OT-POET.filter - rwp tempted:

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:5 @{That I might know} (\eis to gnnai\). Paul's common idiom (verse 2|), \eis to\ and the infinitive of purpose (second aorist ingressive active of \ginsk\, come to know). {Lest by any means the tempter had tempted you} (\m ps epeirasen hums ho peirazn\). Findlay takes this as a question with negative answer, but most likely negative final clause with \m ps\ about a past action with aorist indicative according to the classic idiom as in strkjv@Galatians:2:2| (\m ps--edramon\) and strkjv@Galatians:4:11| after verb of fearing (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). It is a fear that the thing may turn out to be so about the past. {Should be} (\gentai\). Here the usual construction appears (aorist subjunctive with \m ps\) about the future.

rwp@James:1:13 @{Let no one say} (\mdeis leget\). Present active imperative, prohibiting such a habit. {When he is tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle of \peiraz\, here in evil sense of tempt, not test, as in strkjv@Matthew:4:1|. Verses 12-18| give a vivid picture of temptation. {I am tempted of God} (\apo theou peirazomai\). The use of \apo\ shows origin (\apo\ with ablative case), not agency (\hupo\), as in strkjv@Mark:1:13|, of Satan. It is contemptible, but I have heard wicked and weak men blame God for their sins. Cf. strkjv@Proverbs:19:3|; Sirach strkjv@15:11f. Temptation does not spring "from God." {Cannot be tempted with evil} (\apeirastos kakn\). Verbal compound adjective (alpha privative and \peiraz\), probably with the ablative case, as is common with alpha privative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516), though Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 74) treats it as the genitive of definition. The ancient Greek has \apeiratos\ (from \peira\), but this is the earliest example of \apeirastos\ (from \peiraz\) made on the same model. Only here in the N.T. Hort notes \apeiratos kakn\ as a proverb (Diodorus, Plutarch, Josephus) "free from evils." That is possible here, but the context calls for "untemptable" rather than "untempted." {And he himself tempteth no man} (\peirazei de autos oudena\). Because "untemptable."

rwp@Matthew:6:13 @{And bring us not into temptation} (\kai m eisenegkis eis peirasmon\). "Bring" or "lead" bothers many people. It seems to present God as an active agent in subjecting us to temptation, a thing specifically denied in strkjv@James:1:13|. The word here translated "temptation" (\peirasmon\) means originally "trial" or "test" as in strkjv@James:1:2| and Vincent so takes it here. _Braid Scots_ has it: "And lat us no be siftit." But God does test or sift us, though he does not tempt us to evil. No one understood temptation so well as Jesus for the devil tempted him by every avenue of approach to all kinds of sin, but without success. In the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus will say to Peter, James, and John: "Pray that ye enter not into temptation" (Luke:22:40|). That is the idea here. Here we have a "Permissive imperative" as grammarians term it. The idea is then: "Do not allow us to be led into temptation." There is a way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but it is a terrible risk.