The First Temptation of Christ

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Henderson, Texas on Sunday February 17, 2013, the 1st Sunday in Lent.

Deuteronomy 26:1-11

Psalm 91:1-2, 9-16

Romans 8b-13

Luke 4:1-13

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.

Written in 1951, The Last Temptation, or as it is more commonly known in America, The Last Temptation of Christ, is a novel by Nikos Kazantzakis. The central thesis of this fictional book is that Jesus, while free from sin, was still subject to every form of temptation that humans face, including fear, doubt, depression, reluctance, and lust. In the novel's preface, Kazantzakis argues by facing and conquering all human weaknesses Christ became the perfect model for our lives. He sacrificed not only on the cross, but throughout his life. He struggled to do God's will, without ever giving in to the temptations of the flesh.[1] As this book places a great emphasis on the humanity of Jesus dueling with the divinity of the Christ, you can imagine it has been on many banned book lists since its publication.

You may be more familiar with the cinematic version made by Martin Scorsese in 1988 starring Willem Defoe as Jesus. The movie version tried to address the controversial subject matter by beginning with a disclaimer explaining that, “[this movie] departs from the commonly-accepted Biblical portrayal of Jesus’ life, and that it is not intended to be an exact recreation of the events detailed in the Gospels.”[2]

This version was so controversial that it was originally banned in many cities and picketed almost everywhere. Even two years after its theatrical release, when it made its cable debut on the Cinemax premium cable channel, many systems, including the one I subscribed to in Colorado, chose to black it out. I don’t think you would find it surprising that while doing research for this sermon I was unable to find a copy at Wal-Mart.

The idea that Jesus was tempted like we are tempted is controversial. People asked, what does it mean if Jesus can be tempted like me? The simplest answer to this question is that if Jesus could be tempted by the spoils of this world then he is fully human. We also believe he is fully divine so while tempted he never yielded to its temptations.

Jesus is so fully human that he is perfectly human. In fact, more human than we could ever be.

So filled with the Holy Spirit, Jesus is in the wilderness fasting, eating nothing for forty days and forty nights. Verse two tells us that during the entire fast Jesus was being tempted by the devil.

One of the elements of fasting is that while the body abstains from food, the soul is fed. The fast becomes a period of general readjustment, of renovation from the outer sphere of life down to the roots of its innermost fibers.[3] Through the fast, prayer is reinforced and penance is paid.[4] The fast is more than the deprivation of our bodies; it is a means of spiritual preparation. But let’s face it, forty days and forty nights of temptation would be ruthless. Jesus perseveres this time of trial, preparing himself spiritually for his life to come.

So after forty days and forty nights, the devil needs to bring his best material if he is going to tempt Jesus.

Luke writes about three specific temptations. The scene begins with the devil saying, “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread.” When looking at original Greek text, there are two ways to interpret hunger. Jesus could have been hungry for bread or he could have been hungry for spiritual truth.

It kind of leaves this open for us, doesn’t it? The original text could go either way. But all translation involves interpretation, and our text says Jesus was famished. This translation implies Jesus could use a good meal.

Jesus’ response turns this interpretation on its ear. While the devil may have hoped Jesus would fall for bread alone, invoking the words of Deuteronomy 8:3, Jesus reminds us “One does not live by bread alone.” Jesus hungers for spiritual food.

The Devil offers the most human of needs, nourishment. But Jesus turns away from earthly satisfaction in favor of something more substantial. The devil offers to satisfy one hunger, Jesus proclaims satisfying the spiritual hunger to be more important. Luke teaches that the need for bread is secondary to the fact that it is God alone who gives bread.[5]

Jesus teaches that the one who gives the gift is more important than the gift itself.

The devil isn’t out of temptations yet, there is more up his sleeve. So the second temptation is offered, “To you I will give their glory and all this authority; for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please.”

There is some hinky stuff in this passage. First, with this offer, we are reminded that the devil has power in the world, power that can be delegated and allocated as he sees fit. The devil offers this power to Jesus. Imagine if you will the power to do anything you desire. For Jesus, there is a lot of good that can be done with that kind of power.

But this power is given with a catch, “If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours.”

A catch doesn’t get catchier than this. Fly paper wishes it was this sticky.

But Jesus does not get trapped by political intrigue, human glory and authority. He denies the devil his worship in the words of Deuteronomy 6:13, “Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.” The devil offers power over this world, a world that is temporary, a world that is limited. Jesus knows that there is a greater power than the political domain of the devil and the price of the devil’s power is too high.

Jesus rejects the devil’s demand of worship insisting that the only real power comes from God.[6]

Jesus acknowledges that the source of power is more important than power itself.

So the devil has offered Jesus something to eat and all of the power in the world. What’s left?

The devil takes Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple in Jerusalem. They are on the highest place of the high places of the Holy Land. And from there, the devil goads Jesus. “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here, for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you, to protect you,’ and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.’”

This time, it is the devil’s turn to invoke scripture, Psalm 91:11-12. Now this is a good temptation. The devil uses something good to suit his own bad intentions.

In this case, the devil literally offers the oldest trick in the book. The devil asks Jesus to doubt the Father’s sincerity. Paraphrasing Genesis 3:1-4, the serpent tests Eve saying, “Go ahead, eat from the tree in the middle of the garden. Sure, God said you will die, but do you seriously think that God will take your life?” In Luke the devil invites Jesus to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the temple because, after all, “God has promised to protect you. Do you doubt it?” Eve and then Adam and then Jesus are tempted to wonder if God’s promises are real. Adam and Eve fall for it, Jesus does not.

Jesus responds in kind to temptation shrouded in scripture. Quoting Deuteronomy 6:16, Jesus tells the devil to shove off reminding him “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” The Old Testament reminds us that Israel tested the Lord time and time again, and in every case the Lord is faithful. It is said that scripture is best interpreted by scripture, and this is a shining example.

Jesus is invited to test the sincerity of the Lord; Jesus reminds us the Lord is not to be tested. The Father is faithful. God has passed that test time and time again.

These first recorded temptations of Jesus: physical satisfaction, political power, and testing God’s sincerity; these are the things the devil puts on the table. Jesus passes these tests. Jesus does this by knowing what is important.

Bread is not as important as the one who makes it. Power is not as important as the one who creates and gives it. Testing God’s sincerity is not as important as knowing God is earnest and faithful.

But there is more at stake than these obvious temptations.

The devil prefaces the first and last temptations with this phrase: “If you are the Son of God…” So while it is easy to say that the temptations are about bread and sincerity, there is something more sinister happening. The greater, more subtle temptation the devil tries to put in Jesus’ mind is the doubt that he is the Son of God. Yes, the devil asks Jesus if God will do what God has promised, but it is far more devastating if Jesus doubts he is the Son of God. If the devil can plant this seed of doubt, then everything else is lost.

But this seed has no purchase. Jesus will not allow the devil to define what being the Son of God means. Our Lord will not let the devil define what kind of Messiah he is, that is between Father and Son.

And as soon as we doubt that we are the children of God we are lost. Jesus reminds us that being children of God is more important than anything else. This, this relationship between creation and the father is the only source of our hope; the only source of lasting hope.

So often people wail and rent their clothes crying that they are unlovable. That’s because people believe that God can’t possibly love them because they are so horrible; they are unworthy of such great love. This is the lie the devil wants us to believe. It’s the lie the devil told Jesus, it’s the lie the devil tells us all. “If you are the sons and daughters of God…” “If you are the child of God…” When we buy this lie, and fall to this temptation, then we are lost.

When we don’t believe we deserve God’s love, we try to earn it. We know better, we know we can’t earn God’s love. We’ve seen this before in scripture, “You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.”[7] That doesn’t keep us from trying, and it doesn’t keep us from failing either. When we doubt that we are the children of God we are lost.

The Swiss theologian Karl Barth put it this way “God does not love us despite who we are; God loves us because of who we are.” Barth’s point is that God loves us because we are the children of God. It’s who we are, not what we do. We can’t earn God’s love and that’s just fine—God loves us period. We can’t earn God’s love because it is a gift freely given.

In “The Last Temptation,” the thought that Jesus could be tempted is controversial. In real life it’s horrifying that Jesus could fall to temptation. To resist, Jesus relies on scripture and his relationship with the one who gives us scripture. To resist temptation we must rely on Jesus and the scripture and the love of God the Father by the power of the Holy Spirit.

As we approach the cross through Lent, we need to be intentional about growing in relationship with the Lord our God, just as Jesus shows us how. Jesus resisted the temptation. By the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit we can resist too. By this, that seed of temptation will find no purchase in us either. In this alone is our hope.

---

[1] The Last Temptation of Christ- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_last_temptation_of_christ, accessed February 19, 2007.

[2] The Last Temptation of Christ-Film, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Temptation_of_Christ_%28film%29, accessed February 19, 2007.

[3] Wesseling, Theodore, “The Cleansing of the Temple.” London: Longmans, Green, and Company, 1945.

[4] Jungmann, Josef A, S.J., “Public Worship: A Survey.” Howell, Clinton, translator. The Liturgical Press: Collegeville

[5] Cousar, Charles B., Gaventa, Beverly R., McCann, Jr., J. Clinton, Newsome, James D., Texts for Preaching, A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV, Year C. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, page 197.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Daniel 5:27 (NRSV)

Gideon Sunday Children's Sermon

Sunday October 24, 2010 was celebrated as Gideon Sunday in many churches in East Texas. We thank our local Gideon camp for sending a wonderful speaker who brought the Gideon Report to First Presbyterian Church--Marshall.

So instead of the sermon, I brought the Children's sermon.

When the children came forward I asked one little girl to read from my bible the first sentence: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

She did such a wonderful job, that I handed her another bible and asked her to do it again. She looked at me and laughed, she said that she couldn't read what I had handed her. I told her to give it another try, but she could not. Well, considering I handed her a copy of the Hebrew scriptures I could hardly blame her for not being able to read it. Shoot, it took me long enough to be able to read it.

Then I gave her another bible and asked her to read it. She said she couldn't read that one either. I asked her if the letters were more recognizable and she said they were, but she still couldn't read it. Since I handed her a Greek New Testament, I didn't figure she could. But she did notice that a lot of the letters were closer to what she knew.

So I handed her one more bible, this one a Santa Biblia. While it was more and more familiar, she still couldn't read that.

I then told all of the kids that it is wonderful that we have bibles in languages that we can understand, and this is one of the things Gideons do, they distribute bibles in many different native languages, from Arabic to Vietnamese. This way people all around the world can see and read the word of God in their own language.

Then we thanked God that we had bibles in our languages and that because of the Gideons, bibles in many languages are shared with people seeking the word around the world.

The Disciplined Disciple

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday September 7, 2008, the 23rd Sunday in Ordinary Time.


Exodus 12:1-14
Psalm 149
Romans 13:8-14
Matthew 18:15-20

May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our Rock and our Redeemer. Amen

Let’s get in the way-back machine and take a trip to the Year of Our Lord 48. Some men had come from Judea teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to discuss this question with the apostles and the elders. So they were sent on their way by the church, and as they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, they reported the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the believers. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees stood up and said, “It is necessary for them to be circumcised and ordered to keep the Law of Moses.” [1]

This narrative from the Acts 15 describes the first great conflict of the church. In the day there were two kinds of Christians, Jewish believers and Gentile converts. Since Jesus was himself a Jew, the Christian faith has roots in the temple and the law, not Gentile shrines and customs. Yet there was a school of thought that believed that Judaism and the Hebrew customs were not prerequisite to faith in the risen Lord Christ. As usual, leave it to the Pharisees to hold the hard line saying that being circumcised and keeping the Law of Moses were necessary for salvation.

Without going into much detail, the Council of Jerusalem was called by church leaders to discuss this issue. The council made three important decisions about the church and its requirements. First, circumcision would not be an entry requirement for gentile Christians. Second, Jewish Christians would continue to practice circumcision. Finally, traditional Jewish dietary regulations were to be maintained by all Christians.

In the end there was compromise, and even this could not be kept. The resolutions of the Jerusalem Council could not be easily sustained in the scattered communities of Christians, communities which were a combination of Jewish and Gentile Christians. The clashes which arose out of these disputes about behavior were a constant threat to the survival of the church.[2] Eventually Paul could not and did not maintain support of the dietary regulations very long. In the end, had the pro-Jewish perspective been maintained, Christianity might well have remained a reform movement within Judaism.[3]

Matthew’s system of conflict resolution from chapter 18 is sound. It begins: If another member of the church has sinned against you, go alone and point out the fault. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. If that doesn’t work, then the situation escalates. Next, go with one or two others so that every word may be confirmed. Finally, if another member of the church has sinned against you and either they continue to sin against you or your grievance was not resolved by the first two steps or if the offender continues to refuse to listen, then put the offender out.

It’s a good system, beginning with one-on-one contact with repercussions if the offender continues to offend. My study bible says, “These instructions emphasize the responsibility of community members rather than leaders focusing on the goal of reconciliation.”[4] But I don’t get that sense from the reading; I sense something going on under the text.

Historically, when we read Matthew’s discourse in conflict resolution, in a way we read about conflict resolution from what was ultimately the losing side of the Council of Jerusalem. While the actions of the Council affirmed what the Jewish Christians believed, much of what they taught and how they behaved, the tide of history would ultimately leave the substance of this council and their specific brand of Jewish Christianity behind.

These were a people who held tight to their Judaism and the Judaism of their Messiah Jesus. We know that Matthew’s audience was specifically Jewish believers, the children of Moses and Jesus.

From this morning’s text, we are told that “if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” In Matthew’s words, there doesn’t seem to be much of a distinction between Gentile believers and the run-of-the-mill Gentile. Gentiles are Gentiles and whether they are believers or not, they are not the same as real believers, those who adhere to the Law of Moses and the restrictions and distinctions set long ago. Surely, tax collectors were collaborators with the Roman overseers. Reading this passage, I feel like someone ought to follow it saying “and some of my best friends are Gentiles and tax collectors.”

My study bible says that the worshiping community is to treat Gentiles and tax collectors as objects of mission. They are to be included as members of the assembly.[5] They may be the object of mission and they may be a part of the community, but I get the sense Mathew is saying they aren’t like us.

After 2,000 years of disagreements in the church you would think we would learn a thing or two about conflicts and resolving them. All we have to do is change a few words here and there and this description from Acts would be applicable to every church conflict. “Gentiles and tax collectors” can be changed to any one of a number of other proper nouns or adjectives and the reading would remain very familiar.

In fact, today we would all be known as Gentile Christians. We might even be members of Matthew’s refuse pile.

As a community, the bar of people who offend us has moved. I assume we welcome the uncircumcised, at least there’s nothing in the Book of Order. I had Canadian bacon for breakfast and would eat bacon at any meal. These two thousand year old scandals have been replaced by dozens of others; some so arcane we would not understand the issue in the first place. Recent Presbyterian scandals are just another drop in the bucket, and a young drop at that.

So what does this have to do with conflict resolution? I believe it has to do with the root of conflict. Returning to the Jerusalem Council, the pro-Jewish Christians insisted that because the church was the true Israel, converts must be circumcised before they were admitted into the community while Paul insisted that with Christ believers were freed from the works of the Law and were justified by grace through faith. The orthodox Jewish believer agreed with the Pharisees. The Gentile believer didn’t know the difference.

So here’s my question; what would have happened if a Gentile believer had been dragged before Matthew’s community for discipline. Then we have to ask what would have happened if one of Matthew’s community had been dragged before the Gentiles. If conflicts are resolved by individual communities, there will be only community justice. We have to find something broader than our communities, than our lives to resolve conflict. We have to follow the example of our Lord Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ.

To do this, we Christians must return to the root of our faith, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the God in three persons. To do this we must return to the Word of God, the Holy Scripture which is the first source of what we know about God. And once we return to the Word, each of us must become interpreters of the Word, doing as it commands.

We must do more than follow rules, we have to follow commands. God saves through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, but we are transformed not only when we hear and respond to the Gospel’s narrative. Truer, fuller, more complete transformation happens when we participate in the human connectional community of the church. The symbolism and story of redemption reach the depths of our very being when we interpret and reinterpret the word in our world.[6] We do not live into our place in the community, we do not live as active followers of Christ until we both read and interpret the word.

Looking at today’s reading from Matthew, it tells us what to do with the offender. I say let’s be careful whom we call “offender.” It is important to look at the people of God, who we are as the people, who we are in the word, and who we can be before we go to another and say, “You have sinned against me.” I have to beware because I might have sinned against you first.

If true, there is one thing to remember, Jesus expected more out of those who knew him. He expects more out of those who read and interpret the word. He expects more out of those who lead the church. He expects more out of us than he does those who do not know him. He expects more out of the community called in His holy name, bearing his holy word.

We talk about those who sin against us, so let us remember the words of Paul to the church at Rome, Love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law.” Paul commands the Romans to love, this is fulfillment of the Law and our command now and forever.

[1] Acts 15:2-5. See Acts 15 for details.
[2] 1Corinthians 8, Galatians 2:11ff
[3] Rev. Dr. Ellen Babinsky, Course pack, unpublished. Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Theology 100-Church History through 1650. Chapter 2, page 6, 2001.
[4] New Interpreter’s Study Bible, note to Matthew 18:15-20.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Farley, Edward, “Theology in the Life of the Congregation.” Theology and Worship Occasional Paper No. 17, Office of Theology and Worship, PC (USA), Louisville, 2003, page 5. (This publication is a reprint of the first chapter of Farley’s “Practicing Gospel: Unconventional Thoughts on the Church’s Ministry.” Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2003.”