So then , would you say, that it is acts which is the distinctive point here...
Acts? no. Content. Spirit of the law verses letter of the law. This is spoken to directly in scripture. One can be word smart and content dumb. One can also be word smart and content decietful. The latter is what Satan was guilty of in implying in his use of the citation that it is ok to tempt God. It is not. In the twisting of one passage he violates another. Christ properly threw back at Satan that which he was violated by twisting of intent or 'spirit' of the passage.
Scripture proves scripture.
This is why the scriptures are so important. It is how we know what is true and what is not with regard to proper doctrine. Misconstruing what a passage means will cause violations elsewhere that may be utterly unforseen if one does not know scripture. Ecclesiastes, for example, tells us that when people physically die (righteous or unrighteous), so long as they be dead they can have nothing to do ever in what goes on under the sun.. Ie amongst the living. So, say someone then tries to proffer that one can communicate to or with the physically dead. You instantly know that to be bunk because of Ecclesiastes. Whatever might be cited there would be proven a manipulation or false reading because the issue is already proscribed specifically.