Language Studies

Difficult Sayings

Can God be tempted and does He tempt us?
James 1:13

"Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone." (James 1:13). Is he suggesting that God might lead us into those situations but that we should pray against it? Here again, as in James 1:2-3,12, is the linguistic confusion over temptation versus trial.

In addition, was not Jesus tempted in the wilderness by Satan and although he was man, was he not also God and therefore the Divine was subject to very real temptations to acquire worship and rule by alternative means.

We also find a passage in the Apocrypha that commands us not to impute God with the blame for our falling away:

"¹¹ Say not thou, It is through the Lord that I fell away: for thou oughtest not to do the things that he hateth. ¹² Say not thou, He hath caused me to err: for he hath no need of the sinful man. ... ²⁰ He hath commanded no man to do wickedly, neither hath he given any man licence to sin." (Sirach 15:11-20, KJV)

It seems to some that the word 'tempt/temptation' can be positive in James 1:2,12 but in verse 13, negative. For instance, a web discussion group carried the following query:

"Could you please help me to understand the usage of PEIRASMOS (and PEIRAZW) in James? In James 1:1-2 and 1:12 it seems to be a positive thing and is usually translated as "trial". But in James 1:13-14 it becomes something bad and is translated as "temptation". How can it be that the same word in the same context has different meanings and is translated with different words?" (http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/test-archives/html4/1999-06/31667.html)

See the replies posted there.

Some commentaries try to distinguish between internal temptation and external trial:

"It is clear that the reference here [James 1:2] is to external trials, or tests of stamina (peirasmois) whereas later in the same chapter (James 1:13) the verb form (peirazomai) of that noun is used to speak of inner temptations, or solicitations to sin."^F1

"...despite the fact that the same Greek root (peira-) is used for both the outer trial and the inner temptation, it is crucial to distinguish them."^F2

Others, such as Adamson in the NICNT commentary on James (p.53) disagree with the distinction between external and internal trials and point out that the "unity of the passage 1:2-21 must be fully recognized" (p.28).

Davids in the Hard Sayings of the Bible sees an alternate translation as offering some help:

James sees the testing situation occurring in his community in these Old Testament terms. His concern is that the believers should be trusting like Abraham; they are not to be as Israel and fail the test by blaming God. James gives two reasons for not blaming God. We can translate the first reason "God ought not to be tested by sinful people," instead of the traditional translation "God cannot be tempted by evil." The Greek word apeirastos, translated "ought not to be tested" (or "cannot be tempted"), is found only once in the New Testament and nowhere else previously in Greek. Later it is found only a very few times in the church fathers. In those later contexts my translation fits as well as or better than the traditional translation. Furthermore, my translation makes better sense in the context in James. It would be hard to see why the fact that God cannot be tempted would make it wrong to claim that he is behind a test, but it is easy to see that "God ought not to be tested" meets the situation, for then the phrase paraphrases Deuteronomy 6:16 and tells them not to blame God as Israel did at Massah, which is the very thing James pictures them doing. This also solves the problem of Jesus' testing (or temptation), for he was in fact tested by an evil being, which this translation allows to be possible, even if it is a sinful act.^F3

Another problem is that how can James say that God does not tempt anyone when Genesis 22:1 clearly says, "Some time later God tested/tempted Abraham"?

"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, 'Abraham': and he said, 'Behold, here I am'" (Genesis 22:1, KJV)

Certainly, one could argue here, as the majority of other translations clearly believe, that the Hebrew means 'test'. One web author states: "The case of God tempting Abraham is no more than a mistranslation by the seventeenth-century authors of the King James Version."^F4 .

The Hebrew verb nâçah הסנ (Strong's #5254) is used some 36 times in the Old Testament. The KJV uses 'tempt' 12 times to the ASV's 3 times, which prefers 'test'. For instance, Exodus 16:4 "...that I may test them, whether they will walk in My law or not", it seems here as elsewhere that 'test' is more appropriate than 'tempt'.

In fact, after God 'tested' Israel - and Israel failed - they are described as having 'tested' God themselves (Exodus 17:2,7), ten times indeed (Numbers 14:22), and henceforward were commanded not so to do (Deuteronomy 6:16).

The nature of God's testing can hardly be called 'temptation' since its purpose was to help Israel avoid sin:

"God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin." (Exodus 20:20, NKJV; cf. Deuteronomy 8:2; 13:3; Judges 2:22; 3:4).

What about Job? Did it not appear as if God was tempting him to "curse God and die"? Actually, it was Satan doing the tempting and God allowing the testing. Much as with Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 32:30-31), it appears that God "withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might know all that was in his heart".

When Satan tempts us God may allow it by way of a test, in this sense God has allowed but not necessarily authored the trial.

Gideon was allowed to "test" the Lord (Judges 6:39) when he laid down his fleece. It seems that testing is neither good nor bad, but it is the purpose of the testing that clarifies its use. For God, the purpose was to know what was in Israel's heart (or more accurately, that Israel might know what was in its own heart, for God already knew). For Gideon it was to confirm that it was God who was talking to him. It was not doubt or temptation but confirmation that he was after.

Ahaz was even told by a prophet to ask of God a sign and his reply was "I will not ask, nor will I test the LORD!" (Isaiah 7:12), using the same Hebrew word nâçah הסנ. He was told off for 'wearying' God by not asking for the sign. Instead, the Lord Himself gave a sign, the famous prophecy, Isaiah 7:14, "a virgin shall conceive".

A good non-religious use of the term is seen in David's turning down of Saul's armour and sword for he had not tested them (1 Samuel 17:39). He was not comfortable with them as he was not used to them. They were not "tried and tested".

A very useful passage, utilising the Hebrew poetic literary form parallelism, is Psalm 26:2 which parallels the term 'test/tempt' with two other Hebrew terms:

"Examine me, O LORD, and test me;
Try my mind and my heart." (Psalm 26:2)

The first of these parallel terms is ןחב bâchan (Strong's #974), to 'examine', used of testing the heart or refining gold (these two are paralleled again in Psalm 95:9). The second word, ףרצ tsâraph (Strong's #6884), 'try', is even more obviously a goldsmith's term and is used of refining and smelting.

Silver and gold are tested, not 'tempted', they are refined in the fire. Indeed Zechariah 13:9 uses the same two terms paralleled above to describe this process in order to make the remnant truly God's people and Him their God.

All these thoughts, though, do not deny that James 1:13 does speak of 'temptation' as well as 'test' and we are enjoined not to impute God with 'tempting' us, although there is no doubt He does 'test' us for the positive purpose of refinement and for us to know what is in our heart. We can test God too with positive motivation when seeking confirmation or when acting on faith. We are not to put to God to the test for false motives. Furthermore, although Jesus was tempted in real ways as a man, God Himself cannot be tempted by evil means or evil desires, for there is no evil in Him.

---

FOOTNOTES:
F1: Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983/85).
F2: Moo, D., James, TNTC, (IVP, 1985/95) p.72.
F3: Kaiser, W. C., Hard sayings of the Bible (Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity, 1996/7)
F4: http://www.apologeticspress.org/abdiscr/abdiscr73.html

Copyright Statement
'Difficult Sayings' Copyright 2025© KJ Went. 'Difficult Sayings' articles may be reproduced in whole under the following provisions: 1) A proper credit must be given to the author at the end of each article, along with a link to https://www.studylight.org/language-studies/difficult-sayings.html  2) 'Difficult Sayings' content may not be arranged or "mirrored" as a competitive online service.

Meet the Author

KJ Went has taught biblical Hebrew, hermeneutics and Jewish background to early Christianity. The "Biblical Hebrew made easy" course can be found at www.biblicalhebrew.com.

Why not consider Greek, Aramaic, Biblical or Modern Hebrew online, it's easier than you think.

BMSoftware, founded by KJ, offer a wide range of biblical, Hebrew, Greek and multilingual software for theological use.