Lent 1A - Additional Thoughts - Similarities, differences, and paradoxes abound

This morning I am stranded at home by another Maine snow storm! We haven't yet been plowed, so it's a marvelous opportunity to sit at home, drink tea, and study.

Special thanks today to W. Ray Beaver, who highlights an interesting point about the Gospel Lesson at Sunday Blogging - Wednesday thoughts toward Lent 1A.

“The tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, . .’ Could there have been anything more tempting? I believe the temptation was not the idea of commanding stones to become bread, or of commanding angels to keep him from harm, or even of submitting to the devil. Rather, the temptation was one of trying to prove that he was the Son of God

We've already seen how the Temptation in the Wilderness is the Christological response to the Fall in the Garden. It seems that even the fundamental temptation is the same. Adam and Eve were tempted to eat from the tree by the serpent who said, "You will not die; for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." On the other hand, the temptation offered to Jesus was to prove that He was God. The fundamental temptation then is to grasp at equality with God.

Philippians 2:5-11 may help inform our understanding of this:

⁵Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: ⁶Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, ⁷but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. ⁸And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death– even death on a cross! ⁹Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, ¹⁰that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, ¹¹and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

The great irony, of course, is that Jesus already was God. Unlike Adam, who was tempted to become what he wasn't, Jesus' temptation was to prove who He was. What could be so wrong in that?

As I ponder this, I am reminded that the fundamental nature of God is extravagant extroverted love--always working for the other. Throughout the Gospel accounts, Jesus never uses His supernatural power for Himself, only for others. Miracles are performed, not primarily to win converts, but to meet needs (granted, convert-winning certainly occurs--but it does not seem to be the primary focus.)

Jesus doesn't need to convert the tempter...he knows exactly who Jesus is. He doesn't need to convert Himself (Unless the real temptation is one of self-doubt, driven by that nagging little two letter word: 'if.'). Jesus doesn't need the food, wealth, or power offered by the tempter.

No. Jesus needs to remain obedient to the Father. He needed to empty Himself and become nothing--a servant. He needs to do this to provide the antidote to the choices made by the first Adam. That Adam chose disobedience and death. Jesus, the Second Adam, chose obedience and life (paradoxically, through death).

Deuteronomy 30:19-20:

¹⁹ This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live ²⁰ and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him.

Grace and Peace,

PastorJon