The Temptations of Christ

[Glenn101]

Throughout most of my life I really had not thought much about the Christ actually being tempted. I had this picture of a perfect man sailing through life untouched by the cares of this world with his whole being focused on His mission and yielding to his father's will. Of course there is the story of Christ being tempted by Satan, but in my heart of hearts I wondered just how much of a temptation that was. The part about turning stones into bread when Jesus had been fasting for forty days I really could not fathom because I have never done it. Three days is the most I have ever done and my system actually was numb by the time I decided to break it. I really wasn't hungry at the time. And Christ already knew that He would inherit all that His Father had, so, to me that was not too much.

But the Bible actually paints a picture of a very human Jesus. He seemed to show a great sadness when so many of His disciples abandoned Him after receiving the information about Christ's divinity in John chapter 6 and asked the twelve if they would leave Him also. He also seemed to be disappointed when praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and returned to find Peter James and John sleeping. asking if they could not just stay with Him one hour.

But Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews said that Christ "cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities" yet "was in all points tempted like as we are" but still was "without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Was Jesus actually tempted by money? By Power?  I do not wish to be sacrilegious at all here, but I am wondering if Jesus actually had sexual desires, was He tempted at times thusly? Was there maybe a component of same sex attraction in His relationship with a "disciple that Jesus loved". (John 13:23)

I don't know if I should even bring this up. Mods, please look at this and if it is inappropriate please delete it.

Glenn

[SouthernMo]

You point out some important perspectives. Sometimes Christianity can “over-deify” Christ because we mistakenly believe if we humanize him, we belittle him.

[pogi]

45 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Throughout most of my life I really had not thought much about the Christ actually being tempted. I had this picture of a perfect man sailing through life untouched by the cares of this world with his whole being focused on His mission and yielding to his father's will. Of course there is the story of Christ being tempted by Satan, but in my heart of hearts I wondered just how much of a temptation that was. The part about turning stones into bread when Jesus had been fasting for forty days I really could not fathom because I have never done it. Three days is the most I have ever done and my system actually was numb by the time I decided to break it. I really wasn't hungry at the time. And Christ already knew that He would inherit all that His Father had, so, to me that was not too much.

But the Bible actually paints a picture of a very human Jesus. He seemed to show a great sadness when so many of His disciples abandoned Him after receiving the information about Christ's divinity in John chapter 6 and asked the twelve if they would leave Him also. He also seemed to be disappointed when praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and returned to find Peter James and John sleeping. asking if they could not just stay with Him one hour.

But Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews said that Christ "cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities" yet "was in all points tempted like as we are" but still was "without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Was Jesus actually tempted by money? By Power?  I do not wish to be sacrilegious at all here, but I am wondering if Jesus actually had sexual desires, was He tempted at times thusly? Was there maybe a component of same sex attraction in His relationship with a "disciple that Jesus loved". (John 13:23)

I don't know if I should even bring this up. Mods, please look at this and if it is inappropriate please delete it.

Glenn

I personally don't think he would be all that special if he wasn't tempted.  Anyone can breeze through a life of perfection if they are only tempted 3 times.  I agree with SoMo that it is a mistake to think that humanizing him belittles him.  On the contrary, it makes him that much more admirable and remarkable in my eyes.  "How great thou art" indeed! 

Not only did he have his own temptations, but he experienced all of ours as well through the atonement.  He knows. 

Some consider that disciple that he loved to be a female.  

[CV75]

3 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

Throughout most of my life I really had not thought much about the Christ actually being tempted. I had this picture of a perfect man sailing through life untouched by the cares of this world with his whole being focused on His mission and yielding to his father's will. Of course there is the story of Christ being tempted by Satan, but in my heart of hearts I wondered just how much of a temptation that was. The part about turning stones into bread when Jesus had been fasting for forty days I really could not fathom because I have never done it. Three days is the most I have ever done and my system actually was numb by the time I decided to break it. I really wasn't hungry at the time. And Christ already knew that He would inherit all that His Father had, so, to me that was not too much.

But the Bible actually paints a picture of a very human Jesus. He seemed to show a great sadness when so many of His disciples abandoned Him after receiving the information about Christ's divinity in John chapter 6 and asked the twelve if they would leave Him also. He also seemed to be disappointed when praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and returned to find Peter James and John sleeping. asking if they could not just stay with Him one hour.

But Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews said that Christ "cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities" yet "was in all points tempted like as we are" but still was "without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Was Jesus actually tempted by money? By Power?  I do not wish to be sacrilegious at all here, but I am wondering if Jesus actually had sexual desires, was He tempted at times thusly? Was there maybe a component of same sex attraction in His relationship with a "disciple that Jesus loved". (John 13:23)

I don't know if I should even bring this up. Mods, please look at this and if it is inappropriate please delete it.

Glenn

Hebrews 4:15 begins with:"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities," in other words: "who is unable to empathize with..." Jesus is not one who is without empathy.

There are many ways to have empathy, temptation being one important one. Sexuality is a human experience, and whatever sexuality Jesus experienced in temptation allowed Him to extrapolate anything anyone could experience. 

I personally don't classify having a beloved disciple, whoever he or she was, as a sexual temptation.

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

Hebrews 4:15 begins with:"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities," in other words: "who is unable to empathize with..." Jesus is not one who is without empathy.

There are many ways to have empathy, temptation being one important one. Sexuality is a human experience, and whatever sexuality Jesus experienced in temptation allowed Him to extrapolate anything anyone could experience. 

I personally don't classify having a beloved disciple, whoever he or she was, as a sexual temptation.

It has long been my feelings that "beloved" in scripture means elect, chosen.  Nothing romantic about the word.  Jesus is God's beloved son.

And the existence of Christ's sexuality means he understood its mortal drives.  Christ was a man in mortality.  He had wives, probably children.  He understood.

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

........................

Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews said that Christ "cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities" yet "was in all points tempted like as we are" but still was "without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Was Jesus actually tempted by money? By Power?  I do not wish to be sacrilegious at all here, but I am wondering if Jesus actually had sexual desires, was He tempted at times thusly? Was there maybe a component of same sex attraction in His relationship with a "disciple that Jesus loved". (John 13:23)......................

In order for his victory to have any value, any meaning, his temptations had to be real, human temptations.  And the possibility had to exist that he could fail.  Otherwise, his free choice (agency) would have no meaning.  Likewise, his obedience would have no meaning or value.  Moreover, his pain and suffering for our sins had to be infinite in scope.  He had to defeat death and Hell.

Nikos Kazantzakis wrote an interesting book, which was made into a film by Martin Scorsese, "The Last Temptation of Christ."  The last temptation was a very interesting and imaginative one, which is not part of the New Testament.  It allowed Satan to tempt Jesus with one last vision while he hung on the Cross -- Jesus was allowed to see what his life would have been like if he had married, raised children, and then gotten old, like any other, ordinary man.  In the end, despite the attractiveness of that alternative life, Jesus chose to remain on the Cross, bearing the sufferings and sins of the world.  A true victory.  Willem Dafoe played Jesus in that one.  In SLC, when they showed the film, someone slashed the screen in anger.

[CV75]

7 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

It has long been my feelings that "beloved" in scripture means elect, chosen.  Nothing romantic about the word.  Jesus is God's beloved son.

And the existence of Christ's sexuality means he understood its mortal drives.  Christ was a man in mortality.  He had wives, probably children.  He understood.

Yes, and it would seem to me that His vicarious suffering the penalties for all humanity's giving in to any and all temptations is how He understands us, just as His perfect obedience in mortality (for example, in His personal victory over temptation) is how He came to understand the Father.

[MustardSeed]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In SLC, when they showed the film, someone slashed the screen in anger

Interesting reaction.  Brings to mind the saying, “hysterical is always historical”.  I wonder what someone needs their savior to be or not to be in order to elicit such a violent reaction, and more curious, why they need Him to be so. 

I should very much hope that the savior was faced with the very difficult human challenge of the law of chastity. 

[strappinglad]

Did Christ act in faith as He went about fulfilling His mission? If one ' knows ' the end from the beginning , is faith still involved? We are to have faith in Christ. What  or who did Christ have faith in?

[pogi]

1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

Did Christ act in faith as He went about fulfilling His mission? If one ' knows ' the end from the beginning , is faith still involved? We are to have faith in Christ. What  or who did Christ have faith in?

D&C 93 might shed some light on this.

It explains that Christ did not receive of the fullness at first, but that he progressed from grace to grace.   I imagine that he passed through the veil of forgetfulness like the rest of us. 

Quote

 

12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;

14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first.

 

Later it explains that we eventually can receive of the fulness in the exact same way that Christ did, so I don't think he was that different from us in that regard.

Quote

 

19 I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness.

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

 

As far as his faith goes, he for sure had to have faith in the Father, but I am sure that he also had to develop faith in himself, his mission, and his identity.   

Edited November 21, 2018 by pogi

[pogi]

15 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

He had wives, probably children.  He understood.

You sound fairly confident, along with the FLDS, about him having several wives.  What makes you so confident? As every FLDS household has hanging on their wall:

Children?  As in a divine lineage on earth today protected by the Knights of Templar...that could make a good book! 

[HappyJackWagon]

28 minutes ago, pogi said:

You sound fairly confident, along with the FLDS, about him having several wives.  What makes you so confident? As every FLDS household has hanging on their wall:

Children?  As in a divine lineage on earth today protected by the Knights of Templar...that could make a good book! 

I'm probably about as far away from fundamentalist as one can get, but I also suspect that Jesus was married, though I would limit his marriage to one wife. IMO it would have been very strange for him NOT to be married and it also would have been very strange for his time and culture to have multiple wives. IIRC for a man to preach in synagogue he had to be a rabbi, and to be a rabbi one had to be married.

In one of my religion classes at BYU the professor asked if it is a sin to be tempted. Everyone answered "no". If Jesus was tempted, AND he was perfect, temptation could not be a sin. But then we were asked if a person must consider committing the sin, or linger on the idea of sin, to truly be tempted. If they don't consider it, then it wasn't really a temptation. How then do we reconcile the scriptures that state that if we "lust after" another, then we have already committed adultery. It moves the sin from action, to mere thought, which could also be considered temptation. In which case, IF Jesus were tempted in such a way, he had already committed adultery, and therefore wasn't perfect.

OR we could simply toss out the idea that for someone to be perfect they could have NEVER committed a sin, and instead think of perfection as "complete". If that's the case, Jesus could have been tempted, thus sinning as he considered giving in to the temptation, yet still be perfect because he was complete & whole.

IMO- the idea of Jesus being gay seems very unlikely, though it wouldn't bother me. Again, in his culture, an unmarried man of 30+ would likely be considered a menace to society

[pogi]

17 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm probably about as far away from fundamentalist as one can get, but I also suspect that Jesus was married, though I would limit his marriage to one wife. IMO it would have been very strange for him NOT to be married and it also would have been very strange for his time and culture to have multiple wives. IIRC for a man to preach in synagogue he had to be a rabbi, and to be a rabbi one had to be married.

Interesting points.  

17 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

In one of my religion classes at BYU the professor asked if it is a sin to be tempted. Everyone answered "no". If Jesus was tempted, AND he was perfect, temptation could not be a sin. But then we were asked if a person must consider committing the sin, or linger on the idea of sin, to truly be tempted. If they don't consider it, then it wasn't really a temptation. How then do we reconcile the scriptures that state that if we "lust after" another, then we have already committed adultery. It moves the sin from action, to mere thought, which could also be considered temptation. In which case, IF Jesus were tempted in such a way, he had already committed adultery, and therefore wasn't perfect.

OR we could simply toss out the idea that for someone to be perfect they could have NEVER committed a sin, and instead think of perfection as "complete". If that's the case, Jesus could have been tempted, thus sinning as he considered giving in to the temptation, yet still be perfect because he was complete & whole.

IMO- the idea of Jesus being gay seems very unlikely, though it wouldn't bother me. Again, in his culture, an unmarried man of 30+ would likely be considered a menace to society

There are a couple potential theological reasons as to why Christ's perfection is indeed about sin and not about being "complete".   First, Christ was never "complete" in mortality - the scriptures I referenced above in D&C 93 demonstrate this. "He grew from grace to grace".  If there was ever any incompleteness and any growth, then that suggests imperfection or incompleteness.  But also, it is his sinlessness that made him an eligible sacrifice according to scripture  - the only worthy sacrifice would be one without blemish.  He was the lamb without blemish.

Regarding lust - I think it is important that one can have sexual desires (and thus temptation) without engaging in lustful thinking, i.e. committing adultery in one's mind and heart. 

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

Interesting points.  

There are a couple potential theological reasons as to why Christ's perfection is indeed about sin and not about being "complete".   First, Christ was never "complete" in mortality - the scriptures I referenced above in D&C 93 demonstrate this. "He grew from grace to grace".  If there was ever any incompleteness and any growth, then that suggests imperfection or incompleteness.  But also, it is his sinlessness that made him an eligible sacrifice according to scripture  - the only worthy sacrifice would be one without blemish.  He was the lamb without blemish.

Regarding lust - I think it is important that one can have sexual desires (and thus temptation) without engaging in lustful thinking, i.e. committing adultery in one's mind and heart. 

I understand what you're saying about sin and growing from grace to grace but I'm not completely sold on the concept that for one to be without blemish they could have never had any blemish. For Jesus to be "perfect" or "complete" does that mean that he was "perfect and complete" from day one and never faltered in any way? Or is it possible that even though he had some kind of blemish at point X, that doesn't necessarily mean he still had blemish at point Y & Z.  For example, I could say today that I have a complexion without blemish, but as a teen I couldn't say the same thing. Perhaps perfection or completeness don't necessarily reflect an eternal state but a destination at a certain point. What if a lamb was brought to sacrifice with a broken leg. It wouldn't have been accepted because it wasn't perfect, but what if that same lamb was presented later, after the leg had healed and was once again complete/whole?

Also, I can't comprehend how one has desires yet doesn't think about it. In fact, it would seem that contemplating the desire increases the desire. So I honestly don't know how that works.

In any case, it's just fun stuff to think about.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, strappinglad said:

Did Christ act in faith as He went about fulfilling His mission? If one ' knows ' the end from the beginning , is faith still involved? We are to have faith in Christ. What  or who did Christ have faith in?

Jesus had the veil pulled over his memory same as with the rest of us.  He had to acquire faith just like the rest of us.  He was just a much better student than the rest of us.  He had faith in his Father in Heaven long before he became the Way, the Truth, and the Life.  John 14:6

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

You sound fairly confident, along with the FLDS, about him having several wives.  What makes you so confident? As every FLDS household has hanging on their wall:

Children?  As in a divine lineage on earth today protected by the Knights of Templar...that could make a good book! 

Spoilers: It did not.

[pogi]

44 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I understand what you're saying about sin and growing from grace to grace but I'm not completely sold on the concept that for one to be without blemish they could have never had any blemish. For Jesus to be "perfect" or "complete" does that mean that he was "perfect and complete" from day one and never faltered in any way? Or is it possible that even though he had some kind of blemish at point X, that doesn't necessarily mean he still had blemish at point Y & Z.  For example, I could say today that I have a complexion without blemish, but as a teen I couldn't say the same thing. Perhaps perfection or completeness don't necessarily reflect an eternal state but a destination at a certain point. What if a lamb was brought to sacrifice with a broken leg. It wouldn't have been accepted because it wasn't perfect, but what if that same lamb was presented later, after the leg had healed and was once again complete/whole?

If Christ had sinned, then he would have required forgiveness and atonement for that sin in order to qualify as a worthy sacrifice without blemish.  In other words, if Christ sinned, how did he remove that blemish to qualify him for sacrificial atonement?  He would not have been worthy to atone for his own sin if he was not without blemish.  He would have been like the rest of us...hopeless without the atonement of a perfect Savior. 

If one accepts the JST as authoritative canon, then we have to accept the following:

Quote

 

Christ’s role as mediator is explained. (compare Hebrews 7: 26-27)

  25 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made ruler over the heavens;
  26 And not as those high priests who offered up sacrifice daily, first for their own sins, and then for the sins of the people; for he needeth not offer sacrifice for his own sins, for he knew no sins; but for the sins of the people. And this he did once, when he offered up himself.

 

 

44 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Also, I can't comprehend how one has desires yet doesn't think about it. In fact, it would seem that contemplating the desire increases the desire. So I honestly don't know how that works.

In any case, it's just fun stuff to think about.

Can you agree that sexual attraction in and of itself does not necessarily entail lust? One can be sexually attracted to another person without going there. That sexual attraction in and of itself can be a temptation to pursue a path of which we know the ending.  Lust, on the other hand is not a passive experience that happens to us, it is an active indulgence of the mind.  It is a choice, whereas the temptation is not necessarily a choice.  There is a stark difference between the two in my experience.  As a recovering addict I am acutely aware of the difference.

One is an active perusal of fantasy, whereas the other is a passive experience that we choose to hold onto or not.

Edited November 21, 2018 by pogi

[HappyJackWagon]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

If Christ had sinned, then he would have required forgiveness and atonement for that sin in order to qualify as a worthy sacrifice without blemish.  In other words, if Christ sinned, how did he remove that blemish to qualify him for sacrificial atonement?  He would not have been worthy to atone for his own sin if he was not without blemish.  He would have been like the rest of us...hopeless without the atonement of a perfect Savior. 

If one accepts the JST as authoritative canon, then we have to accept the following:

 

Can you agree that sexual attraction in and of itself does not necessarily entail lust? One can be sexually attracted to another person without going there. That sexual attraction in and of itself can be a temptation to pursue a path of which we know the ending.  Lust, on the other hand is not a passive experience that happens to us, it is an active indulgence of the mind.  It is a choice, whereas the temptation is not necessarily a choice.  There is a stark difference between the two in my experience.  As a recovering addict I am acutely aware of the difference.

One is an active perusal of fantasy, whereas the other is a passive experience that we don't hold onto. 

I like the way you say this.

But that illustrates the question about what temptation really is. Is it an active indulgence or a stimuli that presses itself against a passive person. IMO- for it to be a temptation there must be some active indulgence, otherwise the person really isn't tempted by it. I think there is a vast difference between attraction and sxual temptation.

[strappinglad]

Who was it that said," you can't stop the birds from flying over your head, but you can keep them from building a nest in your hair ." ?

[pogi]

18 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I like the way you say this.

But that illustrates the question about what temptation really is. Is it an active indulgence or a stimuli that presses itself against a passive person. IMO- for it to be a temptation there must be some active indulgence, otherwise the person really isn't tempted by it. I think there is a vast difference between attraction and sxual temptation.

It is like the difference between passively feeling hungry and wanting to eat vs. actively fantasizing in all the juicy details about indulging in your favorite food of choice.

One is simply wanting food, the other is lusting after it. 

[MustardSeed]

sometimes I imagine I’ll get very little credits in heaven for following the directive to not drink alcohol.  It’s too easy for me... maybe I’ll get credit for the original decision not to at age 12.  But my imagination wonders if I might get more credit for not drinking coffee, because I’m VERY tempted.  I feel like smoking weed or drinking alcohol would be a bigger betrayal of my commitment but it’s too easy.  

The coffee thing is at least a monthly temptation.  Never had it, at least not in a mug. 

Point being, It seems to me temptation and sin and faith is different for each person.  That’s why judging others is unnecessary... but still, if Christ felt our pain, he must have somehow experienced all the humanness we speak of including sexual temptation and pain. 

 

I also wonder how many women fell in love with him? Is that a terrible thought? Feels weird to type. 

[Calm]

Quote

I also wonder how many women fell in love with him? Is that a terrible thought? Feels weird to type. 

Having someone intelligent and respectful who listens and understands you....who wouldn't?

Edited November 22, 2018 by Calm

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

You sound fairly confident, along with the FLDS, about him having several wives.  What makes you so confident? As every FLDS household has hanging on their wall:

Children?  As in a divine lineage on earth today protected by the Knights of Templar...that could make a good book! 

Yes, I firmly believe Christ was both married and a polygamist.

His status as a Rabbi. His actions with Mary, Martha and Mary Magdalene.  Poetic allusion in scripture.  D&C 130, 131, and 132. The statement at baptism about fulfilling all righteousness. And more.  I am fully convinced.

As for his children- early prophets believed and taught that there were direct descendants of the Savior in the Church.  I am not as positive of that but again, Christ was perfectly obedient to all God's laws.  And that would include the first one he gave to mankind that is repeated in every temple ceremony as established before the foundation of the earth.

Christ was not the exception to law.  He was the fulfiller of all law.  I  don't know why people think he had his own set of rules.  That goes against the gospel.

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by JLHPROF

[pogi]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Yes, I firmly believe Christ was both married and a polygamist.

His status as a Rabbi. His actions with Mary, Martha and Mary Magdalene.  Poetic allusion in scripture.  D&C 130, 131, and 132. The statement at baptism about fulfilling all righteousness. And more.  I am fully convinced.

As for his children- early prophets believed and taught that there were direct descendants of the Savior in the Church.  I am not as positive of that but again, Christ was perfectly obedient to all God's laws.  And that would include the first one he gave to mankind that is repeated in every temple ceremony as established before the foundation of the earth.

Christ was not the exception to law.  He was the fulfiller of all law.  I  don't know why people think he had his own set of rules.  That goes against the gospel.

Good thoughts.

That would make family history work a little tricky beyond around 1 B.C.  And I thought getting access to my Greek family history was hard! 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

On 11/20/2018 at 11:50 PM, Glenn101 said:

Throughout most of my life I really had not thought much about the Christ actually being tempted. I had this picture of a perfect man sailing through life untouched by the cares of this world with his whole being focused on His mission and yielding to his father's will. Of course there is the story of Christ being tempted by Satan, but in my heart of hearts I wondered just how much of a temptation that was. The part about turning stones into bread when Jesus had been fasting for forty days I really could not fathom because I have never done it. Three days is the most I have ever done and my system actually was numb by the time I decided to break it. I really wasn't hungry at the time. And Christ already knew that He would inherit all that His Father had, so, to me that was not too much.

But the Bible actually paints a picture of a very human Jesus. He seemed to show a great sadness when so many of His disciples abandoned Him after receiving the information about Christ's divinity in John chapter 6 and asked the twelve if they would leave Him also. He also seemed to be disappointed when praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and returned to find Peter James and John sleeping. asking if they could not just stay with Him one hour.

But Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews said that Christ "cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities" yet "was in all points tempted like as we are" but still was "without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Was Jesus actually tempted by money? By Power?  I do not wish to be sacrilegious at all here, but I am wondering if Jesus actually had sexual desires, was He tempted at times thusly? Was there maybe a component of same sex attraction in His relationship with a "disciple that Jesus loved". (John 13:23)

I don't know if I should even bring this up. Mods, please look at this and if it is inappropriate please delete it.

Glenn

As far as I know from the Christian beliefs, Christ was unable to sin because of His divine nature. As God The Father is holy and unable to sin, so was Jesus Christ. Therefore, it was impossible for Him to give into the temptations.