New Thoughts (4/7/05-4/13/05)
Jesus spent forty days in the wilderness, being tempted throughout that period, yet God saw fit to speak only of these last three attacks. Given that this is what God focuses on out of that time, it behooves us to understand what lessons are to be found in what has been recorded.
First and foremost, there is the nature of Satan’s attacks to consider. Look at that first assault. Clearly after forty days without food Jesus was hungry in the extreme, and the suggestion is, ‘well make Yourself some bread.’ Now, clearly there is nothing sinful about eating after a fast. There is, however, a great deal that is wrong about that suggestion. First, there’s this matter. From what one sees of other long fasts in the Bible, they are not undergone simply so one can eat again on the other side. They are not undergone simply as something to be suffered to show our dedication. The fasts had a purpose. The purpose was to focus wholly on God’s plan, and to take part in its realization. Moses fasted for forty days, eating only God’s presence, and in that time recorded the terms of God’s covenant with Israel. Elijah spent the duration of his fast traveling cross country to Mount Horeb where he would break his fast by defeating the priests of Baal. I hadn’t thought about this before, but what must it have done to him to smell the bull roasting in the fire of God with that kind of hunger on him?
The point is this: if the fast is all about the fast, and doesn’t lead to something accomplished, then it is not a fast God has asked for, it is merely flesh trying to look good. Jesus had not yet accomplished that for which He had fasted. He would shortly, but the time was not yet. He must first get to the mountain of God, as Moses and Elijah had before Him. To stop and eat now would be to stop short, to fall short of the mark, and therefore a sin.
The second issue with the suggestion is that more than simply calling Jesus to take sustenance, Satan called Him to use the power God imparted for His own selfish reasons. That would be an offense against the authority vested in Him, and against the anointing upon Him. That would be to forsake the heart of David for the ways of Saul. To have been so frivolous in the use of God’s infilling would be to defile it, even as Saul defiled the anointing that was upon him. Having once turned that which was entrusted to Him to His own use, His own defense, there would have been a weakening of the will. Had He failed to stand here, He never would have been able to stand defenseless at the end of His ministry, with so many angels just waiting to take up His cause. Know this: Jesus was never defenseless as He walked among man. Rather, He chose not to use those defenses that were His, for His self-defense was not the perfect plan of God.
Learn from this that the temptations that the Devil brings against us are allowed because the serve to train us. Had Jesus failed the test, as I said, He would never have been able to hold up against the greater tests to come. But, the corollary is also true. Having stood up to this early test, He had a history to back Himself with when greater challenges came. God does not test beyond what we can bear. He tests in a fashion aimed at strengthening us, and by that strengthening we are made able to bear greater tests.
A third issue with the offer to eat is that it denied God’s provision. If, as Jesus would later preach, God knows all our needs, and sees to them, if we are not to be anxious as to what we shall eat, how wrong would it be for our Teacher to operate in unbelief here at the outset? To have acted on Satan’s suggestion here would be to display unbelief, and that is exactly what Satan’s goal was and is today: to spread unbelief.
That was his attack in the garden, “What sort of God would tell you that?” That is the undertone in his twisting of God’s words when he spoke to Eve. He has not yet moved to twisting Scriptures in this attack on Jesus. He’s trying a simpler approach, the approach of the senses, but the goal is the same: Make Him doubt God. That is the whole thrust of Satan’s attack here, “If You are the Son of God.” “If You are more than just another deluded nutcase, prove it!” Satan wasn’t looking to have Jesus prove it to him, but to Himself, for if He had to convince Himself, He was already lost.
It is interesting that in this first attack, we are presented with the Tempter. Here is the devil in his role of doing his best to cause us to show ourselves false. That is the goal of temptation. Yes, it is a test, but it is a test presented for the sole purpose of seeing us fail the test. It is God who makes of the temptation a testing, for He desires that we may be shown true, that we may stand up to the test and thereby show the Liar false. More than that, when we are tested, we are tested as representatives of God. Thus, if we fail, we make Him out to be a liar. Satan’s greater goal, it should be clear, is to show God to be false. For, God is Truth. If He is once shown false, He has ceased to be God, and there is Satan waiting to fill the void!
This first attack seems at first to be wholly physical in nature. It’s about food after all. But I tell you it is not about the body, it’s about the mind. After all, it is the mind, the spirit, that will decide whether the body will be fed or not. It is not the body that decides. The attack of the devil is always first and foremost directed at the mind and the spirit, for it is the mind and the spirit that have faith believing.
With the second attack, as presented in Matthew’s account, Satan reacts to Jesus’ answer to the first. He is as much as saying, “OK, You trust Him to care for You, then throw Yourself off this peak. After all, He’s promised to cover You, hasn’t He?” Again, there is that underlying thread of, “If You are Who God says You are” in the matter. To add to it, since Jesus has used the Scriptures to counter the first assault, Satan shows his own prowess with them. “Why look! It’s written right here!” Listen. Satan’s as expert in the Scriptures as any man can hope to be. He served in the very courts of the Author, after all! He can quote chapter and verse on any subject you wish to try him on. Yes, and he can select just the right quotation to support whatever point he wants to make.
There is the great danger for us. Knowing what Scripture says is one thing. Knowing what it means is quite another. Anybody can go into the Bible to support their argument, and can pull this and that verse out to support their belief. It should be clear from the history of the Church these last two thousand years that it is equally possible to pull this and that verse and support a belief completely opposite in nature. That’s why we have denominations, after all! These divisions have arisen, by and large, over honest attempts to properly understand the Scriptures. They have not been fabricated out of whole cloth, but are backed – on both sides of the argument – by reasonable understandings of the Scriptures.
There are, however, those wolves who will do as their father the Devil has taught them. They will quote the verses that imply what they wish in the hopes of convincing the unwary. We, too, are in a very dangerous place if we come to His word with our preconceptions intact. If we study with our minds already made up as to what He has to say, then we accomplish nothing. We must ever be careful to gather and understand the full and complete message, especially as it applies to matters of sound doctrine.
If we are facing one of these matters that have sundered the church, we dare not enter into the issue having already decided our particular denomination got it right. We must be as honest as those who first brought the issue to a head, we must seek the strongest arguments not just for the opinion we hold, but also for that which we oppose. We must be willing that God may change our mind if we be in disagreement with Him. If we will not allow Him to change our mind, how shall He renew it? And, if He is not renewing our mind in times of studying His word, why bother studying at all?
Let us be, then, most careful in how we use His word. Let us be careful when learning, careful when teaching. Let us be sure that the God we present to ourselves, to our fellow believers, and to unbelievers is the God who presents Himself to us! Let us represent Him truly in all our ways and all our dealings.
This second of attack by the devil sought to use Scripture to mislead. But, Jesus was more than familiar with what was written. He had done more than memorize passages. He understood the point. Yes, God provides. Yes, He cares for Me. No, He is not overly fond of fools. It is one thing to know He will cover us when we make an honest mistake. It is quite another to intentionally make such an error just to see if He will truly cover us. It is the very difference between faith and unbelief once again.
When it comes to the proper use of God’s Word, we must display the respect His Word deserves. If we truly believe this is the message God has for His people, if we truly believe He is God, then we surely must reverence what is written in His message. We must be careful to properly understand and properly apply what He has recorded there. This issue extends, therefore, beyond even the twisting of His Word that is evident in the Devil’s usage. It goes beyond using quotes from Scripture to support what Scripture would never support. It is just as wrong to abuse a passage’s meaning in support of something truly Scriptural. To do so is to take the first step towards joining the Devil in his abuse of the Book.
What do I mean by this? I have seen many cases where a teacher took a particular passage and utterly misrepresented the meaning of that passage in support of making a certain point. The point may well have been valid and true. One could very easily and accurately have supported that point from Scripture. It was not a matter of heresy. Yet, to use the passage that was used was to so abuse the Scriptures as to display little to no regard for them. It was an example of coming to the pages of God’s Word with the meaning already determined. It was to ignore the obvious intent of the message written there in favor of the message being spoken. One recent example was a treatment of the parable of the talents. Yes, that passage uses the example of money entrusted, yet it is clearly not about money. To take that passage as indicating anything about Christian finances must surely stretch the passage. There are plenty of Biblical principles that can be applied to the subject, but this was not, I think, one of them.
Now, in presenting this temptation to our consideration, we are presented with the Devil as the Devil, if we follow Matthew’s account. Here, the name bespeaks one bringing false accusations, one seeking to divide. How does this particular office of his fit the attack that he makes? Truth be told, I think all three of the names by which he is referred to here fit all three of the temptations that are presented. In particular, this aspect of the false accuser, the divider, seems to be displayed in the refrain, “If You are the Son of God.” It’s an attempt to plant doubt. It’s also a veiled implication that God didn’t really say that. He didn’t really cause You to be born. That’s the underlying thought in every one of these attacks. He seeks to instill doubts. As the tempter, he is not so much tempting Jesus here as he is tempting God. He is trying once again to prove God false. He is trying to put Jesus into a position where either way, God is shown false, but he fails in the attempt. Had Jesus heeded Satan’s suggestion, He would have proven Himself disobedient to God’s purpose, and therefore false, even if God proved true to His Word to rescue Him. If, on the other hand, God let Him fall to His death, God was shown false. Either way, it seemed, Satan’s purpose was served.
But, it was not his purpose that was served, it was God’s. Jesus avoided the snare by knowing God’s meaning and purpose well enough to set aside the misuse of Scripture. This is the lesson we must take from this second temptation. If we settle for memorization, for knowing the words only, we are in danger. Men can quote those words to us, and we will be able to acknowledge that the words do indeed come from the Bible, but we will still be prone to being misled. If we haven’t come to grips with God’s message to man, if we haven’t fathomed its depths to grasp the intent and application of what is there, then we have not fulfilled His command on our lives. What disciple does not seek to his utmost to understand not only the mechanics of his teacher’s methods, but the purpose and meaning of those methods?
If I were to take an example from my trade, a technician might, for example, be versed enough in the language of electronics to take a schematic and follow it to the point of having built whatever the schematics were for. He has memorized what those symbols on the page mean, might even recognize that certain configurations represent particular sorts of circuits. Still, he is not to the point of truly understanding what is there. If the circuit is inaccurate, not truly suited for its purpose, he may not be aware of that. His discipline in the art of electronics has not yet brought him to that point. The engineer, on the other hand, has gone further in the discipline, understands the meaning as well as the symbol, and will see that such an error has been made. It’s doubtless a rather weak analogy, but hopefully it makes the point well enough.
So, the Devil moves on. He has tried an appeal to physical need, attacking faith in God’s Providence. He has tried an appeal to mental prowess, attacking faith in God’s Truth. Now, he proceeds to an appeal to spiritual discernment. The attack this time lies in offering Jesus that which was already promised to Him, the kingdoms of the earth. It was an offer to take up something for which He had been anointed, but before the appointed time, and quite apart from the appointed way. Had Jesus taken Him up on this offer of dominion, He might have had His own, but His purpose would have been unfulfilled. Of course, Satan knew this in making the offer. He knew full well that if he could convince Jesus to take this shortcut, though He had the kingdoms, the mission would be lost.
Here, also, we see the devil most exposing his intent and desire. It is worship he wants. It is worship he has always wanted and still does. He wants what God has. Put that way, this probably ought to strike a note of fear in us, for it’s something we all fall prey to. Satan, though, wanted what God had so badly that he was willing to put an end to God that he might have it. He wants the throne. He wants the glory that is God’s alone, and in the distorted pursuit of his lusts he loses the recognition that God’s glory is His particularly because of His purity. To seek His glory by such perverse measures, by lies and deceit is to make it absolutely impossible to gain what one seeks. Yet, he fails to notice that, and instead tries to convince others to pursue the same impossible goal. It is just another attack in the same nature. He seeks to convince us to seize now what is our inheritance anyway. He seeks to set us on the path of the prodigal, insisting on our inheritance now, before we have the wisdom of training and experience by which we might maintain that inheritance. Like the prodigal son, to have our inheritance now would be to waste in on riotous living.
What is more, in this attack Satan makes claims for himself that are utterly false. This is best seen in Luke’s coverage of the affair. “It’s all been given to me,” he says, and there ends the truth of his words. “I can give it to whomever I wish,” shifts into the lie. All authority is given by God alone, and He determines the extent of that authority, as well as the temporal limits. What has been delegated to us is not therefore ours to give away as we see fit, unless of course that authority has also been delegated to us. The offer, then, was not his to make, even were the terms so wholly unacceptable.
Now, in this third temptation, we are introduced to yet another of the enemy’s titles, that of Satan, the Adversary, the Opposer. We are introduced to this title in much the same way that we will hear it used again, when Jesus applies it to Peter a few years hence. The reason is the same. God’s purpose is not in sight for those who have made the offer of opposition. The offer the devil makes is gain without pain. It’s the temptation of laying hold of God’s promise while letting go of God’s purpose. It is to seize the baton and cross the finish line without having actually run the race. It’s the temptation of doing something that looks good, almost fits the instructions, but is in fact evil, for it runs counter to God’s intent, even though it seems to achieve His goal.
There’s that cliché running through church circles lately that says that the good is enemy of the best. This last temptation is perhaps one of the better examples of the point being made. Had Jesus settled for the good of replacing the devil as ruler of the world, that would not be a bad thing in itself, yet the best – forgiveness and life for mankind – would have been forsaken in the process. Jesus would have, as it were, won the battle but lost the war.
Before I start considering more fully the lessons of these events for me, I want to consider the question of why Luke has reordered the telling of them. Matthew’s order takes us from the physical, to the rational, to the spiritual. The progression of thought there is clear. He is building from the least important attribute to the most. The attack is building in that the enemy strikes closer and closer to the critical core with each blow. What should be made of that? I think we ought to see the enemy getting more desperate as each successive attempt fails. He begins with simplest approach, the approach to the senses and to emotions. If he can get us to react without thinking at all, then so much the better. Failing that, he will seek to trick us into wrong thinking. If the senses won’t trip us up, an untrained mind very may well. If even that fails, he will seek to impress us with spiritual displays. Scripture tells us that in the end times he will come with signs and wonders of his own, in hopes of leading the faithful astray.
I tell you, if you look across the history of the church you can see these same three attacks played out. It began with physical persecutions. It wasn’t about debating the theology, it was simply about proving their faith wrong by threats of physical suffering. That having failed, there came the attack of heresy, both in presenting the truth slightly bent, and in offering the temptation of returning to the old ways. Clearly, both of these attacks continue even today. The third phase, that of spiritual deception is also fully in play today. In many branches of the church, there is great danger of spiritual deception, of things that look like moves of God, but are merely demonic gas, magician’s tricks to lead the unwary astray. Wherever the spiritual part of life and worship is promoted to the exclusion of thought, whenever the mental faculties that God created in man are downplayed in favor of the purely prophetic and supernatural, watch out! There is the enemy’s greatest opportunity to reach into the very heart of the church and tear you out.
That is not to say that the prophetic and the supernatural are false in themselves. Not at all. It is when they are promoted beyond all balance that trouble is brewing. Just as those who insisted that there was an absolute dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual were teaching doctrines of devils, so too those who insist on such a dichotomy between mind and spirit. We heard in service last week that God cannot be separated. In other words, the three persons of the One True God are not distinct in a fashion that one could be present and not the other two as well. We cannot have the Son without the Father and the Spirit. We cannot have the Father, except both Spirit and Son be there right along with Him. So it is with man. Man is physical, mental and spiritual simultaneously. That is God’s design for him. The three areas are intended to work together in harmony and accord, all towards one purpose. When we reject one, or promote another beyond its proper bounds, we join the Adversary in opposing God’s purpose, and we aid him in leading us astray.
Well and good, but what is it Luke is doing by rearranging the events? Luke comes from a Greek background, rather than Jewish, which might, perhaps have influenced his record. He is also, according to our understanding, a physician. As such, life is precious to him, and this may be why he elevates the issue of life to the climactic position in his narrative. There is also a sense in which the ordering reflects an increase in the magnitude of the temptation. The temptation to satisfy hunger, to satisfy desires that are not altogether sinful is in some ways the most enticing, but is simultaneously the least costly, and bears the least return. The adage ‘nothing ventured, nothing gained’ seems to fit the plan of the text.
To satisfy hunger is a small thing, and to have done so would have been but a small breaking with God’s directions. Yet, it is in the small things that larger failures are seeded. No great sinner ever began with his greatest sin. It was a thing worked up to by degrees. The earlier sins are matters we may be more easily tempted to do. To eat when hungry seems such a small matter, especially when the fast has been long, and kept in full. But, if satisfying hunger defies God’s command, that good thing He has provided for us has become a sin. It is even as Paul would explain with the Law. The Law was not evil, it was provided for good. But in explaining righteousness, the Law also made us more aware of its opposite, and aroused sinful curiosities. It became a tool for temptation in the devil’s hands. It was no more evil than before, but the use that was made of it was evil indeed.
Luke’s telling moves from a temptation of the simple senses to a temptation of greater lusts. Arguably, the lust for power is one of the strongest motivators in man. From Luke’s telling, the fact that the offer was illegitimate is less in view, although the underlying requirement remains. “Worship me and it’s all yours.” Yet, even had this requirement not been added, to have accepted the offer would have remained a sin. It was still a detour from God’s plan. It was still a taking of right things by wrong means, and thereby would have been another case of making a good thing bad.
Finally, Luke moves to what is in his mind the strongest temptation, the temptation to lay hold of life itself. In this, Luke perhaps brings out the full force of that particular temptation better than did Matthew. For Matthew, the great concern in this temptation was the testing of God, of requiring God to prove Himself. Indeed, that is at the heart of every one of these temptations, is at the heart of every temptation we experience. Every temptation we undergo, as much as it seeks to prove us false, seeks to move us to insist that God prove Himself to us. But Luke shows us something more in this attack by placing it where he does. In this temptation lay the suggestion that Jesus take up the eternal life that was His before its time. It really was a temptation to grasp life itself.
Now, notice this about the temptations. In every one of them, the devil offered Jesus what was already His by right. He offered Jesus what was promised, or at least a portion thereof. The sinfulness of the temptation was not in the thing that was laid before Him, but in the means of that thing’s attainment. Food was not bad. Insisting on satisfying hunger in spite of God’s command was. The rule of nations was not bad. Indeed, it is a part of Jesus’ inheritance. Grasping it early, by wrong means, was bad. Taking the reward without having rendered the service was bad. Life from death, resurrection life, was not bad. It was the culmination of Jesus’ time on this earth, the very seal of approval on His successful completion of all that the Father had laid out for Him to do. To have taken it here, at the start of the mission, would have been wholly wrong. That is really what was at stake there on the peak of the temple. It wasn’t simply about testing God to see if He would hold true to His word. That really wasn’t in doubt anyway. It was about claiming the victory before it had come.
Wow! That raises questions in me. So many times I hear how we should declare what God has done before we see that He has actually done it, that this is the declaration of faith. I wonder. It’s always struck me as being a bit foolish to do so, but then God has been known to accomplish His mighty deeds in foolish ways before. Yet, I cannot think of a case in Scripture that required belief to declare that He had already done what had yet to be accomplished. Is that not a claiming of victory before the battle has been fought? Is that not, in its way, a grasping of the reward without the trial? That may be overstating the issue, but there is a manner of relationship in the issues. Jesus never, that I can see, insisted that God had already accomplished what clearly had not yet been accomplished, He insisted that God’s promise was certain, that the accomplishment would come for the simple reason that God had said so. This is the example I see in the apostles as well. I don’t see them telling the sick to say they are healed. I see them instruct the sick to seek prayer with thanksgiving. That thanksgiving was not, so far as I can tell, to be offered for what was yet to be done, but for the certainty that God would prove faithful.
If our testimony is given for what has not been accomplished, what sort of testimony is that? Our fellow believers might accept it, but to those who still need the Lord, it is more likely to be seen as the nonsense it is. We cannot witness to what the Lord will do. We can prophesy, but we cannot witness. It is not yet done. Our testimony must be of what the Lord has done. Best if His work is in evidence, that the truthfulness of our testimony may shine forth. Yes, if we say the Lord will do what He has promised, our word is true. If we say He has already done what He has promised, our word may very well be true, as well. It is, however, about as likely that what we claim He has promised He has not in truth promised. What then, when our word fails to have been His word? Do we suffer the penalty of the false prophet? We ought to be just as careful in declaring these unfulfilled fulfillments as we would be (or should be) about declaring, “Thus says the Lord.” Well and good if He has truly said it. Woe to us if it was just our own vain imaginations!
So, what have we learned about temptation from this encounter? First, I take those lessons that are found in the introduction of these passages. The events that we read about in detail covered but the briefest moment of time. Luke writes that the devil showed Jesus all the nations of the earth in a moment of time, ‘the twinkling of an eye.’ In all fairness, the whole business may not have taken that much longer. But, we are reading only of those specific events. The truth is that there had been forty days of trial leading up to this point, and Satan had not been idle in that time. Luke is clearest on this, I think. “[He] was led about by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil.” It wasn’t just the fasting that lasted forty days, it was the temptation, the testing.
What do we learn from this? We learn that our enemy is persistent. He will not simply run away at the first failed attack. He will keep coming and coming, hoping that he might either find us with our guard down for a moment, or so wear us down with his repeated offers that we finally succumb. Now there’s an interesting point! That’s exactly the tactics our children use, is it not? If the first request receives a ‘no’ they don’t simply capitulate, they come asking again, maybe with a slight change of phrase, although not necessarily so. If there is any doubt about the truth that we are born in sin, this ought to clear it away! This is not learned behavior, it comes natural to us. It is an inherent part of fallen man. But, thanks be to God, He provides an answer to the problem.
The answer is to apply that persistence with which we have been wont to get our way to a better purpose, to prayer. Pray unceasingly (1Th 5:17). Continue praying until the answer comes (Lk 18:1-8). Now, there is a balance to be struck here, for Jesus also teaches that we are not to simply repeat things with no meaning, to seek to bury God under a plethora of words (Mt 6:7). “Don’t be like them,” He says. “Don’t use meaningless repetition.” The two thoughts must be combined. Pray unceasingly, but not meaninglessly. What does this do for praying in tongues? It does not, certainly, rule such prayer out, for Paul speaks well of it, noting that when we pray thus, we are expressing matters that are beyond our ability to put into words, things to deep for ourselves. It is the prayer of spirit to Spirit. Therefore, we must understand that such prayer is not rejected in what Jesus is teaching, for it is One Spirit that teaches, and one Gospel that the apostles preach – the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
So, there is a place for tongues, but it is not every place. I find it doubtful that the prayer in tongues offered on command is real or proper. That is mere emotionalism. It is seeking to look good. The true prayer is that one which is the earnest expression of an earnest heart. We cannot, I think, express our needs in tongues, for these are things we know, and tongues is for that which we don’t know. It may be, probably ought to be, that as we pray for the needs we know, as we attune our hearts to the kingdom perspective, other needs will come to mind, and add themselves to our prayers. It may be that, as we continue, needs beyond our understanding will come not to our mind, but to our spirit, prompting a more direct prayer in which the mind is not immediately involved. That is, I think, acceptable and right. But it is not the persistent prayer we are called to make.
That persistent prayer life is a matter of survival for us. It is persistent prayer that sustained Jesus amidst the wilderness of temptation, and it is persistent prayer that will sustain us. That is the power by which we live out God’s truth. That is the power of not living by bread alone, but by the Word of God.
Here is lesson number two from the opening verses. The temptations were the devil’s work, to be sure, but they were done for the purpose of God. This is something I must be very careful in explaining, but it is certain truth. Notice that Jesus was led into the wilderness by the Spirit, and that for the purpose of being tempted by the devil. Mark puts it more strongly. The Spirit impelled Jesus into the wilderness. The Holy Spirit caused Him to “move straight on to His intended goal.” He led Jesus along with irresistible force. The devil would do the tempting, but the purpose of that temptation remained wholly in the hands of God. Father, Spirit, and Son are all together in this. Jesus is not being hung out to dry.
Yet, James tells us that we must never claim that God is tempting us (Jas 1:13-14), reminding us that it is our own lusts that tempt us. How do we reconcile these things? The difference is in the motive. It is the same thing that marks the difference between good works and dead works. God has, if you like, permitted the devil’s work against us. Why? He has allowed it to train us, to discipline us, to strengthen us. Now, the devil is a willing enough worker in this pursuit, and works in accord with God’s purpose. It can hardly be said, though, that in so doing he seeks to fulfill God’s purpose. Not at all. His whole goal in temptation is to prove us false, and to prove God false. Remember, it is the throne he wants and strives for, and that alone. Yet, God remains on that throne, and whatever authority the devil has to tempt us is by His command alone. God allows the temptation, but only because He knows that the temptations must be limited to what we can endure – though just barely, and that by enduring we are strengthened to stand more firmly on His word.
In a nutshell, what Satan does in hopes of seeing us fall, God permits, even ordains, because He knows we will stand. I think I have mentioned it already, but this has been the strongest lesson to me out of this whole thing: Every attack of the devil is aimed not so much at us as at God. He wants to prove God a liar. He knows we are God’s witness on the earth. Therefore, he seeks to make us witnesses that God is false. That is the root purpose of temptation, to cause us, the believers in Christ and in God, to declare by our failures that God is a liar. After all, God has said that we are not tempted beyond our ability to withstand. Therefore, if we do not withstand, we declare that He lied. What power there is in recognizing that! When I view my failures as evidence only of my own weakness, it ceases to bother me. It’s just the flesh. I can look at Romans, and twist it sufficiently to think it’s OK that I have failed. It just proves my need for God. But, when that failure is seen as a testimony, when that failure becomes a declaration of unbelief, a statement of God’s failure, how can I allow it to happen? It’s not about my weakness, it’s about God’s Truth!
Now, I mentioned that the Spirit led Jesus irresistibly to the battlefield. It must be said, though, that the Spirit did not leave Him, having got Him there. No, he remained to conduct, guide and direct Jesus throughout that time. He was never alone in that temptation. The Trinity remained whole. So it is, also, with us. The Spirit, who is our Counselor in this life, impels us into those situations that God has prepared for our training. Yes, He impels us right into the face of the devil. He does not guide us around every temptation and trap, but guides us through. He does not simply set us in harm’s way and then depart. No, He remains with us, walking us through, instructing and strengthening, and showing us the safe way through the midst of the traps set for us. It is the Spirit that reminds us of the words of Scripture, when the temptation is strong to do things our way. It is the Spirit that reminds us of Truth when those around us (or even we ourselves) are twisting Scripture to wrong purpose. When we are at our weakest, He remains strong.
Thank God for that! For, it is precisely when we are at our weakest that the strongest attacks will come. Notice that these great temptations came when the end was in sight. Jesus had been fasting forty days and nights. However strong the spirit, the body will be weak after such treatment, and the end, as I said was in sight. If ever there was a time when He might have let down His guard, this was it. We can get that way. We have been laboring hard for the Lord, putting our all into this or that act of service. Perhaps, like Jesus, we’ve been devoting time to prayer and fasting at God’s behest. Having come to the end of that effort, it’s shamefully easy to fall into a mindset that says, “There, that’s done.” It’s never done! That whisper of completion is the first sign of the attack. If we let it remain, it will not be the last.
Articles are written to tell us that the majority of accidents happen close to home. Why? Because we have that feeling that we’re there, it’s done, we’re safe. We let our guard down because the goal is in sight. The same danger is ever present in the spiritual arena. The greatest danger is in that thought that we’ve made it, that we can join Jesus in saying, ‘it is finished.’
Another lesson learned here is that whatever form the attack may take, whatever it may seem to be aimed at, the real attack is always on the mind. The mind unguarded is the devil’s playground. This is why it is so imperative that we take every thought captive, every imagination. It is in our idle thoughts that we turn to matters not fit for the mind of a son of God. It is into the idled mind that the devil can most easily speak and be heard. Recognize this truth when you are asked to empty your mind. It is not God asking that you do so. Recognize this also when you pray in the Spirit. The prayer of tongues may express what is beyond our comprehension, but it is not intended to be done apart from our comprehension. We are instructed to pray in the Spirit and with understanding. It is not an either / or choice. It is both. The creator of our mind does not instruct us to dispose of it, but to train it in the way it should go. He calls us to submit thought to spirit, not to cease from thinking altogether.
I recall, in some prior study years ago, having looked at the various terms for sin. I remember that in many cases the words brought to mind images of archery practice. There in the distance is the target of righteousness, and our acts are as arrows being fired at that target. How do we fare as archers? Not so well. Many of our arrows miss the mark, and these are counted as sins. However, they miss in a variety of ways.
Some fall short of the target, not quite seeking their range. Perhaps we began a good work, began the day with every intention of holding fast to the precepts of holiness. Perhaps we maintained ourselves free from outright disobedience, but we failed to heed the mission statement. We didn’t bear witness to His goodness in helping us to stand as we did.
Other shots fall wide. These are, perhaps, the more obvious matters of sin. They are the things we do that we would be hard pressed to say were even attempting to be righteous. The reactions we have to those who give us the least offense, these are the wide shots. The temptations that we allow ourselves to succumb to without really offering the least bit of fight, these are the wide shots. If the shots that fell short were those accidental slips when we’re trying our best, the shots that go wide are those times when we don’t even try, when we allow our flesh to be an excuse for our behavior.
The third category consists of those arrows that overshoot the mark. They were aimed at the right things, but were given a bit too much energy. I see the temptation to take up rule of the nations as being at least partially in this vein. Granted, the requirement of bowing to one who deserves no worship made the matter wholly wrong, but the rule of the nations passing to a godly man is hardly a bad thing. In fact, it is at least a portion of what was promised to Jesus. He knew it was coming to Him at some point. He knew He had been born to be King of kings. But, had He taken up His position in that moment, even had there been no requirement of worship involved, He would have sinned in overshooting the mark.
It is the same issue that David saw. He had been anointed king, but the time for him to take the throne was not yet. The one who sat upon it still remained God’s anointed, though he had failed so miserably. Though he was plagued by demons, a twisted wreckage being ripped apart by tides of jealousy, he remained God’s anointed. David would not touch him. David would not rush God’s schedule. He understood that what God had promised He would bring about, and any attempt to grab hold of what was promised on one’s own would be sinful.
Abraham learned the same thing the hard way. God promised a son, but it was taking too long in Abraham’s estimate. So, he and Sarah took matters into their own hands. If a son had been promised, well, they would just help God’s plan along a bit. He seemed to be having difficulty finding a way to get it done. But, He wasn’t having difficulty at all. The only difficulty had been in their patience. They rushed His purpose, and in doing so, they sinned. The world still pays the price of that sin, as the child born from their sinfulness wars with the child of promise.
It is a rule we need to keep in mind ourselves. God’s promise cannot be rushed. His appointed events must come at their appointed time, not at our convenience. What has He promised you? It is well! His promise is sure, and what He has declared, He will surely do. In all fairness, He will do it even if you insist on doing your utmost to mess it up. Abraham and Sarah, in spite of their attempts to shorten the schedule, still received the promised son. God’s purposes, though they bear you and I in mind, and have our good at heart, go so much further than just you and I! The son given to Abraham and Sarah, while he blessed them profusely, was not just about their joy. He was about joy to the world. He was about God’s own son.
Here in the temptation of Christ, another attempt was being made at rushing God’s schedule. Perhaps His Son could be led into taking up His inheritance ahead of time. It would be enough to mar His record, prevent His sacrifice, and condemn humanity once and for all. But, it was not to be so, for the Son understood the sinfulness of overshooting the mark. He did not consider what was His by right a matter to be grasped, laid hold of by force. It would come to Him in His time.
I wonder if He wasn’t thinking back on this event when He taught the parable of the prodigal son. He had been offered His inheritance ahead of its proper time. Granted, He hadn’t demanded it as that son of the parable had, but it was laid out before Him, there for the taking. Knowing as He did what was to come, being aware even then of the path He must travel before He received the kingdom, how great that temptation must have been! Yet, He stood firm to the end. He would not break with the Father’s timing. He would not depart from the Father’s planning. He would complete all things perfectly.
Children are as arrows in the warrior’s hands, David wrote (Ps 127:4). This Arrow, the only and eternal Son of the Eternal Father, shot by His hand, would fly true. He would not fall short of the mark, nor would He fly wide of the mark. With this test, it was also clear that He would not overshoot the mark, but would hit it square on, dead center, perfect in all His ways. And, therein lies our hope and our future!
Wow! There is so much more I had thought to discuss with regards to this section, but it seems I have been with it long enough. What a wealth of knowledge God packs into these pages He has written! I recall looking at John’s writings and thinking that he was able to put an incredible amount of wisdom into one sentence. Then, looking at Paul, I had that same impression. Paul was so capable a writer, his rhetoric so well crafted, and the knowledge that poured out of his writings was seemingly endless. I suppose it should have been more obvious to me all along, but seeing that same thing here in the Gospels, it becomes more clear to me that it is not the authors that make this great flow of wisdom possible, but He who inspired their writing. All Scripture is God breathed, after all. I suppose it should surprise us more if it were not so full to overflowing with wisdom and knowledge! He is, after all, the sum of all wisdom and knowledge.
Thank You, Holy One, for all You have shown me in this study. Thank You for those hints of other things that I feel I must leave untouched for now. Perhaps at some other point, You will have me look into why that period of forty days is so important, but that point is not now. I thank You, Lord, that You have given us so much of Your wisdom to see into, to live by. That You would expend such effort to make Yourself understood by us, what love that expresses! I thank You, also, for that understanding You have given me about the real issue of sin, and the strength it has given me to resist. May that strength grow by Your continued presence, Your continued training!
