Originally Posted by PerpetualLearner

tempted? tested? or tried? To my mind "tempted" seems to include the idea that the subject has a quality where a temptation can connect, where "tested" or "tried" seems better. Thoughts?

1. This topic has been discussed here many years ago. There have been lots of upgrades of this board since then and some of the contents of the database have been lost in one or more of those upgrades. Thus, I am not sure if a search would find those discussions.

2. However, in brief, my view is that it was not impossible, i.e., not possible that the Lord Christ was unable to sin... theoretically. Why? Because if for whatever reason that He could not sin, then He would not have been a legitimate representative of the elect who were predestined to be saved. Christ was the "second Adam" (1Cor 15:45). He came to accomplish which the first Adam failed to do, i.e., to live a perfect life in regard to the holy law of God. The fact that He did by personally and willfully resisted the transgression of that law thus provided the righteousness needed to redeem those whom the Father gave Him.

3. "tempted, tested, or tried" in my view are basically synonymous. The temptations were real, which were tests and which were trials He had to endure. Whatever word of the three choices given one chooses to use as a translation of peirazo, the result is the same. So, I would relegate the question as one of symantics given the actual events that the Lord Christ experienced which are enumerated throughout Scripture.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]