I know the account is now banned, but he seems to WANT to try and trap Jesus saying he wasn't the son of God because he was tempted...which is trying to mix oil and water, they're two very different things.
First off, yes, Jesus Christ was tempted of the devil in the wilderness after 40 days of fasting...this was to prove that Jesus Christ was manifest in the flesh, and while he was still the son of God, he went through what it was like to be human, and unlike EVERY king in the bible before him, he was tempted and did not sin, testimony that he is God. Scott was correctly taught that Jesus Christ was man and God at the same time, physically he came to earth as a man, but spiritually he is the only begotten son of the Most High...what are the mechanics of that? Far beyond the capacity of understanding of my little few pounds of grey matter.
What I think he's trying to hint at though, is that because Jesus was tempted...he possibly wasn't the son of God...a dangerous claim to make especially so frivolously, also shows he's not exactly biblically literate because this line of thinking could also say that because Jesus was tempted of the religious leaders (on numerous occasions) that this somehow cancelled out his divine nature for example in Matthew 22:17: "Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? {22:18} But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, [ye] hypocrites?"
What he seems to not realise is that when in Matthew, Jesus was tempted by the devil and rebuked him 4:9 "And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: {4:10} For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: {4:11} And in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. {4:12} And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." Which is a reference back to Deuteronomy 6:16, which basically means we should not test God...after all what is man that God should be mindful of him? It refers to challenging God on what he says (it didn't work out well for the pharasies either), because when we challenge God's word, it's like sending a sugar ant up against a battleship, there's no question about who is going to win.
I think this could serve as a good lesson to Christians too, please read your bible regularly. The more you know God's word, the less likely you are to be taken in by false doctrine and the sooner your discernment will kick in and warn you when something seems off.