How was turning stones into bread a temptation in Matthew 4:3/Luke 4:3?

[Maria Billingsley]

The devil's attempt to tempt Jesus is well known from Matthew 4:1-11. The pertinent portion for us is Matthew 4:1-4:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

The same account is in Luke (Mark also mentions it, but skips over the specifics of the temptations). Now, the subsequent two temptations were to suggest that Jesus jump off the temple for angels would save Jesus, and the last was to offer Jesus the world in exchange for worshipping the devil.

But there seems a dissonance to me here. The latter two temptations--particularly as demonstrated by the passages Jesus cites--are actually wrong things to do. You shouldn't jump off of a temple roof and you definitely shouldn't worship the devil, even in exchange for the world. But what is wrong with turning stones to become bread? In fact, while not specifically done from stones, we do have the miraculous multiplying of the bread described elsewhere in the Gospels. Even the passage Jesus used to refute the offer doesn't actually condemn the eating of bread in any way; it just says not to live by bread alone. There seems nothing wrong with eating bread, and the miracle of the loaves indicates there's nothing wrong with miraculously creating bread either.

Thus I'm confused, and perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can explain. What exactly was wrong with turning the stones into bread to eat that made it a temptation to be resisted?

Direct interation with Satan would be a violation of His divinity. Would God, in the flesh, succumb to Satan's wishes ? In other words, when did God ever take direction from Satan? Never!
Blessings

 

[Rachel20]

What exactly was wrong with turning the stones into bread to eat that made it a temptation to be resisted?

This question reminds me of Christ saying there are certain devils that come out only by prayer and fasting (Matthew 17:21). Ultimately, it's a matter of faith (v20), but fasting seems to be involved with that level of faith. So I would speculate that Satan was trying to get him to break his fast, to be more vulnerable to the two temptations that were to follow.

 

[Hazelelponi]

But Didn't Jesus yield to the flesh in John 19:28 ??? Whats wrong with eating when your hungry?? Is a person only suppose to eat 1 meal every 40 days ???

Jesus said "I thirst" in order that all prophecy concerning Him might be fulfilled, not because He thought they would give Him a nice drink of cold water.

Psalm 69:21: “They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst."

Christ did nothing that wasn't required of Him, that includes fighting against any desire to break fast.

Good article on fasting: God’s Chosen Fast

 

[pescador]

The devil's attempt to tempt Jesus is well known from Matthew 4:1-11. The pertinent portion for us is Matthew 4:1-4:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

The same account is in Luke (Mark also mentions it, but skips over the specifics of the temptations). Now, the subsequent two temptations were to suggest that Jesus jump off the temple for angels would save Jesus, and the last was to offer Jesus the world in exchange for worshipping the devil.

But there seems a dissonance to me here. The latter two temptations--particularly as demonstrated by the passages Jesus cites--are actually wrong things to do. You shouldn't jump off of a temple roof and you definitely shouldn't worship the devil, even in exchange for the world. But what is wrong with turning stones to become bread? In fact, while not specifically done from stones, we do have the miraculous multiplying of the bread described elsewhere in the Gospels. Even the passage Jesus used to refute the offer doesn't actually condemn the eating of bread in any way; it just says not to live by bread alone. There seems nothing wrong with eating bread, and the miracle of the loaves indicates there's nothing wrong with miraculously creating bread either.

Thus I'm confused, and perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can explain. What exactly was wrong with turning the stones into bread to eat that made it a temptation to be resisted?

Since Jesus hadn't eaten for forty days he was hungry. The devil tempted Him but He showed that the Word of God (even when extremely hungry) is better than bread; spiritual food is more important than physical food.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The devil's attempt to tempt Jesus is well known from Matthew 4:1-11. The pertinent portion for us is Matthew 4:1-4:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

The same account is in Luke (Mark also mentions it, but skips over the specifics of the temptations). Now, the subsequent two temptations were to suggest that Jesus jump off the temple for angels would save Jesus, and the last was to offer Jesus the world in exchange for worshipping the devil.

But there seems a dissonance to me here. The latter two temptations--particularly as demonstrated by the passages Jesus cites--are actually wrong things to do. You shouldn't jump off of a temple roof and you definitely shouldn't worship the devil, even in exchange for the world. But what is wrong with turning stones to become bread? In fact, while not specifically done from stones, we do have the miraculous multiplying of the bread described elsewhere in the Gospels. Even the passage Jesus used to refute the offer doesn't actually condemn the eating of bread in any way; it just says not to live by bread alone. There seems nothing wrong with eating bread, and the miracle of the loaves indicates there's nothing wrong with miraculously creating bread either.

Thus I'm confused, and perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can explain. What exactly was wrong with turning the stones into bread to eat that made it a temptation to be resisted?

satan was trying to get Jesus to end His fast for The Father. Jesus was fasting and satan was tempting Him to eat and end His fast.

 

[Fervent]

The temptation in the wilderness was so that Jesus would face all the temptations ordinary men face that cause them to turn from the provision of God. He is facing the very same trials that the Jewish people faced and failed to trust God, and so ending the trial by using powers unavailable to ordinary men would be to say that the test was beyond the limits of even the ideal man. Jesus overcame at every point the wilderness generation failed to overcome, as the temptation is to deny that God will provide.

 

[Randy777]

I note the temptations all began with, "If you are the Son of God"

Just as the last temptation as Jesus was in agony submitting to the Fathers will.

Well then, if you are the Son of God, save yourself and come down from the cross!”

So Jesus had fasted 40 days following Gods will. (Led by the Spirit into the wilderness)
In that context Satan was also asking Him to save Himself from God's trial.
“If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

Jesus refused.

 

[Eloy Craft]

His answer wasn't something just written but a reality for Him. I believe the food He is telling the disciples about is available only to those without sin therefore immortal. The tree of life sustains immortality before death entered human life. I think He alludes to that reality in the passage below. Because He is the Son of God He doesn't need to eat just as He didn't need to eat in the below passage.
I'm thinking that turning the stones to bread wouldn't prove He is the Son of God as much as be a denial that He is. Acting as if He is subject to the law of death and the hunger that comes with fallen mortal life. Just a thought.


John 4
Meanwhile, the disciples urged him, “Rabbi, eat.” 32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat of which you do not know.” 33 So the disciples said to one another, “Could someone have brought him something to eat?” 34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who sent me and to finish his work.

 

[RDKirk]

Turning stones to bread would be yielding to the flesh desire, Jesus was hungry.
Jumping off the temple would be displaying His pride by showing that the angels would save Him as it states in O.T. prophesy. (see how important I am)
Worshiping Satan would be abandoning the mission assigned to Him by the Father thru disobedience to avoid the pain that was to come. (Thus pride again along with disobedience) (placing His comfort above the needs of sinners) ( loving Himself more than mankind)

We can also take note that the three temptations mirror John's categorization of sin:

For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.--1 John 2:16

Turning the stone to bread was Satan's urging to satisfy the lust of His flesh by His own power. That was essentially what Satan had also urged Eve to do:

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. -- Genesis 3:6

Again, John's categorization of sin is mirrored: The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.

Jesus did not obey His flesh, His flesh obeyed Him.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Turning the stone to bread was Satan's urging to satisfy the lust of His flesh by His own power. That was essentially what Satan had also urged Eve to d

Jesus wasn't subject to flesh in rebellion. His flesh couldn't lust. His body didn't inherit death so it isn't like our fallen bodies. His body wasn't imposing on His will a need to survive as a fallen body like ours.

Romans 7:22

For I delight in the law of God in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, with my mind I am a slave to the law of God, but with my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin.

 

[RDKirk]

Jesus wasn't subject to flesh in rebellion. His flesh couldn't lust. His body didn't inherit death so it isn't like our fallen bodies. His body wasn't imposing on His will a need to survive as a fallen body like ours.

Of course his flesh had its natural lusts. It says right there, explicitly "He was hungry."

But Jesus was not a slave to the natural lusts of His body, and that was the point of His resistance to that temptation.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Of course his flesh had its natural lusts. It says right there, explicitly "He was hungry."

But Jesus was not a slave to the natural lusts of His body, and that was the point of His resistance to that temptation.

Let me clarify
Because we die, for us hunger is a matter of survival. Desperation accompanies hunger for a body destined for death. Not so for Jesus. I suggest one consider how different a body that doesn't die would be like from one that does. Paul thought about it and taught about it.
Adam and Eve experienced that change. Their bodies informed them of their fallen state and that's when they felt shame for the first time. They covered their bodies and hid from God.

 

[jamiec]

The devil's attempt to tempt Jesus is well known from Matthew 4:1-11. The pertinent portion for us is Matthew 4:1-4:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” 4 But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

The same account is in Luke (Mark also mentions it, but skips over the specifics of the temptations). Now, the subsequent two temptations were to suggest that Jesus jump off the temple for angels would save Jesus, and the last was to offer Jesus the world in exchange for worshipping the devil.

But there seems a dissonance to me here. The latter two temptations--particularly as demonstrated by the passages Jesus cites--are actually wrong things to do. You shouldn't jump off of a temple roof and you definitely shouldn't worship the devil, even in exchange for the world. But what is wrong with turning stones to become bread? In fact, while not specifically done from stones, we do have the miraculous multiplying of the bread described elsewhere in the Gospels. Even the passage Jesus used to refute the offer doesn't actually condemn the eating of bread in any way; it just says not to live by bread alone. There seems nothing wrong with eating bread, and the miracle of the loaves indicates there's nothing wrong with miraculously creating bread either.

Thus I'm confused, and perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can explain. What exactly was wrong with turning the stones into bread to eat that made it a temptation to be resisted?

Jesus is Israel personified. Israel was the son of God; in the desert Israel lusted for food and complained against Moses (and so, against God Who sent Moses) - so the Son of God Who is the New Israel (and better Moses) re-lived the experience - but this time, in total obedient trust in and love of the Father. The tempter was trying to get Jesus not to depend unreservedly upon the Father, to pit His Will, and His human needs, against His Father's Will. There are always excellent reasons to disobey God - the human need for food, is as good a one as any. What is wrong, is not the eating, but the disobedience: I think there is a fairly clear reference here to Genesis 3 as well: Jesus is the New, and Better/Greater, Adam; the Man from Heaven, not from the dust of the ground.

The tempter tried to get Jesus to use God's Power in Him for trivial and selfish and faithless purposes - to "think as men think, rather than as God thinks". Since Jesus is the Father's Anointed King, on Whom the Father's favour rests, the tempter was in effect trying to thwart the coming of the Kingdom of God, by leading Jesus to be unfaithful to the Father.

 

[RDKirk]

Let me clarify
Because we die, for us hunger is a matter of survival. Desperation accompanies hunger for a body destined for death. Not so for Jesus. I suggest one consider how different a body that doesn't die would be like from one that does. Paul thought about it and taught about it.
Adam and Eve experienced that change. Their bodies informed them of their fallen state and that's when they felt shame for the first time. They covered their bodies and hid from God.

Jesus had a material body that was subject to the normal needs of a material body. Otherwise, the writer of Hebrews would be a liar:

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. -- Hebrews 4

The "every way" here refers to the categories of sin defined by John: Lust of the flesh, lust of the eye, and pride of life...which were the three specific temptations that Satan attempted against Jesus in the wilderness. That event was the fulfilment of Hebrews 4.

The difference between Jesus and us is that Jesus had complete control over His material body. He was completely realized as the "image of God" as Adam was originally created. But even Adam--as originally created--ate and rested in his material body.

 

[Eloy Craft]

The "every way" here refers to the categories of sin defined by John: Lust of the flesh, lust of the eye, and pride of life...which were the three specific temptations that Satan attempted against Jesus in the wilderness. That event was the fulfilment of

You are thinking Jesus had the same law in His members as Paul described in Romans. No other law in Jesus' members like Paul's. That's a reality if death has a hold on you.

The difference between Jesus and us is that Jesus had complete control over His material body. He was completely realized as the "image of God" as Adam was originally created. But even Adam--as originally

He did. Matter of fact the powers of nature served and obey Him. Inside and outside His body. Adam had that too. Comes with a human body that hasn't inherited death.