The Testing of Jesus

This post is a splinter thread from my earlier post entitled "Original Guilt". In some ways this may appear to be a bit of a tangent, but I believe it is a link in a chain of several interdependent issues. The question at hand is in regard to the temptations Jesus experienced, and is derived largely from these three passages:

"Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted." (Hebrews 2:17)

"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15)

"Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am being tempted by God,' for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death." (James 1:13-15)

Since Jesus is God, and God can't be tempted by evil, how could Jesus have been tempted in every respect as we have been? How are we to interpret the phrase "he had to be made like his brothers in every respect" in light of our being born in sin?

One possible clue is that James seems to be making a distinction in that passage between desire and sin. He also specifically says "tempted by evil", which leaves room for the question of whether or not there are other forms of temptation. For example, in Matthew 4 it says that Jesus was hungry. As best I can understand that passage, Jesus desired food at the time when he knew his Father did not want him to eat any. He obeyed his father, but it looks like he would have still wanted the food. If he hadn't wanted it, then how else could he have ever "suffered when tempted"? (Hebrews 2:17) How else can someone suffer when tempted but by having a desire of which we are denying ourselves satisfaction?

As to Hebrews 2:17, one reasonable interpretation of that passage is that the writer of Hebrews is referring to Jesus being made like the ideal version of his brothers, the way humanity was originally intended to be without sin. I think there is some truth to that, but that idea by itself does not reconcile all the issues at hand. For one thing, Adam was a human without sin, and yet he still coveted what the devil offered him and gave in to that temptation. (Come to think about it, there are a lot of parallels between the temptation of Adam and Eve and the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. I'll look more into that.) Before the fall, Adam did not have a sinful nature, but he must've had some kind of nature, and I can only think that must have been a human nature. Thus, not only is it possible for a sinful nature to be to sin, but a human nature is well. If both can cause the effect of sin, what useful distinction is really being made by suggesting that Jesus was made in the likeness of his brothers by having not a sinful nature but a human nature?

Also, I would be hesitant to interpret the "in every respect" part of Hebrews 2:17 as simply meaning ideal humanity when the specific context of that passage is his propitiations for our sins and helping us in our temptations, (and in the larger context of sympathizing with us referred to in Hebrews 4:15), since I have not yet found any evidence in the rest of the book (though my studies have not been completely exhaustive) that such a distinction was in the author's mind. Not to say that such an interpretation is wrong, but that it is a delicate inference I would not put too much weight on without more evidence.

So those are some of my thoughts on these questions. I'm looking forward to all of your responses.