–A few interesting considerations here. The Spirit drove Him into the wilderness. To what purpose? To be tempted by Satan. Why would the Spirit direct Him there, for THAT? I think one of the main reasons may be so that we can know that He KNOWS. To experience the onslaught of temptation, experience what that never-ending “itch” of an addiction may feel like, and to say “No!” to His human nature (remember He was perfectly human and also perfectly divine)…it is all so important for you and for me.
“For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.” Heb. 4:15
–We need to know we have a Savior who understands our plight, who does not stand aloof to our weakness. He KNOWS. We also need a Savior who did not succumb to temptation, even though He was human. It gives us hope and comfort.
“And he was with the wild animals…”
–We live near some genuine wilderness. The kind where bears and mountain lions and other formidable creatures live. To be alone in the Bridger Wilderness, unarmed, for 40 days would be intimidating. But…this was the Creator. Lord of Heaven and Earth. I suspect that they were company for Him rather than a cause for alarm.
–We don’t know if actual lions were present where the Savior walked, but there are two figurative lions in this context:
“For I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah: I, even I, will tear and go away; I will take away, and none shall rescue him.” Hosea 5:14
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” 1 Pet. 5:8
“angels were ministering to Him”
–Here is some commentary from JFB:
and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him–or supplied Him with food, as the same expression means in Mar 1:31 Luk 8:3. Thus did angels to Elijah ( 1Ki 19:5-8 ). Excellent critics think that they ministered, not food only, but supernatural support and cheer also. But this would be the natural effect rather than the direct object of the visit, which was plainly what we have expressed. And after having refused to claim the illegitimate ministration of angels in His behalf, oh, with what deep joy would He accept their services when sent, unasked, at the close of all this temptation, direct from Him whom He had so gloriously honored! What “angels’ food” would this repast be to Him! and as He partook of it, might not a Voice from heaven be heard again, by any who could read the Father’s mind, “Said I not well, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased?”
–To “cheer” the Lord Jesus? How may *I* do that today?