:27.
So that not only this our craft is in danger
to be set at naught; but also that the temple
of the great goddess Diana should be despised,
and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom
all Asia and the world
worshippeth.
- Acts
24:5.
For we have found this man a pestilent fellow,
and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout
the world ,
and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:
- Romans
10:18.
But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily,
their sound went into all the earth, and their
words unto the ends of the world.
- Hebrews
1:6.
And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten
into the world ,
he saith, And let all the angels of God worship
him.
- Hebrews
2:5.
For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection
the world
to come, whereof we speak.
- Revelation
3:10.
Because thou hast kept the word of my patience,
I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation,
which shall come upon all the world
,
to try them that dwell upon the earth.
- Revelation
12:9.
And the great dragon was cast out, that old
serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which
deceiveth the whole world
:
he was cast out into the earth, and his angels
were cast out with him.
- Revelation
16:14.
For they are the spirits of devils, working
miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the
earth and of the whole world, to gather
them to the battle of that great day of God
Almighty.
Some would argue that Acts
17:31, Hebrews 2:5, Revelation 3:10, Revelation
12:9, & Revelation 16:14 refer only to
the world as a whole
(meaning “the entire globe), and I accept that this
is certainly plausible with regard to Acts
17:13 & Hebrews 2:5.
But Revelation 3:10,
Revelation 12:9, & Revelation 16:14 each
make reference also to “the earth”, which (in this
context, at least) is clearly delineated from “the
world.” John is telling us that these great events
will involve not only the territories of the Roman
occupation (in which he lives), but also the many
nations of the Earth itself. On the basis of the
evidence before us, therefore, it makes sense to
understand the tempter’s offer of the “kingdoms
of the world” as a reference to the Roman occupied
territory.
Adam Clarke (the great Methodist exegete) believes
that this is the most plausible interpretation.
From his analysis of Matthew’s temptation account,
we read:
Matthew 4:8 - An exceeding high mountain,
and showeth him –
If the words, all the kingdoms of the world, be
taken in a literal sense, then this must have
been a visionary representation, as the highest
mountain on the face of the globe could not suffice
to make evident even one hemisphere of the earth,
and the other must of necessity be in darkness.
But if we take the world to mean only the land
of Judea, and some of the surrounding nations,
as it appears sometimes to signify, (see on Luke
2:1 (note), then the mountain described by the
Abbe Mariti (Travels through Cyprus, etc).
could have afforded the prospect in question.
Speaking of it, he says,
“Here we enjoyed the most beautiful prospect imaginable.
This part of the mountain overlooks the mountains
of Arabia, the country of Gilead, the country
of the Amorites, the plains of Moab, the plains
of Jericho, the river Jordan, and the whole extent
of the Dead Sea. It was here that the devil said
to the Son of God, All these kingdoms will I give
thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.”
Probably St. Matthew, in the Hebrew original,
wrote haarets, which signifies the world, the
earth, and often the land of Judea only. What
renders this more probable is, that at this time
Judea was divided into several kingdoms, or governments
under the three sons of Herod the Great, viz.
Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip; which are not
only called ethnarchs and tetrarchs in the Gospels,
but also kings, and are said to reign, as Rosenmuller
has properly remarked. See Matthew 2:22; Matthew
14:9.
Having made these points, I shall now address the
tempter’s offer:
Luke 4:6-7.
And the devil said unto him, All this power will
I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is
delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I
give it.
If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be
thine.
This is a serious offer, and we must take it literally,
as Clarke does:
Matthew 4:9 - If thou wilt fall down and
worship me –
As if he had said, “The whole of this land is
now under my government; do me homage for it,
and I will deliver it into thy hand.”
I argue that the tempter (whom I believe to be a
member of the Sanhedrin)
is offering to strike a bargain with Christ. Observe
the nature of his questions:
- He
wants to be sure that Christ is “the Son of
God.”
- He
demands supernatural proof that Christ
is “the Son of God.”
Why is he so keen to witness a display of supernatural
power? Because the tempter himself does not have
such power, and wishes to work through the one who
does. For this reason, he attempts to bribe Christ
by offering him the kingship of the Roman occupied
territory. All he wants in return, is Christ’s submission
to his will.
“But”, you will ask, “could not Christ have gained
these kingdoms by himself, since he had the Holy
Spirit without measure, and no man could resist
him?” Of course he could – and yet, he chose not
to. The tempter knows
that he is unlikely to do it, and therefore seeks
to entice Jesus with his offer. Why? Because he
knows that he cannot defeat Jesus, and for this
reason, hopes to gain
his co-operation. A similar situation
occurs in the book of Acts.
Acts 8:9-20.
But there was a certain man, called Simon, which
beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and
bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that
himself was some great one:
To whom they all gave heed, from the least to
the greatest, saying, This man is the great power
of God.
And to him they had regard, because that of long
time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
But when they believed Philip preaching the things
concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of
Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and
women.
Then Simon himself believed also: and when
he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and
wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which
were done.
Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem
heard that Samaria had received the word of God,
they sent unto them Peter and John:
Who, when they were come down, prayed for them,
that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only
they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Then laid they their hands on them, and they received
the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through
laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy
Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever
I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with
thee, because thou hast thought that the gift
of God may be purchased with money.
Simon’s power was not genuine; it was mere trickery.
He had succeeded in deceiving the people for some
time, but now that the apostles were in town, he
realised that his days as a “great one” were numbered.
None of his tricks could match the undeniable power
of the Holy Spirit. In an attempt to retain his
credibility, Simon attempted to purchase this gift.
He wanted to achieve power that was not rightly
his, by manipulating the apostles. I believe that
the tempter of Christ was motivated by similar intentions
– although of course, there were other things on
his mind, as I shall shortly explain.
Before I go on, however, I think it is important
to realise that even if the tempter was
a supernatural being, my argument holds true. “Satan”
would surely have known that Christ could obtain
this “kingdom” if he coveted it – and yet, he still
makes the offer. So we see that my interpretation
of the tempter’s motives is not subjective; it is
consistent with the text, and it is consistent with
the “traditional” interpretation of the tempter
as “Satan.” (The same applies to my interpretation
of oikoumene,
as Clarke’s Commentary
has proved.)
If the tempter is a member of the Sanhedrin
(as I argue), then what is his primary motivation
for wanting to strike a bargain with Christ? Two
Gospels provide the answer:
- John
11:45-48
Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and
had seen the things which Jesus did, believed
on him.
But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees,
and told them what things Jesus had done.
Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees
a council, and said, What do we? for this man
doeth many miracles.
If we let him thus alone, all men will believe
on him: and the Romans shall come and take away
both our place and nation.
And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high
priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know
nothing at all,
Nor consider that it is expedient for us,
that one man should die for the people, and
that the whole nation perish not.
- Matthew
27:17-23.
Therefore when they were gathered together,
Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release
unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called
Christ?
For he knew that for envy they had delivered
him.
When he was set down on the judgment seat, his
wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing
to do with that just man: for I have suffered
many things this day in a dream because of him.
But the chief priests and elders persuaded
the multitude that they should ask Barabbas,
and destroy Jesus.
The governor answered and said unto them, Whether
of the twain will ye that I release unto you?
They said, Barabbas.
Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then
with Jesus which is called Christ? They all
say unto him, Let him be crucified.
And the governor said, Why, what evil hath
he done? But they cried out the more, saying,
Let him be crucified.
Jesus confirms the point during his prayer in the
garden of Gethsemane:
John 15:24-25.
If I had not done among them the works which none
other man did, they had not had sin: but now
have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.
But this cometh to pass, that the word might be
fulfilled that is written in their law, They
hated me without a cause.
These three passages are highly significant. They
prove beyond any shadow of a doubt, that (a) the
Sanhedrin
could find no fault in Jesus, respecting their law;
(b) Pilate could find no fault in Jesus respecting
his law; ©
the Sanhedrin
could not answer Pilate when he asked for proof
of Jesus’ alleged sins; (d) the entire trial was
motivated by envy,
not by an honest desire to keep the Law of Moses.
I argue, therefore, that the tempter who came to
Christ in Luke 4,
had hoped to bribe him with an offer of shared power.
Interestingly enough, the followers of Jesus tempted
Christ in a similar way – albeit inadvertently:
John 6:14.
Then those men, when they had seen the miracle
that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that
prophet that should come into the world.
When Jesus therefore perceived that they would
come and take him by force, to make him a king,
he departed again into a mountain himself alone.
So eager were the people to restore the kingdom
of Israel, that they were prepared to coerce the
Messiah into fulfilling God’s prophecy before the
appointed time. (An opportunity that Christ chose
not to take.) By contrast, the Sanhedrin
had hoped to bring him onto their side (hence the
visit of the tempter in Luke 4.) But this
proved unsuccessful. As time went on, and their
credibility with the people began to suffer, the
Sanhedrin decided to eliminate Christ because
(a) he had turned the hearts of the people against
them, and (b) he had proven himself to be wholly
incorruptible. Unlike Judas and the soldiers who
later guarded his tomb, Christ could not be bribed
or threatened. |
