Genesis 1:8 || Meditate the Scripture daily verse by verse
Ss lesson090913.commentary
1. 1 | P a g e
DIGGING DEEPER:
Trial/Tempt (Vv. 13-14) – These words come from the same Greek word. Context determines whether the word
is used for trials (referring to difficulties and hardships as in verse 2) or enticements to sin.
SOURCE: Life Ventures-Bible Studies for Life; Leader Guide; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern
Baptist Convention; Nashville, TN.
Trial and Temptation—The Greek root word peirazo could be translated ―to temp‖ or ―to test.‖ The meaning
depends partly on the context in the passage. In verse 13, the first use is rendered ―trial‖ in the HCSB because
God does not test humans, as we saw in session 1. God sends trials into our lives to test our faith and help us to
grow closer to Him. He does not want us to sin. James told us to welcome the testing of our faith with ―great joy:
(1:2). However, some translations rendered the first use of the Greek word as ―tempted‖ (KJV, NASB, NIV,
ESV) since temptation to sin becomes the main subject of the passage. The second use of peirazo in verse 13 is
correctly translated ―tempted‖ since temptation to sin is the key topic of this passage. What is the source of by
temptation to sin? James will tell us.
SOURCE: Advanced Bible Study; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention; One
LifeWay Plaza, Nashville, TN.
TEMPTATION: Used in KJV to refer to testing, trying, and enticing to evil. When the KJV was translated in
1611, ―temptation‖ meant all of these, but the word has narrowed in meaning in modern times. Modern
translations use ―testing,‖ ―proving,‖ ―trying,‖ and ―tempting.‖ Four distinct uses of the Hebrew (nsh) and Greek
(peirazo) words for trying or tempting are:
God tests the loyalty or disloyalty of persons. ―God did tempt (nsh) Abraham‖ (Gen. 22:1). God ―tested‖
Abraham’s loyalty to God when He told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Hebrews 11:17 says: ―By faith Abraham,
when he was tried, offered up Isaac.‖ In Deuteronomy 8:2 Moses said: ―God led thee these forty years in
the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove (nsh) thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest
keep his commandments, or no.‖ (Compare Ex. 20:20; Judg. 2:22.) Christ also tested the loyalty of persons. Jesus
asked Philip a question ―to prove (peirazo) him: for he himself knew what he would do (John 6:6).‖
Jesus’ enemies tried Him to get something to use against him. ―The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came,
and tempting (peirazo) desired him that he would show them a sign from heaven‖ (Matt 16:1). (Compare Matt.
19:3; 22:18, 35; Mark 8:11; 10:2; 12:15; Luke 11:16; 20:23; John 8:6.)
Persons are tempted or enticed to sin. James 1:13 says, ―Let no man say when he is tempted (peirazo), I am
tempted by God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.‖ Both the Old Testament and
New Testament make it clear that God does not entice persons to sin, but both indicate that God allows human
beings to be tempted. (Compare 1 Chron. 21:1; Matt. 4:1, 3; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2, 13; 1 Cor. 7:5; 1 Thess.
3:5; Rev. 2:10.) These passages refer to the temptation as coming from the ―tempter,‖ ―devil,‖ or ―Satan.‖ In 1
Corinthians 10:13 Paul said: ―There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God
is faithful, who will not suffer you 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.‖ James 1:14 says that ―every man is tempted, when he drawn away
of his own lust, and enticed.‖ Persons are thus tempted from without by the tempter or from within themselves.
2. 2 | P a g e
Jesus taught His disciples to pray: ―Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil‖ (Matt 6:13). Since God
does not entice to sin, this is a cry of the soul for help in the midst of temptation.
Persons are not to test God. Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:16 when He said: ―Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy
God‖ (Matt. 4:7). People did put God to the test. (Compare Ex. 17:2, 7; Deut. 6:16; 9:22; Num. 14:22; Acts
5:9; 15:10; 1 Cor. 10:9; Heb. 3:8-9.) When the apostles and elders from the Jerusalem church came to Antioch and
questioned the admission of the Gentiles into the church, Peter said that the Holy Spirit had been given to the
Gentiles: ―Why tempt ye God?‖ (Acts 15:6-11).
SOURCE: Holman Bible Dictionary; General Editor, David S. Dockery; Holman Bible Publishers; Nashville,
Tennessee.
Evil Desires (V. 14) – The single Greek word means a longing or desire. It can be a good or natural desire, but it
is usually used to refer to something forbidden.
SOURCE: Life Ventures-Bible Studies for Life; Leader Guide; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern
Baptist Convention; Nashville, TN.
Evil Desires—This is actually one word, desires, in the Greek of verse 14. The term can refer to either good and
natural desires or to desires and longings that are forbidden. Again, the context is the deciding factor. The HCSB
and NIV (versus the ESV) make it clear that James had in focus evil desires, as is the case in most New
Testament passages that use the word. The NASB, like the KJV, uses ―lust.‖
SOURCE: Advanced Bible Study; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention; One
LifeWay Plaza, Nashville, TN.
The Setting: After writing about how we should respond to the trials we face, James turned his attention to
temptations. We all face trials and temptations, but temptations do not come from God. James concluded this
section by pointing our attention to what does come from God. God is the giver of all good things.
SOURCE: Advanced Bible Study; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention.
FIRSTFRUITS: The choice examples of a crop harvested first and dedicated to God. In accordance with Mosaic
law, individual Israelites brought to the house of the Lord ―the first (that is, ―the best‖) of the firstfruits of thy
land‖ (Ex. 23:19; 34:26), including grain, wine, and oil, which were used—except for the grain (Lev. 2:14-16)—
for the support of the priests (Num. 18:12; Deut. 18:4). According to Deuteronomy 26:1-11, the offering was
brought in a basket to the sanctuary for presentation. The Book of Proverbs promises prosperity to those
who honor the Lord with the firstfruits (Prov. 3:9).
According to Leviticus 23:9-14, the first sheaf of the new crop of barley was presented as a wave offering before
the Lord. This took place on the day after the Passover Sabbath and was a public acknowledgment that all came
from God and belonged to Him (Num. 28:26; compare Ex. 23:16; 34:22). Not only were the Israelites to be
mindful that the land of Canaan was the Lord’s possession and that they had only the rights of tenants (Lev.
25:23), but they were also to be aware that the fertility of Canaan’s soil was not due to one of the Baals but rather
to the Lord’s gift of grace.
3. 3 | P a g e
Israel was described as God’s ―firstfruits‖ (Jer. 2:3). Christ in His resurrection is described as the ―firstfruits‖ of
them that slept (1 Cor. 15:20, 23). The Holy Spirit is spoken of as a ―firstfruits‖ (Rom. 8:23), and believers are
also spoken of as ―a kind of firstfruits‖ (Jas. 1:18). The saved remnant within Israel is described as ―firstfruits‖
(Rom. 11:16), as are the 144,000 of the tribulation period (Rev. 14:4). The first converts of an area were
designated ―firstfruits‖ (Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:15). In each case, the emphasis was on special dedication and
blessing.
SOURCE: Holman Bible Dictionary; General Editor, David S. Dockery; Holman Bible Publishers; Nashville,
Tennessee.
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND READING:
Self Deception As A Theme In James
By Lynn O. Traylor, pastor of Buckner Baptist Church, LaGrange, Kentucky.
A FAMILIAR ADAGE SAYS ―You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of
the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.‖ The saying reflects a theory that if a group of
people is large enough, a certain number either will not fall prey to a deception accepted by the majority, or the
majority will not be deceived for very long.
Ironically, the Bible reminds us that such thinking itself is deceptive, due in no small part to our ability as humans
to deceive ourselves. While Jesus portrayed Satan as ―a liar and the father of lies‖ (John 8:44), 1
and the Scriptures
clearly acknowledge Satan’s role in deceiving humanity (Rev. 20:8), the Bible is equally blunt in locating our own
contribution to deception. It declares that the human ―heart is more deceitful than anything else, and incurable‖
(Jer. 17:9). James warns against self-deception three times in his letter to believers (1:16, 22, and 26). A brief
discussion of the nature of human self-deception is helpful in understanding these warnings and why James felt
they were necessary.
At first, the problem of self-deception seems a bit difficult to grasp. We might well ask: ―How can someone be
both the deceiver and the deceived?‖2
Self-deception has long been a topic of inquiry among ancient and modern
philosophers, and their work provides some basic insights into understanding how it takes place. Self-deception
may be defined simply as choosing to manage our beliefs in order to avoid dealing with truth.3
Put another way,
self-deception is claiming a belief we have as a truth in order to avoid a truth we prefer not to believe.4
The
motivation for such ―belief management‖ lies in our feeling uncomfortable with the reality or truth confronting us.
Whereas a deceiver ―stands outside‖ others intending to lead them away from truth, the self-deceived choose
within themselves to move away from truth.5
In the past, so much scholarly attention focused on the verses in James related to faith and works (2:14-26), that
the larger message of the letter was overlooked, if not outright distorted.6
Admittedly, James touched on many
themes in his epistle, leading some scholars in the past to question what structure or strategy unifies his writing.7
While acknowledging the various themes in the text, more recent scholarship places an emphasis on viewing
James’s letter as a sort of ―community instruction‖ exhorting believers to live distinctively different lives among
non-believers.8
Why would the topic of self-deception matter to James? From a pastoral view, James was
concerned with behavior.9
Of special concern were those who claimed to be Christians but who did not
4. 4 | P a g e
demonstrate Christ in their lifestyle, a specifically Christian self-deception he explicitly addressed.10
James used three separate and distinct Greek words to illustrate both his concerns and the problems of Christian
self-deception. In 1:16, the Greek word in the admonition, ―Don’t be deceived” (emphasis added) means ―led
astray‖ or ―wandering‖ as in taking the wrong path.11
The symbolism of this word especially applies in James’s
caution to persons believing they are ―being tempted by God‖ in the trials they experience (1:13). Such a belief is
a misstep in their thinking about God, who is ―generous‖ and the Giver of ―every perfect gift‖ (v. 17). As
mentioned earlier, human self-deception occurs when persons choose to embrace a belief in order to avoid an
uncomfortable truth. The truth is that God’s nature is holiness and He is never the source of temptation, is
uncomfortable for those who either want to blame Him for their own evil desires12
or have difficulty fully trusting
themselves to God in the midst of temptations.13
The second explicit warning against self-deception urges believers to ―be doers of the word and not hearers only,
deceiving yourselves‖ (v. 22). ―Deceiving‖ here comes from a compound Greek word which, read literally,
means ―laying one measure against another‖ (my translation). The deception comes in choosing a standard we
desire rather than using an established one; this also illustrates another meaning, ―to defraud.‖14
James insisted
that to be only hearers and not ―doers of the word‖ (v. 22) represents a fraudulent faith. A genuine faith shapes
behavior; God’s Word provides the corrective image and reveals what God intends human life to look like.15
The third mention of self-deception is a warning that any religion which does not result in controlled speech is
―useless‖ (v. 26). James argued that anyone who considered himself to be religious without having a controlled
tongue ―deceives himself‖ (literally, ―to deceive one’s own heart‖).16
For James, Christians demonstrated true
faith in how it affected the content of a believer’s speech.17
Though most of his teaching on the tongue is in
chapter three (vv. 1-12), every chapter mentions a believer’s words and speech (1:19,26; 2:12-13; 4:11; 5:9,12).18
James 1:26 connects with the thought in 1:22, which warns against adopting a ―form‖ of religion that has no effect
on behavior and thus is ―useless‖ (1:26). Hearing the Word and being exposed to ―the perfect law of freedom‖ (v.
25) provides an opportunity for genuine faith, but such faith demands a response beyond just hearing. To judge
one’s self as ―religious‖ for merely having heard the Word is self-deception, rationalizing beliefs and behavior to
avoid making the lifestyle changes that such faith demands.
In summary, the first chapter of James’s epistle carries three explicit warnings against self-deception: believers are
not to be deceived regarding temptation (vv. 13-15), righteous wisdom (vv. 16-25), and religious practice (vv. 26-
27).19
Each of these warnings involves a reality or truth that demands a change in behavior. Certain, albeit
unacceptable, behaviors are possible for believers only when they allow self-deception to mask or avoid the
truth.20
James highlighted these self-deceptions as part of his overall efforts to encourage the community of
believers to live out with consistency the truth and wisdom of God.21
Because the Book of James links his warnings about self-deception to behavior, one could argue that self-
deception is an implicit theme throughout the epistle. For example, chapter 2 speaks of ―hearing but not doing‖
(compare with 1:22); chapter 3 is a commentary on ―the uncontrolled tongue‖ (see 1:26); and 4:1-12 illustrates the
self-desires of temptation James described in 1:13-16. Finally, James 4:13—5:1 implicitly points toward a self-
deception of those who think they are in control of their lives or who trust in their riches.22
In naming these
warnings, James make clear that he expected his audience to respond in faith and was confident that in heeding
God’s Word, a self-deceived person can turn ―from the error of his way‖ (5:20).23
5. 5 | P a g e
1. All Scripture quotations are from the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB).
2. Dan G. McCartney, ―Self-Deception in James,‖ Criswell Theological Review 8, no. 2 (Spring 2011), 31.
3. Gregg A. Ten Elshof, I Told Me So: Self-Deception and the Christian Life (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009),
xiv.
4. McCartney, ―Self-Deception in James,‖ 32.
5. Elshof, I Told Me So, 26-27.
6. Mark Edward Taylor, A Text-Linguistic Investigation into the Discourse Structure of James (New York: T &
T Clark International, 2006), 5.
7. Ibid., 9.
8. James Riley Strange, The Moral World of James: Setting the Epistle in its Greco-Roman and Judaic
Environments (New York: Peter Lang, 2010), 1.
9. Christopher W. Morgan, A Theology of James: Wisdom for God’s People (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing,
2010), 40-41.
10. McCartney, ―Self-Deception in James,‖ 33.
11. ― ‖ (planao; to cause to wander; to deceive) in Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature [BDAG], trans. and ed. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich,
2nd
ed., rev. F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 665.
12. Mc Cartney, ―Self-Deception in James,‖ 34.
13. Morgan, A Theology of James, 173.
14. ‖ (paralogizomai, to reckon fraudulently, defraud, distort) in BDAG, 620.
15. McCartney, ―Self-Deception in James,‖ 35.
16. Ibid., 36.
17. Morgan, A Theology of James, 95.
18. Taylor, A Text-Linguistic Investigation, 76.
19. Ibid., 104-105.
20. Elshof, I Told Me So, 8.
21. Morgan, A Theology of James, 39.
22. McCartney, ―Self-Destruction in James,‖ 37-38.
23. Ibid., 41.
SOURCE: Biblical Illustrator; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention; Nashville, TN
37234; Vol. 40, No. 1; Fall 2013.
LUST/EVIL DESIRE
By Billy Simmons , retired professor of New Testament, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary,
IN THE FIRST CHAPTER of his practical letter James set up the first of several comparisons regarding the
individual who put his/her faith into practice over against the one who does not. In the midst of this comparison,
James developed a paradigm to describe the progression of temptation in the individual’s heart to the actual sinful
act on the part of the individual. The word with which this article is primarily concerned is epithumos, which is
translated “desire” or “lust” by most English translations.
6. 6 | P a g e
This word used in James 1:13-15 is built on two separate words. The first is the preposition epi, which literally
means ―upon‖ but has a wide variety of meanings when it is prefixed to other words. Generally speaking, a
preposition prefixed to another word served to intensify the meaning of that word, but it could also alter the
meaning of the word.
The second word on which this one is built is thumos, which is the regular word for “wrath,” particularly in
Paul’s letters. It was used both for human and divine wrath. However, in Revelation it almost exclusively
describes the divine wrath.
The word thumos originally was used to describe a violent movement of something. Later the word became
associated with sacrifice, probably because of the rising of the smoke from the fire of the sacrifice. By the time of
the first Christian century, this word basically described a breaking forth of something such as anger on the part of
man or God. Paul used the term five times, and only once (Rom. 2:8) does it refer to God’s wrath.
There are two terms that grow out of the basic word with which we are dealing in this article. There is the noun
epithumia and the verb epithumein. In Greek philosophical writings, the noun was used primarily ethically rather
than morally or religiously. Basically, the word was used to describe a person who was at odds with rational
action involving his/her own personal choices.
In Jewish thought both the noun and the verb could be used to describe sinful actions. Often the noun was used to
describe a base or ungodly desire. It was used specifically to describe sinful sexual desire on the part of a man.
The verb, on the other hand, was used to describe pious striving as well as strong eschatological expectations.
Seldom, if ever, was the word used of physical love or sexual desire in a good sense.
In Rabbinic literature prior to the New Testament the noun often was used to describe the desire or even the
actions of an adulterer or adulteress. However, generally in Rabbinic literature the word was used to describe a
general disposition rather than concrete action.
In the New Testament both the noun and the verb are rare in the Gospels. The verb is used in the Gospels more
than once to express a legitimate desire. In Luke 22:15 Jesus used the verb to express His strong desire to eat the
Passover with His disciples prior to His passion. In Luke 15:16 the verb was used to describe the prodigal son’s
gnawing hunger, his ―longing‖ to eat the swill of the swine to satisfy his hunger. Again it was used in Luke 16:21
to describe the extreme hunger of the poor man at the rich man’s feast. In almost every instance where the verb is
used in the New Testament, it described a desire that was either good or neutral. It was never used to describe an
evil desire or lust.
The usage of the noun in the New Testament, however, tells quite a different story. Basically it was a neutral
word, but in the majority of its uses in the New Testament, it was used to describe an evil desire. A general rule of
thumb when translating any word or phrase is that the context always determines the exact meaning. Even though
the noun in question was generally used in the New Testament to describe an evil desire, only the context can
determine if the usage conveys a good, evil, or neutral desire.
In James 1:13-15 there is little doubt that the desire described here was less than honorable. In fact in this context
7. 7 | P a g e
the word described a desire of human will that is evil. In the greater context of James 1:12-15 James was
describing the process of evil as it developed within the human psyche.
Though James certainly did not intend to disallow the existence of Satan as an evil spiritual entity, he would not
allow Christians to blame Satan for all of the problems confronting them. On the other hand, James would not
allow Christians to blame God for their problems either. Some persons may have attempted to excuse a vile
temper or some other problem with the assertion that this is the way God made them, therefore they are not to be
blamed for their actions. The idea that is promulgated by this excuse is that the person has no control over his/her
actions. James would have none of that. In fact he placed the blame squarely on the individual. On the other
hand, James described the “blessed” person as one who was able to stand in the face of temptation to do evil
without succumbing to the temptation.
James was not entering into a philosophical discussion of free will versus predestination either. As he did
throughout this grand epistle, James was dealing with the practical outcome of desirable and undesirable actions
by a Christian individual. From a practical perspective James would not allow the individual to shift the blame for
his/her problems to God or Satan. Evil actions grow out of evil thoughts that are engendered within the person’s
psyche.
James stated that temptation was not always something that was placed before the person by Satan. The
individual’s own desire is well capable of engendering the problem of temptation. The noun translated “desire”
or “lust” is the key word, and in this context it can scarcely mean anything other than evil desire or lust. In this
context, however, the word certainly was not limited to illicit sexual desire, although this idea surely was included
as a possible understanding of the word. Any desire that would lead the individual to actions contrary to God’s
will for the person surely were included here. An inordinate desire for power or control over others might have
been included here. The desire that would have caused one to covet another person’s wealth or their position in
the church or community surely was part and parcel of the idea in this passage.
James completed his progression from the conception of the evil desire within the heart of the person to the
culmination of the sinful act, which if left unchecked would lead to death. Though James did not elaborate on the
ultimate result of this sinful progression in the life of the person, he scarcely could have been more direct in his
assertion.
Basically James has left the Christian with little or no room to free himself/herself from responsibility when the
person has succumbed to the temptation to yield to the evil desires that crop up periodically in one’s life. The
person in question cannot blame others for his/her predicament, although this is a much-used ploy in many
instances. He/she cannot shift the blame to Satan. Surely the devil is responsible for much of the evil in the
world, but James would not allow the erring Christian to blame Satan for his/her predicament in this particular
instance. On the other hand, many people want to place the blame on God for their sinful predicament. James
would not allow this to be done either. James placed all of the blame squarely on the individual for his/her sinful
problem.
Though the word under scrutiny in this article was basically a neutral one, James has used it in such a way as to
leave little doubt about the way he wanted his readers to understand it. There hardly can be any reason to translate
the word with any other English idea other than “evil desire” or “lust.” As he was throughout this letter, James
8. 8 | P a g e
was rather direct and blunt in his assessment of the basic human problem relating to temptation and sin.
James scarcely could have produced a more stark or frightening analogy for the progression of an evil desire from
its conception within the human psyche to its culmination as a sinful action in the life of an individual than he did
in this passage. All who read James’s powerful epistle would be wise to take to heart his straightforward and clear
admonitions.
SOURCE: Biblical Illustrator; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention; Nashville, TN
37234; Winter 2002-03.
Temptation
By Mark A. Rathel , Adjunct Professor of New Testament and Church History, Florida Baptist Theological
College, Graceville, Florida.
MY ADOLENSCENT SON and I recently experience a dialogue that underscores the difficulty of
communication. My son referred to his favorite musical piece as ―hot.‖ My generation expressed the same
concept through the use of the term ―cool.‖
This verbal interchange between parent and child brought to remembrance an adage my seminary professors
repeatedly drilled into students: ―Words do not have meanings; words have usages,‖ Studying the word translated
―temptation‖ demonstrates the validity of this adage. Contextual analysis determines the usage a biblical author
gave to a word.
Near the end of his life, the apostle Peter wrote his first epistle to Jewish Christians in northern Asia Minor living
in an antagonistic and oppressive society. The apostle advised Christians to expect suffering because Christ
experienced suffering (2:21; 4:1). The Christians whom Peter addressed experienced persecution in the form of
slander (4:14) and animosity for refusal to participate in a morally decadent society (4:4). Peter challenged these
Jewish Christians to steadfast endurance and unswerving loyalty in light of the reproach that came upon them
because of Christ’s name (4:14). Further, he admonished Christians not be troubled by suffering (3:14); to bear
suffering patiently (3:9); and to greatly rejoice in trials (1:6; 4:12-13).
Peter’s theme of a Christian response to suffering and persecution provides the interpretative contextual in 1 Peter
1:6: ―Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold
temptations‖ (KJV).
In the King James Version ―temptation‖ translates the Greek noun peirasmos in every New Testament occurrence
except one.1
The general meaning of peirasmos in the Greek New Testament is ―test or trial.‖2
In the New
Testament, the Greek noun developed a connotation of testing or trying the faith or character of another. A test or
trial, therefore, related to an ethical purpose.3
God positively tested by means of trials in order to prove a
believer’s faith or character.4
Satan tested by means of temptation, or an enticement to sin.5
On one occasion, the
Greek term referred to a person testing God.6
The Greek term peirasmos was rare outside of biblical literature and literature influenced by the Bible. The Greek
9. 9 | P a g e
term did not occur prior to the first century. Secular Greek literature reveals only three occurrences of the term.
The first-century physician Dioscorides provided the most significant usage for an understanding of the New
Testament.
Dioscorides used peirasmos to describe medical experiments about the effect of drugs on certain disease. Hence,
he used the word in the sense of tests or trials.
The Greek Old Testament, called the Septuagint, provides the immediate background for an understanding of the
usage of peirasmos in the Greek New Testament. In the Septuagint, peirasmos occurs 12 times altogether. The
Septuagint translators most frequently used peirasmos as a translation for the Hebrew word massa, a term with the
general meaning of ―temptations‖ or ―trials.‖
The Old Testament makes a threefold contribution in relations to the meaning and usage of trial, test, or
temptation. First, trials refer to the mighty deeds of God, in particular, the plagues God inflicted upon the
Egyptians. ―You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all his
servants and all his land; the great trials which your eyes have seen, those great signs and wonders.‖7
Second,
sinful, arrogant men tempt or test God by complaining against God. ―Ye shall not tempt the Lord Your God, as ye
tempted him in Massah.‖8
The incident at Massa, in which the Israelites complained of a lack of water, forms the
background for these usages suggesting a testing or temptation of God. Third, while the Old Testament authors
used neither the Hebrew term massa nor the Greek term peirasmos in a context of enticement to evil, the Old
Testament authors extensively used other verbs to describe an enticement to evil.
In the New Testament, the context determines whether ―trial,‖ ―test,‖ or ―temptation‖ serves as the proper
translation of peirasmos.9
On the one hand, the New Testament authors utilized the term in reference to
temptation. The most frequent usage of the term refers to Jesus’ temptation. On the other hand, the New
Testament authors utilized the term as a general description of difficulties or trials.
Peter commanded Christians to rejoice in the light of God’s protective keeping of believers until the last day (1
Pet. 1:3-12). The Greek term translated greatly ―rejoice,‖ agalliao, only occurs in biblical texts, particularly in the
Psalms (LXX) as expressive of a religious joy derived from receiving God’s help. Although believers rejoice as
they await their future revelation of salvation, they experience grief in the present because of various trials. In the
Greek New Testament, the conditional clause introduced by ―if‖ usually affirms the reality of the condition.
Hence, ―Since it is necessary‖ may be the proper translation.
Manifold or various trials is a broad generalization inclusive of a whole range of difficulties that come to a
believer. Trials have a purpose; they prove the genuineness of a believer’s faith. Like a fire that burns away the
dross, trials purify a believer’s faith.
A spiritual relationship exists between trial and temptation. A trial may become a temptation if a believer blames
God for the difficulty.
The Bible provides a way of victory in regard to trials, tests, and temptations. On the one hand, Scripture
encourages believers to endure trials with a positive expectancy that a sovereign God has a purpose in the trial.
Trials provide believers an opportunity for faithful testimony. On the other hand, Scripture admonishes believers
to resist temptation. Whether a believer encounters a trial or a temptation, prayer is the secret to victory (Luke
10. 10 | P a g e
22:40).
1. The noun occurs 21 times in the Greek New Testament. The translators of the KJV translated peirasmos in 1
Peter 4:12 as ―trial.‖
2. Walter Bauer, A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd
ed.
translated and augmented by F.W. Gingrich and F.W. Danker from Walter Bauer’s 5th
ed. (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1979), 640.
3. G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 3rd
ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1937),
351.
4. Acts 20:19; James 1:2;12; Revelation 3:10.
5. Luke 4:13; 1 Corinthians 10:13; 1 Timothy 6:9.
6. Hebrews 3:8-9.
7. Deut. 29:2-3 NASB. Other passages conveying the same usage are Deut. 4:34; 7:19. The KJV translates all
these usages with the word ―temptation.‖
8. Deut. 6:16. Other passages that contain the same use of massah or peirasmos in reference to the incident at
Massah include Exodus 17:7; Deut. 9:22; and Psalm 95:8.
9. Contextual analysis does not always result in a definite decision regarding the proper translation. Major
English translations differ slightly regarding the proper translation. The New International Version translates the
Greek term 9 times as ―temptation,‖ 3 times as ―test,‖ and 8 times as ―trial.‖ The American Standard Version
(ASV) translates the Greek term 10 times as ―temptation,’ 1 time as ―test,‖ and 1 time as ―ordeal,‖ and 7 times as
―trial.‖
SOURCE: Biblical Illustrator; LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention; Nashville, TN
37234; Vol. 40, No. 1; Fall 2013.
The Devil Made Me Do It: A Study of Temptation
By Douglas Ezell , assistant professor of New Testament, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
FLIP WILSON HAS MADE US LAUGH at ourselves with his comical routine and statement, ―The devil made
me do it.‖ Thus, we justify our selfish actions. Such justification did not originate with our generation. Adam
blamed his actions in the garden on Eve, and Eve declared: ―The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat‖ (Gen. 3:13).
In everyday vernacular, this practice is called ―passing the buck.‖ But, can we justify such action? Isn’t each
person responsible for his response to his particular circumstances?
This phenomenon of ―buck passing‖ has been revitalized by the contemporary emphasis on demonology. All
manner of ills can be charged to ―that demon who has possessed me before ever I saw him.‖ But again, what does
the evidence say? If sin is a crucial issue for men—biblically a valid case can be made for such a statement—who
is held responsible? Isn’t it the individual or group involved in the transgression? Does God let us ―pass the
buck‖?
Temptation in the Old Testament
Probably the best-known Old Testament examples of temptation and testing are found in Genesis 3:1-19 (Adam,
11. 11 | P a g e
Eve, and the serpent) and Genesis 22:1-19 (Abraham, Isaac, and the ram). The word peirazo, meaning to try or
tempt, is used in the ancient Greek translation of the account of Abraham and Isaac. Though the word is not
present in the account of the fall, the concept is clearly discussed. The context in which a word is used contributes
as much to the message as does the particular word used. For example, the account of Abraham and Isaac should
not be interpreted so as to make God the author of temptation or evil (see Jas. 1:13-15). God did set up the
conditions for Abraham’s faith and dependence to be tested, the test environment. These circumstances had the
potential of producing a test or a temptation, depending on Abraham’s response to the circumstance.
The account of the fall, however, conveys a different concept. An agent, namely a serpent, sought to draw man
from obedience into disobedience. This is never God’s stance. God is not against Himself. For him to call man
away from obedience at the same time that He is calling man to obedience would involve Him in an
insurmountable moral dilemma. He would not be God, but a devil. These two accounts compel us to distinguish
between God’s testing and Satan’s seeking to lure man into sin.
Dokimazo is a second word used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament to convey the Hebrew concept of
―to try‖ or ―to test.‖ This word is found especially in Jeremiah and Psalms (Jer. 9:7; 11:20; Ps. 17:3; 26:2).
Jeremiah declares that God tries the heart and the mind of men (Jer. 11:20), and the psalmist cries out for God to
try his heart (Ps. 17:3; 26:2). This usage of dokimazo parallels the use of peirazo in the account of Abraham’s
near-sacrifice of Isaac. The psalmist teaches that the true people of God desire to live their lives under the
watchful eye of God. They desire that He try and prove their lives in order that they might become fully what
God intended.
An evaluation of these two words, then, reveals that God does not tempt us to sin, but rather He provides an
occasion for us to triumph over sin through following His will faithfully. Such experiences are meant to
strengthen us.
Temptation in the New Testament
The situation in the New Testament corresponds to that in the Old. Peirazo can refer either to ―putting to the test‖
as in the case of Abraham, or ―enticement to sin: as with Adam and Eve. Jesus is presented at the outset of His
ministry (Matt. 4:1-11) and at the close of His ministry (Matt. 26:36-46) as one who was tempted as were Adam
and Eve. But was He tempted or tested? Perhaps that is the wrong question. Perhaps God uses a situation to test
while Satan uses it to tempt. The event is the same. What Jesus did with the issue determined its character. The
author of Hebrews sees this tempting as the ultimate proof of Jesus’ obedience, as was the case of Abraham in his
hour of trial (Heb. 2:18; 4:15; 5:7-9). God allowed Satan to put Jesus to the test. Satan used the occasion to try
Him. Jesus proved His faith and emerged stronger for the experience.
Paul used the word peirazo to mean enticement to sin (1 Cor. 10:12,13), while Peter used the same word to mean
a trial (1 Pet. 1:6). Interestingly enough, in 1 Peter 1:7 as in James 1:3, in which each author wrote of his faith
being proved by his trials, the word is dokimazo, the word used in the Old Testament of God proving His own
people to be authentic by measuring them against His standard. Trials come, and believers are proved true by the
way they react in the midst of the trial.
But let’s look at James for a moment to understand how one word can be colored by its context. In James 1:2 the
12. 12 | P a g e
word peirazo is used to talk about various trials. However, later in the same chapter James uses the same word to
declare that God tempts no one, and that man is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desires (Jas.
1:13-15). In this second passage, as in the case of Adam, Eve, and Abraham, James declares that the individual is
responsible for turning a trial into a temptation. James states his point clearly. One’s own lust is the author of
temptation and sin.
James did not state who prompts such lust. From the account of Jesus’ temptation and from that of the fall in the
Old Testament, the conclusion may be reached that Satan is ever ready to prompt and prod the lusts of men.
However, the individual is responsible for giving in these desires and allowing them to issue in sin.
From our study, some conclusions are in order regarding the use of the words peirazo and dokimazo. First, a word
must be understood in its context. Second, the individual is the determining factor as to whether trials become
temptations. Third, God continually seeks to prove His people to be authentic before and for the world. Fourth,
the distinction between God’s efforts to call His people to obedience and Satan’s efforts to prod the Christian into
disobedience. Fifth, Jesus’ temptation experience and James’ discussion of temptation emphasize that we cannot
blame our weaknesses on the devil. Satan’s power stops with his ability to prod and prompt our lusts and desires.
This leads into our sixth and final conclusion. We have been put on guard in regard to responsibility for sin. The
buck stops with the individual.
Temptation and God
Scripture is clear that God is not tempted by evil nor does He tempt man with evil. From the beginning, God has
desired to have fellowship with man on the basis of a free relationship rather than by coercion. He wants
fellowship to be based on free response to His love rather than on forced response to His power. Man’s readiness
to commit himself wholly is on trial. To be obedient and to overcome the trial is simply equivalent to depending
on God. This is where Adam the man and Israel the nation failed; but Jesus the Christ overcame. Not by divine
might did He overcome, for in that case He would not have been tempted like we are. Rather He refused to use
His divine power to overcome temptation. He availed Himself of the faith and power available to all men, and in
that strength He overcame the temptations. By contrast, Adam did not go to the Father for a clarification of His
will; he acted independently of the Father and failed. Jesus went to the Father in prayer and thus overcame the
tempter. (We are not here talking about doubt. Growth often comes through questioning. One who walks in
dependence on God, though carrying many questions about how, why, when, where, is not doubting God in the
sense that Adam and Israel doubted God and rebelled.)
God tests a man’s readiness to commit himself wholly on the basis of faith. Man challenges God to prove Himself
in sight. God has proved Himself in a Son who walked by faith and calls others saying, ―Follow me.‖
Temptation and Faith
The Bible teachings on temptation reveal a startling conclusion. Faith cannot live if it is not exposed to
temptation. Living faith is tempted faith. The life of faith, is a struggle. Some insist that the greater faith grows,
the less it is tempted and the more it is alive. But the greatest temptation of all is to believe that your are free from
all temptation. When you have arrived at this conclusion you also have declared that you no longer need to walk
by faith, that the struggle is over.
13. 13 | P a g e
Jesus warned His disciples that the world would treat them as it had treated him (John 15:18-21). Trials present an
occasion for displaying the victory already won. The danger of failing to count on God and turning the trial into a
temptation, a time of doubting and challenging God, is always there.
Luther understood the relationship between temptation and faith. He declared that the whole life of believer will
consist of being exposed to hatred, pain, rejection, execution. He saw baptism as a sign which, as a visible
symbol, soon passed from sight, as well as an experience which characterized the believer’s life. Throughout the
Christian’s experience he continues to drown sin and overcome the tempter. In the process faith continues to rise
as if constantly overcomes unbelief, as it constantly experiences the overwhelming power which is ours in the
victory won once for all, in Jesus Christ.