I am teaching Matthew this semester and today we looked at the Temptation narrative in Matt. 4:1-11. I am utilizing an edited and improved post from a year ago. which has to do with the subject of “The Temptation of Jesus and Intertextuality.”
Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness following his baptism in the Jordan is recorded in all three Synoptic Gospels, although Mark only describes it briefly (Mark 1:12-13). Matthew and Luke bring out the details by describing the three temptations and Jesus’ response by quoting thrice from Deuteronomy (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13).
For years I have struggled over the question of the OT background to these events. The temptations seem to parallel the threefold temptation in the Garden (Gen 3:6) as an appeal to the flesh (good for food; make stones bread); and as an appeal to the eyes (delight to the eyes; cast yourself down publicly); and an appeal to pride (make you wise; rule the kingdoms). A later parallel would be John’s statement about the threefold human desire in 1John 2:16 (desires of flesh, eyes, and pride of life). Thus the first Adam’s failing the test is remedied and restored by the last Adam’s passing the test and regaining life for us (Rom. 5:12-17; 1Cor 15:20-22; 15:45).
But I have also been struck by Jesus’ three quotations all being from Deuteronomy (Deut. 8:3; 6:16; 6:13). That book was given at the end of Israel’s wandering in the wilderness, where they failed the test miserably many times. Matthew makes an apparent effort to portray Jesus as recapitulating the history of Israel coming out of Egypt (Matt. 2:15; Hos.11:1), passing through the waters (Matt. 3:13-17; Red Sea), and then being tested in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1; Numbers). Like Adam, Israel failed miserably, but in Jesus their failure in the wilderness has now become triumph in His wilderness!
So which is it - the garden or the wilderness - that is the background for the temptations? By recognizing an intertextual thread or chain, perhaps it is BOTH! When Adam failed, God’s rescue operation involved a people called Israel. But instead of solving the problem of Adam’s failure, Israel themselves became part of the very problem! Adam and Israel, both of whom could be called God’s “son” (Hos.11:1; Luke3:38), could only be rescued by God’s ideal Son, the Messiah. He passed where they failed, and through His work He restores Adam’s lost inheritance (Rom. 5:12-21) and fulfills Israel’s messianic hope (Acts 28:20).
So the intertextual thread of Jesus’ temptation goes back to the OT but it connects through the temptation of Israel in the wilderness to connect again with Adam’s temptation in the garden. This theological background adds even more octane to the truths taught in Hebrews about Jesus’ help being available to us who are being tested and tempted (Heb. 2:17-18; 4:14-16).
What a Story! Who could have made this up?
NOTE: Perhaps David’s tests in the wilderness (1Sam 21-31) could also be another link in this intertextual chain. When we recognize the Davidic Covenant at work, and Jesus as the Son of David, this starts to make some sense.