Is temptation, in and of itself, sin?

[SkyWriting]

I think most Christians would say that temptation, in and of itself, is not sin.

Lets ask Jesus:

Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

Matthew 4:1-11
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” But he answered, “It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple ...

James 1:13
Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.

Hebrews 2:18
For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

 

[public hermit]

Jesus never sinned but He was tempted in the wilderness

Can one be tempted by something they don't desire? If not, then Jesus desired that which tempted him. That is, he had desires contrary to the will of God. Or, if he didn't desire those things, then were they really temptations? Or, perhaps, desires that are contrary to God's will are not sinful. However, Jesus seems to think the desires of the heart, e.g. adultery, are culpable and worthy of judgment. Do you see the issue at stake?

It's easy to say Jesus was tempted and did not sin. It's not so easy to nail down what that means.

To the OP, which is another one I completely forgot about, I think Calvin got caught up in this issue, perhaps not realizing it. He seems to say temptation is a sin because it comes from a corrupted nature. Only a corrupted nature can will contrary to God's will.

For me the issue with temptation concerns desire. I am not tempted by cake because I can't stand it; whereas, cherry pie is another matter. I can be tempted by a cherry pie that doesn't actually exist. I only have to imagine it. It's all in what I desire. Did Jesus desire contrary to the will of God? If so, he was tempted. If not, he wasn't. Maybe, again, the way out is to say desiring contrary to the will of God is not sin. But, and again, Jesus doesn't seem to think that, according to scripture.

 

[public hermit]

No. I don't think so. But what really surprises me is that there's anyone out there who really thinks it is...

Is there?

For a moment, at least, Calvin seems to have thought so.

It depends on how we define temptation. I am not tempted by things I don't desire. Never have I been tempted to hit myself in the head with a hammer. I just don't want that. I am tempted by things I want. Jesus seems to say those desires, if contrary to God's will, are liable to judgment. I don't have to commit murder, I just have to want it, i.e. hate the person, which is as good as wishing they didn't exist, or something very much like that. If all that is right, which I'm not sure it is, then temptation is sin and can only arise in a heart that has a place for the sin in question.

 

[SkyWriting]

Can one be tempted by something they don't desire? If not, then Jesus desired that which tempted him. That is, he had desires contrary to the will of God. Or, if he didn't desire those things, then were they really temptations? Or, perhaps, desires that are contrary to God's will are not sinful. However, Jesus seems to think the desires of the heart, e.g. adultery, are culpable and worthy of judgment. Do you see the issue at stake?

It's easy to say Jesus was tempted and did not sin. It's not so easy to nail down what that means.

To the OP, which is another one I completely forgot about, I think Calvin got caught up in this issue, perhaps not realizing it. He seems to say temptation is a sin because it comes from a corrupted nature. Only a corrupted nature can will contrary to God's will.

For me the issue with temptation concerns desire. I am not tempted by cake because I can't stand it; whereas, cherry pie is another matter. I can be tempted by a cherry pie that doesn't actually exist. I only have to imagine it. It's all in what I desire. Did Jesus desire contrary to the will of God? If so, he was tempted. If not, he wasn't. Maybe, again, the way out is to say desiring contrary to the will of God is not sin. But, and again, Jesus doesn't seem to think that, according to scripture.

Jesus was tempted because he was fully human. He had an empty stomach and was parched, just like anyone. Probably has sore feet to. He was tempted more so than anyone because he knew how much better the afterlife was. If the devil offered us a better life, we are not as tempted, because we can hardly imagine it.

 

[public hermit]

Jesus was tempted because he was fully human. He had an empty stomach and was parched, just like anyone. Probably has sore feet to. He was tempted more so than anyone because he knew how much better the afterlife was. If the devil offered us a better life, we are not as tempted, because we can hardly imagine it.

We're talking about sin, not going hungry or having sore feet. Was Jesus tempted to sin? If so, did he desire that which tempted him?

 

[Saint Steven]

For a moment, at least, Calvin seems to have thought so.

It depends on how we define temptation. I am not tempted by things I don't desire. Never have I been tempted to hit myself in the head with a hammer. I just don't want that. I am tempted by things I want. Jesus seems to say those desires, if contrary to God's will, are liable to judgment. I don't have to commit murder, I just have to want it, i.e. hate the person, which is as good as wishing they didn't exist, or something very much like that. If all that is right, which I'm not sure it is, then temptation is sin and can only arise in a heart that has a place for the sin in question.

Perhaps we should address indifference as well? Not sure if that came up on this thread or not.

I heard a sermon years ago that informed me that indifference is the extreme in the middle between love and hate. The motive being hatred but with no tangible action to incriminate the perpetrator. The object of their hatred no longer exists. Consciously exterminated.

 

[public hermit]

Perhaps we should address indifference as well? Not sure if that came up on this thread or not.

I heard a sermon years ago that informed me that indifference is the extreme in the middle between love and hate. The motive being hatred but with no tangible action to incriminate the perpetrator. The object of their hatred no longer exists. Consciously exterminated.

That is a great way of putting it. The object of their hatred no longer exists.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

For a moment, at least, Calvin seems to have thought so.

Yeah, I kind of figured that by what you shared in your OP. But, I guess what I'm wondering is, are there those who still interpret these passages in this vein today? Some hyper-conservative Presbyterians and/or Wesleyan folks who still handle these particular tropes in this way?

It depends on how we define temptation. I am not tempted by things I don't desire. Never have I been tempted to hit myself in the head with a hammer. I just don't want that. I am tempted by things I want. Jesus seems to say those desires, if contrary to God's will, are liable to judgment. I don't have to commit murder, I just have to want it, i.e. hate the person, which is as good as wishing they didn't exist, or something very much like that. If all that is right, which I'm not sure it is, then temptation is sin and can only arise in a heart that has a place for the sin in question.

I agree with you, it does depend upon how we define temptation. But how we define temptation will (in my estimation) be dependent upon which exegetical methods we emply when we read the pertinent verses.

At present, and with elaboration, I'm going to go with the idea that temptation is a complex and dynamic state of mind and takes more than simply 'desiring something' since I deem 'desire' to be a weasel word that all too often and all too easily stands in ambiguous waters. I'd have to see what Calvin says precisely and elaborately in his method to see if he was on to something, or not.

But yeah. I can understand some of what Calvin's interpretation is intending to point out, and I think I've understood this all on my own ever since I stole that 25¢ piece of bubble-gum from the corner store when I was 8---I've never been the same since.

 

[public hermit]

yeah. I can understand some of what Calvin's interpretation is intending to point out, and I think I've understood this all on my own ever since I stole that 25¢ piece of bubble-gum from the corner store when I was 8---I've never been the same since

Lol, that reminds me of Augustine and his pears. If I remember correctly, he didn't like the pears as much as he liked stealing them, and really all he wanted was acceptance by his friends. But, still, the thrill of it all was just too tempting!

I can remember wanting to try things that I had no desire for since I didn't know what they were like, but I wanted them because they were forbidden or I thought people looked cool doing them or something. I agree that it can get complicated, but I can't imagine being tempted by something I had no desire for, at least in some way or another.

Why do you find "desire" to be a weasel word?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Lol, that reminds me of Augustine and his pears. If I remember correctly, he didn't like the pears as much as he liked stealing them, and really all he wanted was acceptance by his friends. But, still, the thrill of it all was just too tempting!

I can remember wanting to try things that I had no desire for since I didn't know what they were like, but I wanted them because they were forbidden or I thought people looked cool doing them or something. I agree that it can get complicated, but I can't imagine being tempted by something I had no desire for, at least in some way or another.

Why do you find "desire" to be a weasel word?

I think "desire" qualifies as a weasel word because it can be ambigously used in our English vernacular to refer to either a legitimate want in life or to an illegitimate one.

The conceptual problem with this term is (I think) that it is sometimes used by some Christians to directly refer to "sinful behaviors," and sinful behaviors only. And depending upon the amount of semantic twist involved in its usage, it can also be applied by one person to disparage the character or motives of another person who has been observed to have "attractions for others" out of wedlock.

In sum, the problem with an all too simple approach to conceptualizing human desire is that it leads to conflations of sorts that in turn can leave some Christians feeling castigated and ashamed for having feelings or perceptions about "wanting someone else" that aren't really sinful.

One solution?: Better Exegesis since "temptation" involves more psychological and social complexities than simply that we feel we want (or like) something.

 

[Saint Steven]

That is a great way of putting it. The object of their hatred no longer exists.

A murderous thought with no outward expression. The self-defense being, "I didn't do anything." (sinister)

 

[SkyWriting]

We're talking about sin, not going hungry or having sore feet. Was Jesus tempted to sin? If so, did he desire that which tempted him?

Jesus was fully human. Yes He was tempted more than any other human was.
Yes, he desired not to die. But was saved by His choice to follow the Father's will.
Because He always choose to follow the will of His Father, He was perfect.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Lol, that reminds me of Augustine and his pears. If I remember correctly, he didn't like the pears as much as he liked stealing them, and really all he wanted was acceptance by his friends. But, still, the thrill of it all was just too tempting!

I can remember wanting to try things that I had no desire for since I didn't know what they were like, but I wanted them because they were forbidden or I thought people looked cool doing them or something. I agree that it can get complicated, but I can't imagine being tempted by something I had no desire for, at least in some way or another.

Why do you find "desire" to be a weasel word?

Here's the long version of what I was trying to say above, just in case there's any need for further elaboration and clarity on an ambiguous topic that so many people like to speak on in more confidently certain and dogmatic terms.

Desire | Encyclopedia.com

 

[public hermit]

Here's the long version of what I was trying to say above, just in case there's any need for further elaboration and clarity on an ambiguous topic that so many people like to speak on in more confidently certain and dogmatic terms.

Desire | Encyclopedia.com

That's a helpful article. I saved a copy because I really like that Augustine quote on love and hadn't seen it before.

I think in the context of this discussion, dealing specifically with temptation, James clarifies some of the ambiguity mentioned in the article.

"But one is tempted by one’s own desire, being lured and enticed by it; then, when that desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and that sin, when it is fully grown, gives birth to death. Do not be deceived, my beloved." James 1.14-16

The word translated "desire" is epithumios which means an intense desire, craving, want. It is a strong want for something such that we are enticed.

Back to the OP, temptation is a result of a strong desire for x, which is contrary to the divine will, i.e. sin. Is that desire sin? That's the question.

I'm still of the opinion that having a desire is not a problem until we nurture it. Desires begin with a thought, usually. We have thoughts that come out of nowhere, and don't have much control over that. But I can choose to engage a thought or let it go, usually it takes practice in letting things go, but it's possible. So, perhaps, Jesus was tempted in that initial sense, as we all are, but did not engage thoughts and desires that were contrary to the will of God. The garden situation kind of throws a wrench in all that, lol. Still, that kind of makes sense to me.

Obviously, I can't know his inner experience, but if he is human as I am, then his experience should be as mine in terms of how one experiences temptation up to the point it becomes sin, whenever that is.

Consider Jesus says if we commit adultery in our hearts we are liable to judgment. Well, is that having the initial thought or nurturing that thought, feeding it? I would say the later; although, I would consider the former temptation if what I said above is right.

 

[returntosender]

Must not be, Jesus was tempted.