An Attempt To Listen To God
 

Meditations on The Unblemished Christ

Study to shew thyself approved unto God . . . 2 Timothy 2:15


 

Introduction

In many places and many times across the world, a lonely saint, or a number of saints together have had their hearts quietened and amazed as they have sung the lovely words penned by Mary Jane Walker. 

“O spotless Lamb of God in Thee,
The Father’s holiness we see
And with delight thy children trace
In Thee, His wondrous love and grace.”

The Importance Of His Perfections

Our appreciation of the glory of the Lord is intensified by the comprehending that He, the Lamb of God’s providing, was becoming to the God who is thrice holy.  Had there been the slightest blemish in a sacrifice in the Old Testament it would never have been accepted.  (Lev. 22:2) 

It was not sufficient for the Lord to be sinless, He had to be void of any deadness of spirit, distortion of character, distancing from God or defilement from without. He had to be superlatively immaculate to offer Himself a sacrifice pleasing to God, which would satisfy the claims of righteous justice.

The slightest tint of error in any of the declarations of the Lord, any distortion in any activity in His manifestation of God or the Father, any modification of Him as the Light by defusing or distortion would have at that instance:
 

1)

 Debarred Him from being the sacrifice for sin.
  2) Would have stopped Him from being the manifestation of God and the Father.
  3) Prevented His ability to deliver from the power of sin.
  4) God’s last voice to man would forever have been silenced.
  5) The holy fellowship from eternity past would have been severed.

The Lamb Of Exodus 12

Perhaps the best known Old Testament shadow of our Lord is the Passover Lamb in Ex. 12. In that ancient “shadow” there were a number of prophetic foreshadowings.  One is that the house was always too little for the lamb and never the lamb for the house. This is supported by Ex. 12:4, “If the household be too little for the lamb”, thus signifying the all sufficiency of the sacrifice of the Lord for the whosoever will.  Another is the keeping of the lamb from the tenth to the fourteenth day. The common teaching is that this was to see if there was any defilement in it. This I strongly disagree with for the following reason:
 

1)

 I have one son and he is very dear to me, and I am no different from the ancients of whom Zechariah wrote, “They shall mourn for him as one that mourneth for his only son” (Zech. 12:10). Evidently the firstborn son was very precious to the heart of the father.  This being so, consider the following scenario. If God was to put me in the situation of that Israelite father and told, “Get a lamb, an unblemished lamb and keep it from the 10th to 14th day”, when would I check that animal to make sure there was no blemish in it?
      a) Would it be before I brought it home or afterward?
      b) If a flaw was found could I get another on the 11th, 12th or 13th day?
         
I have no doubt that a father who loved his son would very carefully inspect every part of that animal before it was ever brought home to make sure of its perfections, because the life of his son depended on four things:
 

1)

 The lamb being without blemish.  (Ex. 12:5)
  2) On the shedding of its blood.  (Ex. 12: 6-7)
  3) The blood applied as God had commanded.  (Ex. 12:7, 22).
  4) On them staying inside the house.  (Ex. 12:22)

Each command by God had to be precisely kept, first for the glory of God and then because the life of the son and future prosperity depended on the purity of the animal.  

Then why was the animal kept?  

My suggestion is the lamb was kept so that all who saw the lamb, could see an unblemished life being lived in their very midst. It was not kept in a cloistered area but in a world of slavery, confused hopes and under a powerful prince.  

The Loveliness Of The Unblemished Christ

Christ, the great antitype of the unblemished Lamb, never had to be told to “reckon Himself dead to sin,” nor “ love not the world”.  He never had the law of sin within that would sin and respond to iniquity.

Likened unto the tree planted by the rivers of water which brings forth its fruit in its season (Psa. 1:3), the unblemished life of the Lord resulted in unrestricted fruitfulness to God and man.  As such, His life was one of separation but never isolation, separate from sin but separation to God.  Not being an isolationist He was very close to sinners in their needs and everyday life.  He was the carpenter of Nazareth, living in a family of siblings and knowing “cousins”, etc.  He ate with publicans and sinners and was in the house of the publican, it was not that He joined them or lowered His place before them.  The scriptures are very clear that they sat down with Him (Matt. 9:10), not He with them, thus they ate with Him not He with them.  In Luke 15:1 they came to Him as the teacher and He taught and when He entered a home He entered it as the Teacher.  However, His separation was not based on man made rules or even the law of God but with a heart filled with love for God the Father.

When selecting a sacrifice man could only look on the outward appearance of the animal to see if there was any blemish but God was not restricted to the external life of the Lord.  He looked into His heart and mind, His motivation and the goals.  Assessing with all the righteousness of His character He saw a man who was perfect.
 

1)

 God looked into his physical body and it was unblemished.
  2) God looked into His intellectual life and it was unblemished.
  3) God looked into His moral life and it was unblemished.
  4) God looked into His social life and it was unblemished.
  5) God looked into His leisure life and it was unblemished.
  6) God looked into the soul of Christ and it was unblemished.
  7) God looked into the spirit of Christ and it was unblemished.

This is profoundly wonderful for when the Moral Governor of the Universe, the Judge of all, gave His ruling on the life of Christ, He gave several outstanding statements.  Some were given before His birth and some afterward.   

Only concerning an unblemished man could the Lord say:
 

1)

 “The Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon Him.”  (Isa. 11:2)
  2) “My servant. . . In whom my soul delighteth.”  (Isa. 42:1)
  3) “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”  (Matt. 3:16-17)
  4)  “This is my beloved Son, hear him.”  (Matt. 17:5)
     
Only concerning an unblemished man could be given the responsibility of:
 

1)

 “Judge the poor, and reprove with equity. . . And he shall smite the earth with the rod of His mouth”. (Isa. 11: 4)

Christ was a man who, unlike Jeroboam, never turned his back against God (1 Kgs. 14:9), or David who was never blindsided by Satan (1 Chron. 21:1), or Moses who acted out of the mind of God (Ex. 2:12-14).

The sacrificial death of the lamb prefigured more than the physical death of the Lord.  It foreshadowed the experience our Lord went through when He was forsaken by God.  That death of separation from God prompted the cry: “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?”  It is this level that Paul speaks of when the Holy Spirit caused him to write:
 

1)

 “Christ died for our sins.”  (1 Cor. 15:3)
  2) “Christ died for us.”  (Rom. 5:6)
  3) “Reconciled by the death of His Son.”  (Rom. 5:10)
     
This is not to minimize the physical death of our Lord for without it, we would still be related to Adam and there would be no justification.  This is taught by such scriptures as:
 

1)

 “Christ dieth no more.”  (Rom. 6:9)
  2) “Through death he might destroy him that had the power of death.”  (Heb. 2:14)

The Principle Words Used To Describe The Unblemished Christ

The Old Testament records several ways by which the spotlessness of the Son of God is emphasized.  The perfection of the soon to be offered animals is indicated by two repeated expressions, “no blemish” and “no spot”.  When God gives commands about the red heifer (Num. 19), the Israelites were told: “Bring thee (Moses) a red heifer without blemish wherein is no spot”.  This is the only time in the Old Testament where both words are used governing one offering.  The literal wording is: “In her there is no spot”.  In the New testament when Peter speaks of the Lord as a Lamb he will also say He is without blemish or spot.               

The Hebrew clause translated, “wherein is no spot” is spoken of Coniah and Israel.  Concerning Coniah, God said: “Wherein is no pleasure?” (Jer. 22:28).  He was cast aside as a broken vessel because of his wickedness in cutting and burning the scroll of the Lord, indicating his rebellion against the government of God (Jer. 36:20-23, 25; 28-32).  The same concerning Israel who transgressed the commandments of the Lord and the covenant of their betrothal to Him (Hos. 8:8). 

It is when considering the perfections of the Lord against the background of these two references that the perfection of the Lord shines out.  Unlike Coniah, the Lord Jesus rebelled against the word of God but fulfilled it.  Speaking to John at His baptism He said: “Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15).  To the religious leaders He said: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill (Matt. 5:17).  Unlike Israel, His pledge to “do thy will” was never violated.  Again, just prior to the cross He said: “I have finished the work which Thou gavest me to do” (Jn. 17:4). 

The Two Hebrew Words Are “Tamiym” and “M’uwm”

The following scriptures make clear that there is a distinction between these two words.

God never uses words superfluously, consequently when the Holy Spirit writes, “No blemish” or “No spot”, there is a difference.  This is shown in the following scriptures:
 

1)

 “This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke.”  (Num. 19:2)
  2) “That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”  (Eph. 5:27)
  3) “But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” (1 Pet. 1:19)

Unfortunately they are not translated consistently in the King James Version and this leads to confusion.

There is no value is saying “M’uwm” means without blemish and “tamiym” means without spot because the King James Version is exceedingly inconsistent in its translating.  In Lev. 1:3 the Hebrew word “Tamiym” is translated “no blemish” yet, is translated “no spot” in Num. 19:2.  Complicating the matter further the word translated “without blemish” in Num. 19:2 is “m’uwm”.  A consistent translation would have been:
 

1)

 “Let him offer a male without tamiym (blemish).”  (Lev. 1:3)
  2) Num. 19:2 “that they bring thee a red heifer without tamiym (blemish, not spot) wherein is no “m’uwm” (spot, not blemish).  The expression, “wherein is no m’uwm”, finds its New Testament antitype in our Lord when in 1 John 3:5 the expression is found, “In Him is no sin”.

To Assist In The Differentiating Between The Words, Following Is A List Of The Places Where:

 

1)

 The word “Tamiym” is translated “spot”.
     

a)

 Num. 19:2; ch. 28:3, 9,11; ⃰ ch. 29; 17; 26.
  ⃰  In Num. 28:19 it is without blemish although in vv. 3, 9, 11 it is “without spot”.
     
  2) The word “tamiym ⃰ ” is translated “without blemish”.
  ⃰  Trs “complete” Lev. 23:15 “full year” Lev. 25:30
     

a)

 Ex. 12:5; ch 29:1
     

b)

 Lev. 1:3, 10; ch. 3, 6; ch. 4:3, 23, 28, 32; ch. 5:15, 18; ch. 6:6; ch. 9:2, 3; ch. 14:10; ch. 22:19 ⃰, ch. 23:12,18
  ⃰  In Lev. 22:21 it is translated perfect.
     

c)

 Num. 6:14; ch. 28:10 ⃰ ; ch. 29:2, 8, 13,⃰ ⃰   20, 29, 32 & 36
  ⃰    In Num. 28:31 The NASB indicates that at the end of this verse there is a clause bracketed in the KJV, “They shall be without defect” Tamiym.
  ⃰ ⃰  In Num. 29:17, 26 it is translated without spot although the rest of the times it is without blemish.
     

d)

  Ez. 43:22, 23, 25; ch. 45:18, 25; ch. 46:6, 13 
     
  3) The word “mum” is translated “spot”
     

a)

 Num. 19:2
     

b)

 Deut. 32:5
     

c)

 Job 11:15 ⃰
  ⃰  In Job 21:7 it is translated “blot” as in Prov. 9:7.
     

d)

 Song of Songs 4:7
     
  4) The word “mum” is translated “blemish”
     

a)

 Lev. 21:17, 18, 21; ch. 22:20, 21, 25; ch. 24:19, 20
     

b)

 Deut. 15:21; ch.17:1
     

c)

 2 Sam. 14:25
     

d)

 Dan. 1:4
     
There are several Greek words which indicate wholeness.  They are: 
 

1)

 “Amōmos” translated “without blemish, without spot, faultless”.
  2) “Aspilos” translated “without spot”, which is translated “complete”.
  3) “Artios” which is translated “entire”.
  4) “Amemptos” translated “blameless”.
  5) “Anegkletos” translated “unreprovable and blameless”.
  6) “Anepilēptos” translated “unreprovable and irreproachable”.

Of these, only two are used regarding the Lord.  These are “Amōmos” in Heb. 9:14 and 1 Pet. 1:19 where it is translated “without spot” in Heb. 9:14 but “without blemish” in 1 Pet. 1:19.  The other word, “Aspilos”, is only used in 1 Pet. 1:19.  Archbishop Trench, in his “Synonyms of the New Testament”, writes the following: “When amōmos is used with aspilos, amōmos refers to the absence of internal blemish and aspilos to the lack of external spot.  Thus when it is said, “no blemish” it indicates nothing external had marred the animal.  “No spot” indicates no marring on the inside.  Thank God this is wonderfully true. 

  Illustration: Mark Jones has a beautiful tablecloth, it is perfect (it is without blemish) in its coloring, texture and smoothness, furthermore there is not a stain, discoloration or tear in it, it is without spot.  Then in a moment of carelessness I spill tomato juice on the perfect tablecloth.  It is still perfect but not without spot.  To be without blemish emphasizes that which is positive, to be without spot emphasizes that which is negative.
     
In His manifestation of God the unblemished Son of God was never rushed, never flustered, never impatient or irritated by delays, never too early and never too late to achieve His purpose for He knew two glorious truths.
 

1)

 God is sovereign and everything is under His control.
  2) He Himself was in perfect fellowship with God in submissiveness to Him.

The perfection of His manifestation of God was seen in the years of His ministry.  He never needed to minimize a statement, amend a message to make it clearer, repeal an utterance or revise a sentence.

 Tamiym

In the Old testament when it is recorded that the Lord was without blemish, Heb. “tamiym”, which is translated in the following ways which are relevant to us for consideration. It is recorded:
 

1)

 Noah was “Perfect in his generations”.  (Gen. 6.9)
  2) The lamb (Ex. 12:5) was to be “without blemish” thus having the fitness to die for another.
  3) The people (Josh. 24:14) were to “Serve the Lord in sincerity (tamiym)”.
  4) In Psa. 119:1 there is reference to a man who is undefiled (tamiym) in the way.
  5) God’s work is tamiym.  (Deut. 32:4)
  6) God’s ways are tamiym. (2 Sam. 22:31)

“Tamiym” emphasizes perfection, His holiness, what he was in himself, perfection of integrity and emphasizes what He was.  “Tamiym” means to be complete, having an untroubled human relationship with God.  Moses wrote of a people whom God summarized as: “the abominations of those nations” (Deut. 18:9).  Their religion included making a son or daughter pass through the fire, using the service of a charmer, a consultant with familiar spirits and a wizard or a necromancer (Deut. 18:10-11).  In contrast to them God tells His people: “Thou shalt be perfect (tamiym) with the Lord thy God”.  

Because the Lord was perfect, He was totally opposite to the wicked who are like the troubled sea, always stirring up mire.  His perfection is seen when as the physician, He was present to spiritually heal those who thought themselves spiritually healthy.  “And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them”.  (Lk. 5:17) 

From my studies, apart from our Lord, there is only one group of men and one individual of whom it is recorded that they were without blemish.  In Dan. 1:4 there were a group of the children of Israel who physically had nothing organically deficient in them.  The same was true of Absalom (2 Sam. 14:25).  The infinite difference is that in the Hebrews and Absalom it was physically and outwardly as seen by men, but with the Lord it was morally and inwardly as evaluated by God. 

Our Lord was a man who lived without “tamiym” (without spot/blemish depending on the translation), a life of perfect completeness, soundness before God, a life of a man who lived in uninterrupted fellowship with God who breathed and lived in the rarified air of Heaven.⃰
  ⃰   See notes on “A Man Walking On Earth But Living In The Atmosphere Of Heaven”. 

The Lord was perfect, perfect in His deity and humanity, neither canceling out the other but each complete and unmingled.  Furthermore, He was not only perfectly man but a perfect man. 

M’uwm

The word for “blemish” is n’uwm and is used in 19 verses in the Old Testament.  Some of its significant uses are:
 

1)

 A blemished individual could not offer a sacrifice.  (Lev.  21:21)
  2) At times it was the result of damage done by another.  (Lev. 24:19)
  3) At times it indicates that which was organically deficient in an individual.  (Dan. 1:4)

“M'uwm" emphasizes His absence of any unsightliness before God, a man utterly void of any blemish in any way and there was no internal sin (the heredity effect of original sin).  The emphasis is on what He was not and what He did not, carrying the thought of His imperviousness to blemishing from within or from without.  Living in this vale of tears and sorrow He saw sin, heard sinful talk and knew man’s sinful thoughts but was never defiled. Furthermore, all which He was morally He was physically, having a body utterly impervious to disease as His spirit was to sin.  He could touch the leper and not be contaminated, He could touch the dead and not be defiled, He could live surrounded by sin on every hand and yet never be contaminated.

  Illustration: Like the sunlight, it can shine into the dirtiest places, shine upon the most corrupt wickedness and never be contaminated.

The Difficulty For Us To Understand It

It is hard for us to comprehend the perfection of the Lord because of several factors:
 

1)

 Absolute perfection is synonymous with underived essential holiness and that is something we cannot comprehend.  This is because of the law of sin in our nature and being infiltrated subconsciously by senses that are often left unguarded.
  2) Again, I can know things but not appreciate them.  For instance, at a wedding there could be doctors, teachers, retired persons and house wives who look at the wedding cake.  They may see it is beautifully decorated, they may admire and even take pictures of it but ultimately it’s just a cake!  However, being a cake decorator and doing fine intricate work, I would see more than just a cake. I can, to some degree, appreciate the skill needed and the perfection of intricate lace work, the perfection of the blending of design and colors. So with my appreciation of Christ, for unless I know, not intellectually but experientially, the difficulty of living in this earth and surrounded by filth, I will never appreciate the wonder of the unblemished Christ.

The Perfections Of The Lord

The Perfection of The Life Of Christ Despite It Being Lived In Public

Returning to an earlier point, our Lord did not live in the closed halls of a monastery separated from humanity, but this lovely man walked the hills of Judea, mingled with the crowds in the market place, knelt in the outlying fields of Nazareth and Galilee, encountering those who swore, were vulgar, lustful and yet his spirit remained unblemished and unspotted. No defilement could attach itself to Him. 

He lived, worked, ate, visited, prayed, went to the synagogue and slept among a people who had confused hopes and were under the prince of the power of the air.  He lived in a normal family from Nazareth and if anyone can see faults it is family!  The only things His family ever saw was the outshining of glory.           Profound are the words of John: “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn. 1:14).  Despite living among humanity with all the depravity, distortion and distance from God, His life was void of imperfection from the day of His birth until His ascension.  

However, He was also undefiled physically for He could touch the leper or the dead yet not be contaminated.  He would hold the hand of the dead child and wonder of wonders, the hand of the dead child was held by the omnipotent hand of the Loving God.  Not only was He undefiled but His life passed to the child.  It was an impossibility for anyone to die in the presence of the Lord and only those He did not call would remain dead. (Jn. 11:43) 

The ability to be uncontaminated despite the presence of contagious infection can be faintly illustrated by the doctor who, when working with an HIV patient, cannot be infected because of his gloves.  Likewise, the holy perfection of the Lord automatically prevented any intrusion of defilement contaminating His spirit, soul or body. The Lord had a spirit that was impervious to sin and a body impervious to disease. 

In perfection the Lord read every situation and response.  For instance, there were those who said that they would follow Him and to them He said: “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay His head” (Matt. 8:20).  When about to go to the cross He told the disciples that the world would hate them (Jn. 15:18; 1 Jn. 3:13), or when many followed and: “He did not commit Himself unto them for He knew all men (Jn. 2:24).

It was not an exaggeration when:
 

1)

 Standing before Caiaphas that He said there would be a day when he would see the Son of man coming in clouds and great glory.  (Matt. 24:30)
  2) Nor was it an embellishment when speaking to Mary and Martha He said, “I am the resurrection and the Life”.  (Jn. 11:25)
  3) Nor was it empty words when He said: “I am the door by me if any man enter in he shall be saved” (Jn. 10:9); “I am the way the truth and the Life” (Jn. 14:6); “I am the true Vine. . . Every branch in me that beareth not fruit He purgeth it” (Jn. 15:1-2); “Heaven and earth shall pass away but my words shall not pass away” (Mk. 13:31).

Being unblemished, these were vocalizations of a fertile imagination, but absolute truth.  He never underestimated the severity of a judgement, for when speaking of those who professed knowing Him, but did not, He warned them by revealing the words that would be spoken to them: “Depart from me ye workers of iniquity” (Matt. 7:23).  Again, concerning the judgment of the nations, its solemnity and severity, He said: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41).           

The psalmist wrote: “If I regard iniquity in my heart the Lord will not hear me” (Psa. 66:18), but since there was never iniquity in the heart of the Lord, God always heard his petitions.  As He stood by the grave of Lazarus He said: “Father, I thank Thee that Thou hast heard me” (Jn. 11: 42). 

He never used emotion to gain converts, consequently all His illustrations (parables or miracles) were factual and easily understood.  There were no sad heart wrenching stories.  When the Lord spoke of those who were killed by sudden death (Lk. 13), it was not to create an emotional response but to cause men to think.  He had no plaintive music being played as numerous alter calls were made and pleas given.  His perfect holiness enabled Him to be a channel by which the power of God flowed without interruption, resulting in divine enlightenment and conviction.           

He never sought for, nor was He swayed by numbers, seeking only those who professed to be His in truth (Jn. 2:24).   The only time a number is mentioned about a miracle is when the disciples caught the fishes (Jn. 21:11). He never spoke of how many people were converted through His ministry for He knew the heart of humanity. 

When the Lord caused the dumb man to speak (Lk. 11:14), He was accused of working the miracle by the power of Beelzebub.  The natural man would have been antagonistic in response, but not Christ.  When they came tempting Him, seeking a sign from Heaven, He faces their hurtfulness and the temptation in a beautiful manner. He pointed out to them the inconsistency of their argument and then with a heart of love and undoubted sorrow, He told them of their condition by the parable of the man freed from demonic power and then he and others demons their coming back to him making his condition worse than it was prior to his deliverance (Matt. 12:45).  

He was perfect in enduring accusations and temptations, then with sympathetic graciousness intelligently answered.  The accusations and temptations never stopped for at the end of Luke 11:53 it is recorded: “The Pharisees began to urge Him vehemently, and to provoke Him to speak of many things”; and in v. 54: “Laying wait for Him, and seeking to catch something out of His mouth, that they might accuse Him”.  Praise God this man of God never failed in the provocation, neither did a word ever slip that could come back to haunt Him.  He was holy and perfect without blemish! 

The service of God’s unblemished Servant was always wrought at the most opportune moment and in the most appropriate manner.

 His Perfection In Prayer  

The Lord was perfect in His praying, for His life was His prayers personified, that is there was no inconsistency between His praying and his activity.  His works were working with God for the fulfilling of His prayers.  When he taught the disciples how to pray, it was not just words, it demanded the praying one to have a spirit in fellowship with the requests being made.  For instance, to pray for the salvation of individuals and yet live like the ungodly is a contradiction and the prayers would be hypocritical.  Therefore, when the Lord told the disciples to pray that the will of God be done on earth as in Heaven, it meant that they must have that desire in their own lives.  However, while He taught the disciples to pray: “Deliver us from evil”, a clause that is, according to Dr. Lightfoot, softened too much and is better said: “Deliver us from the wicked one”.  These expressions could never be applied to Him, neither could He ask for forgiveness in the clause: “Forgive us our trespasses”, but He did experience what it was to be led into temptation.  

He outlived His prayers, that is, when He taught the disciples how to pray: “Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven” (Lk. 11:2), this described the life He lived.  His prayers were the out-breathing of a heart in true fellowship with God.  When teaching the disciples the right attitude and prioritizing in prayer, the first words were: “Our Father, who art in Heaven, Hallowed be thy Name” (Lk. 11:2). 

Because of His unblemished life and inward perfection it is observed that He prayed, but He never asked for forgiveness, never came to God with a sin offering or a confession of sin (Jn. 17:4). 

He interceded for others but never asked others to intercede for Him.  In this He is set in contrast to Paul who asked for prayer (1 Thess. 5:25) or the writer to the Hebrews (Heb. 13:18) nor needed others to intercede for Him (1 Tim. 2:1-2). 

He prayed for His disciples but never with them (Matt. 26:39), calling God His Father but never His Saviour, and in this He is set in contrast to Mary (Lk. 1:46-47).

He Was Perfect In His Approach To God 

The Psalmist exhorted the ancients: “Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto Him” (Psa. 100:4).  Speaking to God was no mere casual affair to Christ.  God was not someone to be politely acknowledged in the morning.  The Lord knew nothing of patronizing God, neither did He know what it was to approach God ignorant of the intensity of His holiness.  Being God, He knew the glory of divine holiness, the greatness of God and the awe that is His due.  In Rom. 1:21 the first major sin is unthankfulness, but being unblemished, this was never a characteristic of Christ.  The concept of “thanksgiving” was on His lips continually:
 

1)

 “At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.”  (Matt. 11:25)
  2) “Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid.  And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.”  (Jn. 11:41)
  3) “And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.” (Mk. 14:23)
  4) “And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.”  (Lk. 22:19)
  5) “And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would.”  (Jn. 6:11)

He Was Perfect In His Acceptance Of The Circumstances Which Crossed His Path

Amid the developing of His rejection by the Jewish religious leaders and speaking of the impossibility of pleasing them (Matt. 11:16-24), He answers their rejections and then prays a most unusual prayer.  On one level it is a prayer of condemnation on the religious rulers, but that is not the major focus.  The focus is on the grace of God in revealing divine truth to the ordinary individuals.  He said: “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes” (Matt. 11:25).  

At the grave of Lazarus, when they had taken away the stone, He lifted up his eyes and said: “Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me” (Jn. 11:41).  Amid the questioning of His love and virtual criticising Him for not coming, He speaks to the One who never criticised Him or questioned His love because there was never anything to criticise in Christ and God knew the genuineness of His love.

Perfection Of Attitude Toward God In Fulfilment Of The Law

In the law God gave some 600+ commands and when our Lord was asked:  "What is the greatest?", His answer was:
 

1)

 “And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul”. (Deut. 10:12)
  2) Micah wrote the same truths, “He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?”  (Mic. 6:8)

What then was the attitude of the unblemished Christ concerning the law?

Like the Psalmist, but with more delight, He loved every aspect of God’s law.  In Psalms 119 there is indicated the scope and intensity of His love for the law of God.  Observing the change of terms used we read:    
 

1)

 “Thy commandments which I have loved”.  (v. 48)
  2) “O how love I thy law.” (v. 97)
  3) “I love thy testimonies.”  (v. 119)
  4) “Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.”  (v. 140)
  5) “Consider how I love thy precepts.”  (v. 159)
     
Every aspect of God’s truth was loved by Him.  It was more than love, it was a passion:
 

1)

 “My soul breaketh for the longing that if hath unto thy judgments.”  (v. 20)
  2) “O how love I thy law.”  (v. 97)
  3) “I opened my mouth and panted, for I longed for thy commandments.”  (v. 13)
  4) “My soul hath kept thy testimonies; and I love them exceedingly.”  (v. 167)
     
When sitting on the mount our Lord taught: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets, I came not to destroy but to fulfil” (Matt. 5:17).  This leads one to question: “What did he mean by fulfilling the Law?” There are several ways in which the Lord fulfilled ⃰  the law:
  ⃰  The Greek word “gamar”, translated “fulfill”, also means to teach as Paul did in Col. 1:25.  “I am made a minister to fulfill the word of God”, that means to teach it.  Thus the Lord was not only fulfilling the law in every way but also teaching it as He did in the sermon on the mount.
 

1)

 He fulfilled it ceremonially by His morally perfect life, substitutionary death and resurrection.
  2) He fulfilled it by fulfilling that which it predicted, especially by the prophets, and being in circumstances where He Himself could not fulfil the predictions but was dependent on others who were Jewish and pagan (Mary, and the soldiers who gambled for His garment and the one who pierced His side).  Very often this was done unwittingly as with the soldiers when they parted His garments.
  3) He filled up its fullest depths by showing that it goes beyond the letter but makes necessary fulfilling the spirit of the law.  (Matt. 5-7)
  4) He fulfilled it morally by loving the Lord with all His heart, soul, strength and mind.

It must be remembered that the Lord was born under the dispensation of law (Gal. 4:4) and out lived it, not only in the letter but in its spirit.  That meant loving with all that He was and had.  The love he had for the Father was only spoken of on one occasion in the upper room after washing the disciples feet and instituting the Lord’s Supper.  John records the Lord saying: “That the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do.  Arise, let us go hence” (Jn. 14:31).  To Christ, Gethsemane and Calvary were avenues by which He could show His love for the Father.  He fulfilled the law not only ceremonially and in obedience to God, but also in purity of motive (Deut. 6:5).

Considering how stringent the law was in showing no pity or mercy, it necessitated utmost humility.  Never was there a man who was as humble as the Lord and this perfection was manifested:
 

1)

 In His place of birth.  (Matt. 2:6; Jn. 1:46; Jn. 7:52)
  2) In poverty of parentage.  (Lk. 2:42)
  3) By non retaliating acceptance of belittlement by his brethren.  (Mk. 3:21; Jn. 7:3-5)
  4) By no threatening internally or externally to the mockery by the chief priests and soldiers.  (Matt. 26:67; 1 Pet. 2:23)
  5) In His shame of being smitten by the officer.  (Jn. 18:22)
 

6)

 The ignominy of publicly bearing His own cross.  (Jn. 19:17)
  7) The disgrace of being put on the middle cross.  (Jn. 19:18)
  8) The indignities He endured by the taunts of men when He hung on the cross.  (Matt. 27:40; Mk. 15: 30-32)
  9) The contempt vented on Him by mocking and bowing the knee before Him and the crowning of thorns.  (Matt. 27:29)

Such was His love for God and the Father that He never rebelled in the slightest degree or protested to or against God.  In contrast, we have only to think of Israel in the wilderness and their murmurings, of Jonah and his disobedience against God in going to Nineveh and his displeasure at God for sparing the people of Nineveh. Christ was unblemished regarding the law, and therefore the God who gave the Law. 

Perfection Of Purpose

For God to hear an individual making a pledge to Him, irrespective of the cost to them, it is beautiful to Him.  For one to not only make the pledge, but also know the price they would pay personally for its fulfillment, is infinitely precious to God.  It is in this light that we can understand the words of the Lord: “Therefore doth my Father love me because I lay down my life, that I might take it again” (Jn. 10:17).  This statement was not made by the Lord when He said: “Father glorify thy Name” (Jn. 12:28), nor on the holy mount (2 Pet. 1:18).  Gethsemane (Matt.26:36), Gabbatha (Jn. 19:13), and Golgotha (Jn. 19:17) were only hours away, and facing these the Lord was steadfast living life exclusively for the glory of God.  His will was steadfast (Isa. 50:7) and praise God His face going to Jerusalem, for it was from there He would be received up ⃰  (Lk. 9:51).  It was irrelevant what God asked or commanded Him to do, He did it because it glorified God.  Infinitely lovely this was to God.
                ⃰  This does not refer to the cross for there He was lifted up (Jn. 8:28), but here it is “received up” and that happened in His ascension.

In the Garden of Eden Satan sought to slight the character of God by intimating to Eve that God was not really a God of love nor had He their best interests at heart.  Surely the fact that they were not allowed to eat of the tree, which would make them as God, showed that his love was not genuine.  When someone loves another do they not share everything with them?  The Lord shows the devil’s lie and that the love of God is infinite and manifested by what He seeks to do for humanity.  He offers humanity the free gift at His expense.   What a gift it is, fulness of life, forgiveness of sins and a restored fellowship with God.  This was no withholding God, but abundant unrestrained giving, and through Christ the Name of God was glorified.  This was perfection of purpose in an unblemished clearing of the Name of God. 

He Was Perfect In His Dependence On God 

The Lord was the Author and Finisher of faith (Heb. 12:2) and since whatsoever is not of faith, is sin (Rom. 14:23), it means that the entire life of Christ was a pathway of faith.
Christ is:
 

1)

 The Author/Prince of life.  (Acts 3:15)
  2) The Author of eternal salvation.  (Heb. 5:9)
  3) And the Author of faith.  (Heb. 12:2)

Faith permeated the life of the Lord from infancy to His ascension.  Prophetically it could be said of Him: “I was cast upon Thee from the womb” (Psa. 22:10) and made me hope when I was upon my mothers breasts (Psa. 22:9). His faith was unwavering when He called the dead to life, told a blind man to go and wash or tell Peter to cast a line to get a coin sufficient for the temple tax.  That faith was tested to the ultimate when entering into death, but in all He was an overcomer and never once doubted the word, the will or power of God, thus unblemished in His dependence on God.  When our Lord hung on the cross his enemies gave to Him the highest compliment that could be given: “He trusted in God” (Matt. 27:43).

 He Was Perfect In His Listening  

There are few things more irritating and insulting that when speaking to a person, it is evident they are not listening or only patronizing without any intention of really listening to that which is being said.  The greatness of the insult and rightness to obey is dependent on the position of the speaker.  Many years ago Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, her husband, had a tiff.  He went into a room and shut the door.  Victoria came and knocking on the door called: “Albert, open the door”, but he refused.  She called again: “Albert open the door for your wife”, but he refused.  She called again: “Albert open the door for the Queen of England”, and he had no option but to do so. Her position demanded his listening and obeying.  He had to acknowledge her rightful place. 

Christ acknowledged God’s rightful place for God was His God from His mother’s belly (Psa. 22:10).  Therefore, He was genuine in His listening, sincerely waiting and wanting to hear the voice of God so as to fulfill it.  His was not a polite patronizing of God, listening only to determine if He wanted to obey or not, it was true and inimitably sincere.  Looking on this earth the Lord watched with delight one man who was transparent in heart, mind, action, word and motive and who listened to God for the sole purpose of fulfilling His desires.  What a difference this was to other times when the Lord looked upon earth, as in the days of Noah (Gen. 6:12), or Lot (Gen. 18:21), or on having looked gave His comment (Psa. 14:1-3).  The Lord listened with sincerity and coupled with His fulfilling of that which He heard, He was unblemished. 

The prayer of Paul for the Ephesians was perfectly manifested in Christ for He was: “Filled with the knowledge of His will” (Col. 1:9).  He never knew what it was to not have the knowledge of His will, nor to doubt the knowing of His will which results in unstableness.  Having the assurance of knowing the will of God resulted in steadfastness of step and forging ahead irrespective of what others said.  

Christ Was Holy  

As previously stated, absolute perfection is synonymous with holiness and Christ was perfectly holy in every area and development of His life.

 Christ Was Holy In His Conception 

In the coming of Christ into this world there were four distinct steps: 
 

1)

 The condescension
  2) The incarnation
  3) The conception
  4) The birth

Since the birth of the Lord was the last step, then it is evident that in each preceding step the activity itself had to be holy and at birth He had to be holy. 

The moral beauty of the Lord was manifested before He ever lefts the heights of glory for the activities of condescension and incarnation were based on love.  “Love . . . seeketh not her own”(1 Cor. 13:5).  It is impossible for us to comprehend such love.  Many years ago I was in northern Canada at a canola farm.  It was harvest time and I helped the farmer gather in the canal.  My job was to stand beside a very large bucket into which there was a very fast whirling auger.  The wheat was churned by the auger into a much larger container.  Suddenly I saw a most ugly little insect crawling round the wheat.  It had no idea of the danger it was in and the thought was brought to me, what sort of love would it take on my part to be willing to become what this little insect was, knowing the surety of death so that it could have my life in all its richness.  Then I realized that this was just a little picture of that which the Lord did for me.  We used to sing a hymn the words of which were:

Oh twas love, twas wondrous love
The love of Christ to me
It brought my Saviour from above
To die on Calvary.

The conception of the Lord was holy because there was a physical miracle and a spiritual one.        

Regarding the physical miracle, God will emphasize that the body of the Lord was prepared as no other body was by several avenues:
 

1)

 The miracle of His conception.
  2) The moral character of Joseph.
  3) The fact that Mary was a virgin. 
 

1)

 The Miracle of His Conception.
     
 

The conception of the Lord stands in opposition to all that is natural for and had to come into the world by 5 methods:
    a) The act of creation (Gen. 2:7).  A man coming into this world without a woman, that was Adam.
    b) By a woman whose body was dead, as in the case of Rebecca.  (Gen. 29:31 & 30:22-24)
    c) By a man whose body was dead, as seen with Abraham.  (Rom. 4:19)
    d) By natural procreation.
    e) By the activity of the Holy Spirit.  (Matt. 1:20).
 

The conception of the Lord was not by a human father.  The scriptures will speak of the “child and his mother” (Matt. 2:13, 14, 20 & 21).  Mary will refer to Joseph as, “Thy father” (Lk. 2:48), and this is legally correct but Joseph was never his biological father.  In the Revised Version of Luke 2:3 it says: “His father and mother”.  How does this balance with a virgin birth?  It is to be understood that Joseph was the father of the Lord by reputation, law acknowledgement (Lk. 3:23; Jn. 1:45), therefore Luke is free to speak about “his parents” (Lk. 2:41; 43).  Mary, who knew the facts more accurately than anyone else, spoke of Joseph as “Thy father”.  The only one the Lord ever calls “Father” is God.

   

2)

 The Moral Character Of Joseph
     
 

When our three children were small, there were points of time when we contemplated, “If we both were to die in an accident, who would we want to look after our children?”  It was a major decision for the children were very precious to us.  It was with great care we would have chosen legal guardians for them.  They had to have our values and best interests at heart for the children and love them.  If we faltering parents are like this, was God any less careful when entrusting His beloved Son to two human beings?

In God’s first comment about Joseph, it is a declaration of his relationship to Mary and his character, he was “a just man” (Matt. 1:19).  This is the character of God: “A God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He” (Deut.32:4); “There is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour” (Isa. 45:21).  It was, therefore, automatic that the man who would be the “supposed father” (Lk. 3:23) of the Lord, would have the character of God.  He was also a man of tender compassion, for when he was told of Mary’s pregnancy he “was not willing to make her a public example but was minded to put her away privily” (Matt. 1:19).  The word “willing” is better, “it was not his purpose to make a public exposure of her” but to give her a bill of divorcement (Deut. 24:1).  Joseph was going through a deep ethical struggle, his love for Mary and the fact of a pregnancy he was not responsible for.

He was also a man of spiritual discernment for he knew the voice of God, explaining to him what had happened and not his own “hopes against hopes”.
   

3)

 Mary Was A Virgin
   
 

Matthew will inform the readers that Mary was a virgin and not sexually known by Joseph (Matt. 1:25), but Dr. Luke will expand on this.  He will inform his readers that she had never known any man (Lk. 1:34), thus removing any suggestion that while Joseph and she were never intimate, she could have been with another man and the child was someone else’s.  It is this very intimation the Pharisees made when they said: “We be not born of fornication” (Jn. 8:41) and, “Thou art a Samaritan” (Jn. 8:48).

Joseph and Mary were espoused (Lk. 1:27; 2:5 & Matt. 1:18), therefore viewed as husband and wife, but there was no intimacy until after the birth of the baby.  He (Joseph), “knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son” (Matt. 1:25).  The baby was conceived “before they came together” (Matt. 1:18).  This was all for the fulfillment of the scripture, “Behold a virgin shall be with child” (Matt. 1:23).

A threefold cord is not easily broken and with plain words, it is recorded that this conception was the work of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18, 20; Lk. 1:31).

 For the Lord to be the Son given (Isa. 9:6), to have His body prepared by God (Heb. 10:5), for the invisible to become visible, the omnipresent to become localized, and for the God who cannot die to become mortal, it took a work of the Holy Spirit.

However, this was not sufficient for had the Lord been born of Mary, still a virgin and untouched by Joseph, the law of sin would still have entered the child.  He would have been born under the headship of Adam and under condemnation.  Something more was needed than the physical purity.  It is the other work, perhaps even the greater work of the Holy Spirit, the preventing of the law of sin and death entering the child.
   
  Mary had presented the angel with a very real perplexity: “How is it possible to have a child seeing she had never known a man?” (Lk. 1:34).  She is given a two fold answer:
    a) “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee” and “The power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.”  (Lk. 1:35)
    b) “Conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.”  (Matt. 1:20)
 

 
 

To prevent the inherent sin of Adam being passed onto the baby He overshadowed Mary!  Hence, the second miracle was that despite the Lord being the offspring of Mary and from a corrupted pedigree and family history, “The law of sin and death” was never transmitted to Him nor did it ever infiltrate His holy body.  No tint of her own fallen nature was passed onto that holy body.

The overshadowing of Mary was not to protect her from sinning or defilement entering into her but for the prevention of the law of sin in her entering into the baby.  Had she not been overshadowed, had there not been a covering over her, then the baby would have been born under the condemnation of Adam and with the law of sin and death in His members.  That must not be, yet he must be born a human being.  This could only be brought about by the working of the Holy Spirit preventing those from contaminating the baby.

 As head of a new creation, the Lord had to enter this sphere by the work of God, just as Adam the head of the first creation entered by a work of God.  For the creating of a body for Adam, the Lord took dust and into that deadness breathed the breath of life.  In creating a body for the Lord the Lord took a woman and created life in her. ⃰
        ⃰  With such a subject there can never be too much carefulness in that which is taught. Yet we must be clear that the overshadowing of Mary was not to make her a suitable vessel, neither was it to keep her a suitable vessel.
             Furthermore, the Lord was not a divine person in a human body, a divine person with a human body, a divine person with the appearance of a human body nor a divine person with a human nature.

 This was a work of God, man having no part in it.  It was the foundation for redemption and sinful man played no part in causing such a thing.  He was born: “Not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, and the Word became flesh ⃰  (Jn. 1:13-14).
          ⃰  This verse can be interpreted in several ways, this is not necessarily giving the interpretation but a possible interpretation.

Christ Was Holy At His Birth

The Lord was holy at his birth for we read: “That Holy thing which shall be born of thee” (Lk. 1:35).  For the first time in the history of the world there was a human being born who was utterly free from sin in any way, whose body was undefiled and consequently the River of God (Psa. 65:9) could flow uninterrupted and unhindered through Him.  He was the only one ever born who was never deformed by sin, never distorted by sin and never defiled by sin. 

The blessed Lord was from Adam’s race but He was never under the headship of Adam.  This world has had perfect manhood untested as with Adam, fallen manhood for all his family, redeemed humanity which is what we are, but Christ was holy humanity.  He was a human being as Adam was but the sentence of spiritual death never passed onto Him, therefore physical death had no power on Him and the condemnation and judgment cast over all men never fell upon Him (Rom 5:12,15,16,18,19). 

At least twice over His holiness is spoken of at His birth. “That holy which shall be born of thee” (Lk. 1:35) and “every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord” (Lk. 2:23).  Our Lord was not holy by justification as we are, or by spirit driven desire as Peter exhorts us (1 Pet. 1:15-16).  He was holy in His own essential character and Person. 

Christ Was Holy In His Life

While the particular aspects of the perfections of the Lord will follow in coming papers, this is simply a meditative summary of His perfections.  

The best way to appreciate the holiness of the life of Christ is to watch his works and listen to His words. Concerning His works He said: “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (Jn. 5:17).  When it is the matter of works the Lord could, without a convicting memory say: “The Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things which please the Father” (Jn. 8:29); “My meat is to do the will of Him that sent me, and to finish his work” (Jn. 4:34); “I came down from Heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of Him that sent me (Jn. 6:38). 

Concerning His words the Lord said: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (Jn. 14:9).  This is strongly intimated again when the Lord said: “Now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father” (Jn. 15:24). 

With such incontestable statements such as these, could His life have been anything other than holy?

His holy perfection is seen in his judgments, for considering how God judges, Christ must judge in the same ways God judges:
 

1)

 In righteousness (Psa. 96:10) and the law demanded righteous judgment.  (Deut. 1:16)
  2) According to knowledge.  (Rom. 2:12)
  3) According to truth.  (Rom. 2:2)
  4) Without respect of persons.  (Rom. 2:3)
  5) According to works/personal accountability.  (Rom. 2:6) (Mk. 6:11)

How Did The Lord Judge? 

1)

 He Judged Righteously.
Having been invited, the Lord went into the home of the Pharisee and sat down to eat.  To the Pharisee this was a definite no no, because having come from the market place, etc., one would be defiled by those contacted.  Hands had to be washed to cleanse the defilement.  When the Lord did not wash His hands, it was not an oversight, rather it was the channel by which He would teach what true defilement is and thereby make a righteous judgment call between external and internal defilement? (Lk. 11:37-41).  In John 7:24 the Lord condemned those who condemned Him for healing a man on the Sabbath and then gave the following terse statement: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment”.  He was able to discern the distinction between religious activity and activity in fellowship with God.
 
2) He Judged According To Their Knowledge.
On another occasion the Scribes and Pharisees said: “Master we would seek a sign from thee”.  The Lord gave a most solemn pronouncement: “The men of Nineveh will rise up in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it; because they repented at the preaching of Jonas and behold a greater then Jonas is here.  The queen of the South shall rise up in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it. . . And, behold, a greater than Solomon is here” (Matt. 12:38-42).  Increase of knowledge necessitates increased responsibility and judgment must be according to knowledge.  For instance, if a little child is out playing and then hears a curse word and repeats it, should they be punished?  What is the knowledge of the child?  Did it know the word was a curse word?  If not, then it is just another word he or she has learned.  They must not be punished for what they did not know.  However, if after it is explained that such a word is not to be said, and the child repeats it again, this now demands punishment.  This is judgment according to knowledge.
 
3) He Judged According To Truth.
 In John 8 there is a woman brought to the Lord having been caught in the act of adultery, and the matter of judgment had been brought to the Lord.  They said: “Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest Thou?” (v. 5).  He knew their blatant attempt to deceive him, after all, where was the man?  Having convicted them of not judging according to truth, He then speaks with the woman and says: “Neither do I condemn thee, go and sin no more” (v. 11).  This was the second judgment call.  Was He being lax relative to the law?  Then He says: “Ye judge after the flesh, I judge no man, (that is after the flesh).  Yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.  It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.  I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me”  (vv. 15-18).

 Having told the woman to go and sin no more, the Lord makes a profound statement: “I am the Light of the world. . . He that followeth me shall have the light of life” (v. 12).  This was a declaration of deity for in the Old and New Testaments God is seen as Light: “In thy light we shall see light” (Psa. 36:9); “The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light” (Isa 60:19); “God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn. 1:5). Therefore, for the Lord to say that He is the Light is to claim deity, and on this the Pharisees accused Him of falsehood.  The Lord answers: “I bear record of myself, yet my record is true”.  Therein lies an apparent contradiction for earlier the Lord had said: “If I bear witness of myself my witness is not true” (Jn. 5:31). Does this show a flaw in the teaching that the Lord was holy in life?  Not in the slightest.  Each must be kept in context.  In ch. 5 the Lord was proving that His witness was not independent of the Father but in fullest accord.  The scriptures from God testify of His deity (Jn. 5:37).  In this passage the Lord is declaring that His witness to His deity is not false but true.
 
4) The Lord Judged Without Respect Of Persons.
 For instance, he rebuked the Pharisees and also His disciples (Lk. 11:42-50), and according to works, that is responses to that which was preached (Matt 11:20-23).

His unblemished life was the manifestation of the titles of relationship and perfect identity.  Only by His sinless perfection could he be the Word of God, the Image of God or the Son of God. 

Men bore witness to His purity by their silence and the woman taken in adultery (Jn. 8:9), and their need for deception to get a conviction at His trials (Matt. 26:60). 

If we combine all the works, attitudes, censuring and words of the Lord, then look to God for His evaluation, He says: “This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased”.  Heaven looked down and saw the most beautiful sight; a man walking and living in perfect fellowship with God from a heart of love to God and seeking nothing but the glory of God. 

In all of these and other situations, there is manifested the moral solidity of the Lord and spiritual backbone. Unflinching holiness was a key characteristic of His life, whether in public or private, in the darkness or light, in the synagogue or the home, the light of holiness shone uninterruptedly. 

Sin is a double edged sword in that there are sins of omission and sins of commission.  Sins of omission is the failure to do that which is good (Jam. 4:17) and sins of commission is doing that which is not right.  This means that for the Lord to be without blemish He must never fail to do that which was right, in the right way, at the right time and He must never do that which was wrong on any level.  In 1 John 3:4 sin is lawlessness, thus in this context, sin is rebellion against God and righteousness is conformity to God.  Heb. 1:9 informs us that He loved righteousness and hated iniquity.  Two utter extremes, He “agapao/loved” righteousness, He “miseo/hated” iniquity.  He knew what it was for the world to “miseo/hate” Him (Jn. 15:18).  He “miseo/hated” the deeds of the Nicolaitanes (Rev. 2:15).  Irrespective of which word is used to describe sin, iniquity, transgression, disobedience, perverseness, rebellion or treachery, all describe that which was obnoxious to Him.  To Him the proffering's of Satan were repulsive and the clamoring of the people to make Him a King were detestable (Matt.4:9; Jn. 6:15).

The perfection of the Lord was not an exterior holiness due to conformity with the criteria of men, but it was that which He was in His innermost being.  The more one “flays” that sacrificial offering into its pieces, ⃰  the deeper His perfection is seen and it is found to be genuine throughout His person.
              ⃰  Lev. 1:6.

Christ rendered to God the greatest possible service, outliving the words of Josh. 24:14: “Serve the Lord in sincerity” (without blemish).  He served God with every iota of His entire being.  All that He did was an act of worship in whole hearted truth and spirit. 

Holiness was His claim exclusively.  Men call the pope and the Dali Lama “His holiness”, but there is little that could be more blasphemous than for a fallen sin enslaved individual to be called “His holiness”.  Christ was that and He alone and His claims to it were true, or else He would have sinned in stating them.  His sacrifice would have been worthless.  To say: “The prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me” (Jn. 14:30) would be the ravings of an imbecile speaking nonsense if not true.  When He threw down the gauntlet by saying: “Which of you convinceth me of sin” (Jn. 8:36) to those who acutely watched Him and then left speechless, certainly indicated holiness.  Finally, when the Lord said: “I do always those things which please Him” (Jn. 8:29), meant that in the very saying of this it was pleasing to God. 

He was in a world of sinners, seeing sin on every hand but never conscious of any sin in Himself.  Again, even Paul, that mighty man of God, had to confess depravity (Rom. 7:24). 

The Lord Was Holy When On The Cross And In The Three Hours Of Darkness

Today there are many evil doctrines being taught concerning our Lord as the sin bearer and His holiness.  Some openly teach that He became satanized, that is God looked upon Him as if He were Satan!  This is done by the perversion of the scripture: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the Son of man be lifted up” (Jn. 3:14).  From this is taught that the serpent is how Satan was first manifested and so Christ on the cross became satanized.  See endnote.

What did Christ become when on the cross?
 

1)

 He became the sin bearer.  (2 Cor. 5:21)
  2) He became the curse bearer for us.  (Gal. 3:13)
  3) He became the iniquity bearer for us.  (Isa. 53:5)
  4) He became the chastised sufferer for us.  (Isa. 53:5)
  5) He became the wounded One for us.  (Isa. 53:5)

The Lord was intensely holy and unblemished and when He hung on the cross, drinking the cup, being baptised, He was as holy as He was when lying in the arms of Mary or in the celestial courts. 

In the sin offering of Lev. 6:25, God says it is most holy and this is repeated in v. 29, 10:17.  In Lev. 7:1 concerning the trespass offering, it is recorded: “It is most holy” also in 14:13.  Both the sin and trespass offerings are not just said to be holy but “most holy”.  In those hours of being forsaken and under the rod of divine justice, He was still, without detraction, the perfect and holy Son of God.  The affliction for sin never made Him a blemished man! 

He Was Holy When In The Tomb 

For three days and nights that holy body lay in the tomb but the tomb was never defiled.  The body that rose from the dead was as holy and perfect as the body that lay in that tomb or walked the streets of Nazareth. 

We often speak of the empty tomb, and one can understand that which is said, but thank God it was not an empty tomb, it was a vacated one.  The grave clothes were still there but He had left them and vacated the tomb.  Had the grave been empty, there would have been no grave clothes, and one of the greatest evidences for His resurrection to the disciples and humanity would have been gone.  (It is of note that anyone with a shred of Biblical knowledge of the grave cloths of the Lord would know that the Shroud of Turin had nothing to do with the Lord. His Head was wrapped in a cloth separate from the other cloths. The fact that a head was seen proves it as a fake.)
The scriptures stand out in starkness and in triplicate. (Psa. 16:10; Acts 2:27, 13:35)  “Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt Thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption.  (Roman Catholicism teaches that this verse refers to Mary and not to Christ thus seeking to substantiate their argument that due to her immaculate conception corruption had no power over her.) (Psa. 16:10 or Acts 2:27). 
JFB notes that paraphrased it can be put as: “In death I shall hope for resurrection, for I shall not be left under its dominion and within its bounds, or be subject to the corruption which ordinarily ensues”.

No other body ever went into a grave or tomb, lay in one or rose from one like the Lord.  Death could not keep Him for even in death He was still, “Thy holy One”. 1 Cor. 15:42 informs us that our bodies are sown in corruption, His never was. 

Death and the grave was the citadel of Satan.  No one had ever of their own volition entered into it and no one had by their own power exited it.  If Satan had been able to find a single iota of imperfection in any area of the Lord’s life, He would have been able to forever keep Christ captive.  There was nothing in Christ for Satan to lay hold upon.  He is the unblemished Son of God and Son of Man.  How blessed it is to sing with bursting delight: 

Low in the grave He lay, Jesus my Saviour
He tore the bars away, Jesus my Lord. 

Death could not keep its prey, Jesus my Saviour
He tore the bars away, Jesus my Lord 

Up from the grave He arose, with a mighty triumph o’re his foes
He arose a Victor from the dark domain and He lives forever with His saints to reign
He arose, He arose, Hallelujah Christ arose.

It was only suitable that the holy body of the Lord was handled by:
 

1)

 Clean men
  2) Wrapped in a clean shroud
  3) Laid in a clean place.
 

1)

 The Clean Men
     
 

The jealousy God has for His Son is seen in the preciseness of the Old Testament pictures relative to those who would entomb that sacred body.  The ancient shadow records that it had to be “a fit man” who brought the scapegoat into the wilderness (Lev. 16:21).  The word for “fit” in Lev. 16:21 is never used again in the scriptures.
    a) It is translated by Darby as “a man standing ready”.
    b) The NKJV translates it as “a suitable man”.
    c) In Hebrew it is a man of time, one who can be trusted with the work.
 

When our Lord died God had a fit man, one standing ready and was qualified in every way to entomb the body of our Lord.  That man was Joseph and with him was Nicodemus.

 

It is interesting it does not say, “a worthy man”, for no man is worthy to take that which symbolizes the body of the Lord in type, much less in reality.  It is easy for us to miss the glory given to us on the first day of the week, to hold in our hands that which represents His body and blood and even more glorious to partake of it.  Are we worthy?  A thousand times “no” but we need to be clean.  Isa. 52:11 states: “be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord”.

Joseph is described as:
    a) A good man and just, waiting for the kingdom of God.  (Lk. 23:50-51)
    b) He was honorable.  (Mk. 15:43)
    c) He was, for fear of the Jews, a secret disciple of the Lord.  (Jn. 19:38)
    d) A counsellor.  (Lk. 23:50)
    e) God had him as the man for the time and the prime undertaker for the burial of the Lord.  (Jn. 19:38)
  Joseph had four exclusive blessings:
    a) He was marked by humility to go and crave the body of the Lord.  (Mk. 15:43)
    b) He had the qualification for immediate access to Pilate.  (Mk. 15:43)
    c) He had the means and contacts to get the linen for it had to be bought.  (Mk. 15:46)
    d) He had the tomb and was willing to give it for the Lord.  (Matt. 27:60)
 

Nicodemus was a “saved” man therefore “fit”.  There are three things that indicate that clearly:
    a) He had questioned the right of the council when they had sent soldiers to take Him.  (Jn. 7:51)
    b) He had not given his agreement when the decision was made to crucify the Lord.  (Lk. 23:51)
    c) God let him be a sharer as the undertaker for the Lord.  (Jn. 19:39-40)
 

God saw Him as being a “fit” man.

 

Two different words are used for his attitude in the request:
    a) He begged/craved (anteo) the body. (Matt. 27:58; Mk. 15:43)
    b)

He besought (erratao) the body. (Jn. 19:38)
 

How wonderful that God in His providential activities had this man ready for such a task.  Added to this is the wonder that although while the Lord was alive he had failed to come and declare His allegiance.  Despite his failure, God saw him as a fit man.  ⃰
  ⃰  What an encouragement this is for which of us has not failed, and when opportunity came to do a work for God, such was the circumstances only we could do it. Despite the feelings of inadequacy, God “locked” us in to the situation where no one else other than we could do the work. How humbling such a case is. Others may have questioned his right to do it, he may have been ridiculed for doing it, but in the sight and evaluation of God he was a “fit man”.
   
  These men did not know He would rise again so the spices were to help keep the body from putrefaction and with the linen wrapped about every part of the body, the spices were in contact with the flesh.  A second embalming was to happen later since the first one had to be done in a hurry due to the coming Sabbath.
   

2)

  The Clean Cloths
     
 

The order was that Joseph having obtained permission to take the body of the Lord, removed it from the cross (Jn. 19:38), then Nicodemus came with a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about 100 pounds weight, and together they (Jn. 19:40) took the body of Jesus and wrapped it in the spices and clean linen.  While they did this together, Joseph is seen as the prime mover for it specifically says:
    a) He wrapped it in a clean linen cloth.  (Matt. 27:59)
    b) He bought fine linen, wrapped Him in the linen and laid Him in the sepulchre.  (Mk. 15:46)
    c) He took it down and wrapped it in linen.  (Lk. 23:53)
 

When someone of nobility dies, every undertaker would give anything to be responsible for their funerals. Whether it is presidents, kings or celebrities all are ordinary human beings.  Christ was no ordinary person and his preparation for burial and funeral arrangements were not made amid pomp and glory but by two men.  Very probably, associates were given the superlative honor of jointly preparing the body of the Lord, the Son of God, for burial.  Joseph obtained the body, bought the linen clothes and gave the Lord his own tomb.  Nicodemus came with the spices. 

   

3)

 The Clean Place
   
 

The ashes were put in a clean place.  (Lev. 6:11; Num. 19:9)

 The Lord was buried in a clean place, being Joseph’s own new tomb (Matt. 27:60), it was a tomb in which had never been contaminated by another dead body.  No corpse had ever lain within its walls.  (Lk. 23:53; Jn. 19:41)

 It is seen that the Lord’s resurrection is a declaration of His Sonship (Rom. 1:4), by the Spirit of Holiness, in answer to His prayer (Heb. 5:7) and in accordance with the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:4).

 There had been thousands of burials in earth’s history, Sarah, Jacob, Mariam, Moses and Samuel, etc., but there was never a burial like this.  A man was being buried and his body touched the bones of Elisha who rose again (2 Kgs. 13:21), but that will not happen here.

In that tomb that holy body lay but was never corrupted or stank.  The unblemished body of the Lord in life saw no blemish in death.  It was in stark contrast to Lazarus whose body was stinking after four days.  The question could be asked: “Could His body have begun corruption before God raised it or would it have corrupted had God not raised it?  Absolutely not!  Corruption is the last manifestations of sin in the body, but in Christ there was no sin.  It was only after the fall that the sentence: “Unto dust thou shalt return” (Gen. 3:19) ⃰  was instituted.
         ⃰ Also Psa. 104:29 and Eccl. 12:7
 

Into that clean place the holy angels could go and sit where the body of the Lord had been laid and be undefiled.  The disciple could go right in and he was undefiled.  How was this possible since Num. 19:16 is veryclear on the matter.  “And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.”  They not only touched the grave but went right into the tomb.  It was because His body could never decay so it left no contamination.  The linen cloth was still clean, void of the defilement or stench of death so those who entered were never defiled consequently, there was no need for cleansing (Num.19:16).

 

Christ Is Holy In Heaven

Now as our High Priest in Heaven, the Holy Spirit gives us His characteristics in Heb. 7:26.  He is (not He was) holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; but He is that right now. Robertson in his “NT word picture” says that, “harmless” means guileless, without malice, the opposite to deception as is seen in the only other time the word is used in Rom. 16:18.  Undefiled indicates not that He was undefiled ceremonially but clinically.  He was and is Holy in Himself, guileless in his dealings with men, ever living for the blessing of others and undefiled by man. 

Glorious is the truth shown by the shadow, Christ was without blemish, not just in body but in the depths of His heart, mind, soul and spirit.  He was the flawless, sinless Christ who alone was perfect for the vicarious sufferings of Calvary.  

This excellency which was pre-shadowed by offerings was personified in Christ and He alone was:
 

1)

 Pure in His death. (above)
  2) Powerful in resurrection.  (1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor. 13:4)
  3) Perpetual in life.  (Heb. 7:16)
  4) Preeminent in glory.  (Col. 1:18)
This is not the end of the narrative for it leads to the following questions, the “How did” section.

The “How did?” Section

These meditations deal with the following questions:
 

1)

 How did His holy unblemished life effect His attitude toward God?
  2) How did this holy unblemished life effect His activities for God?
  3) How did His holy unblemished life effect His speech to God and for God?
  4) How does His holy unblemished life effect God’s purpose for Him?
 

1)

 How Did His Holy Unblemished Life Effect His Attitude Toward God?
     
 

God is Light and Christ walked in the Light of God’s holiness and presence.  When speaking of humanity the Holy Spirit makes the statement: “They glorified Him not as God, but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened” (Rom.1:21).  For many years I was told that this referred to those who lived before the flood.  The question is: “Did it only apply to those individuals or were the people of the first or twenty-first century any different?  To these ancients and moderns God was/is a theory, they were/are an atheistic religious people who treated God as a man whose laws they accepted, rejected, ignored or debated about, to which they added their own.  To many God is either a theory or non existing, but He was never that to Christ.  In a very real way, to Christ, God was all in all.
   
 

By God being all in all to Christ means that God was the source of all He did, therefore all He did was the will of God.  It necessitated that how He did things was by the power of God and why He did things was for the glory of God.  Consequently, when God had His rightful place Christ:
    a)

Glorified God, by living in thankfulness to Him.
    b)

Glorified God by be subject to Him.
    c)

Glorified God by having the true genuine spirit of meekness. ⃰
  ⃰   Meekness does not imply that the Lord failed to face religiosity and expose it. Illus. Matt. 11:21 Woe unto thee Chorazin . . . For if the mighty works which were done in thee had been done in Tyre and Sidon they would
     have repented; Lk. 11:43 “Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees”; ch. 12:1 “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy”; Lk. 11:52 “Woe unto you lawyers”.
   
 

Before God, He was meek and lowly of heart (Matt. 11:29), waiting upon God for His words to be able to speak a word in season to the weary (Isa. 50:4).  His ear was ever opened by God and His response was truly listening to God.  He listened not to make a decision whether to obey or not, but to obey irrespective of the extent and did not turn back.  Having made a decision, He never came to God wondering if He had done the right thing.  Furthermore, He never communed with God about a course of action He was going to take and then ask the Lord to bless it, much less go on a course which He knew was wrong and not mention it to God.  The Lord never did or said anything that He could not ask for the blessing of God upon it prior to the activity or saying, and He never did or said anything for which He could not thank God.  The Lord knew nothing of selective hearing or obeying, an attitude that was beautiful to God.  Being perfect in the genuineness of His listening contrasted Him to Israel who listened but had no intention of obeying, but were simply patronizing God.  They were proud and consequently God would not reveal His will to such.

 The attitude of Israel is seen in miniature by Ahab when he refused to listen to the prophet Micaiah and did not want to hear the truth.  Concerning Micaiah, Ahab said: “I hate him” (1 Kgs 22:8), the reason being the man told the truth.  The blessed Son of God loved the truth and never turned away from it.  When our Lord was here the character of Ahab was manifested in the Pharisees, Sadducees and lawyers (Jn. 5:18; 7:1; 15:25; Psa. 35:19; 69:4).
   

2)

  How Did His Holy Unblemished Attitude Effect His Activities For God?
     
 

With the Lord having the right attitude toward God, it is evident that He also had the right attitude toward activities for God.  Blessed Man, all He did was that which He saw His Father do.  He Himself said: “The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do . . . . the Son doeth likewise.” (Jn. 5:19)

 In John 5 there is the record of the Lord raising a man on the sabbath.  This man had never walked and had laid on his sides and back for 38 years, incapable of major movement.  Then the Lord does a miracle, He raises the man and he walks.  It is not a singular miracle but a series of miracles, his ankle bones got strength, muscles which had long been weakened and entropic were made strong, balance was restored and his back, which knew degeneration, was made strong.  The problem the religious leaders had was the Lord did it on the sabbath.  How dare He do this on the Sabbath!  This infuriated the Jews who questioned the Lord and His reply was: “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (v. 17), which agitated them all the more.  Then the Lord said: “The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise” (v. 19).  Again He said: “I must work the works of Him that sent me” (Jn. 9:4).  The Lord actually was saying that His activity on the Sabbath was that which God did!  Irrespective of the religious hierarchy, He did the works of God, never to be ornery but because this was the will of God.

 Furthermore, it is seen that nothing He ever did or said needed to be rectified for it was always done perfectly so the brow of God was never furrowed by sadness.  I recall when I was a teenager I had done something foolish.  I remember seeing dad walking alone, and as I watched Him, I shall never forget the sadness and disappointment I saw written on his face.   The Lord never ever saw that on the face of God His Father.

 God bears witness to the Lord saying prophetically: “Behold, My servant in whom my soul delighteth” (Isa. 42:1).  God was, and ever will be, delighted in Christ because all He ever did, said or went was
 “approved”   ⃰  by God.  This, in itself, necessitated Him having a heart that truly desired the pleasure, glory and honor of God.
  ⃰  The Hebrew word “Delighted” is in other passages translated “approved” and “acceptable.”
 
 

God not only approved of that which the Lord did, it was also acceptable.   

       Illustration: I could approve of my driveway being resurfaced, but when I see the shoddy work, it is not acceptable.
   
 

The emphasis was not only on what he said and did, but also on His experiences in different places.  He is set in contrast to:
    a) Jonah who went, but only after having to be forced.  Later he was very unhappy with the grace of God, but that attitude was not acceptable to God.
    b) Moses with whom, for a time, God graciously compromised.
 

 
 

The Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of truth, also bore witness to His perfect holiness by causing substantiating clauses to be written about the Lord.
    a)

Peter, the man of action, was led to write, “He did no sin”.  (1 Pet. 2:22)
    b)

Paul, the man of deep thinking and contemplation, wrote,“He knew no sin”.  (2 Cor. 5:21) 

    c)

The writer to the Hebrews wrote, that even though He was tempted, He is “without sin”.  ( Heb 4:15)
    d)

Dr. Luke wrote, “That holy thing which shall be born of thee.”  (Lk. 1:35)
   
  He also endorsed the holiness of Christ by His activity in descending upon the Lord at His baptism and abiding on Him.  (Jn. 1:32)

 Our Lord challenged the religious leaders relative to His sinlessness when He said: “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (Jn. 8:46).  This perfection was borne witness to by the need for false witnesses and changing of accusations to get a conviction at His trials (Matt. 26:60).  The Lord also challenged Satan when He said: “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me” (Jn. 14:30).

 Being the Light of the world, the Lord was always full of light (Lk. 11:34).  He had singleness of eye on the sovereignty of God, keeping Himself in the love of God (Jude 1:21), and ever showing the character of God (Jn. 14:9).  From the day of His birth to His ascension, the glory of God was His only focus.  It is so easy for us to “pray”, patronizing God or speaking mere words.  When the Lord prayed: “Father glorify thy Name” (Jn. 12:28), He meant every word of it.  He was the personification of the attitude of the Psalmist when he wrote: “I will praise thee, O Lord my God, with all my heart: and I will glorify thy name for evermore” (Psa. 86:12).  His pledge was: “I come to do thy will” (Heb. 10:9); “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me (Jn. 6:38).  Thus, all He did was in fellowship with God.  The Father gave Him works to finish (Jn. 10:32), He did the works in the Fathers Name (Jn. 10:36) and was able to say: “I have finished the work which Thou gavest me to do” (Jn. 17:4).

When God, with eyes which are as a flame of fire, looked down from Heaven He found nothing in the life, words or attitudes of Christ that needed burned up.  The penetrating piercing of God’s eyes evaluated every thought afar off and knew every word on his tongue in completeness.  He could have said: “Search me . . . and know my thoughts: and see if there be any wicked way in me” (Psa. 139:23-24) and been very comfortable knowing that there was not one iota in His life that was in conflict with God’s holiness.  He knew that nothing contrary to God’s own character, heart and mind could be found in Him.  He was impenetrable by defilement or sin.  Without contradiction or pride He could say: “I do always those things which please the Father” (Jn. 8:29); or when at the grave He said: “Father, Thou hearest me always” (Jn. 11:42).  He lived a life so unblemished that prophetically God could say: “Behold my servant . . . in whom my soul delighteth” (Isa. 42:1).
   

3)

 How Did His Holy Unblemished Life Effect His Speech To God And For God?           
   
 

In contrast to today, when God is spoken of in a casual way, that reverence, the wording of the Lord to God, is exceedingly reverent.  In the gospels the Lord is recorded speaking to God as:    

    a)

“Father”, which indicates relationship without particular emphasis.  (Lk. 10:21)
    b)

“My Father”, which indicates personal relationship. (forty-one verses)
    c)

“My heavenly Father”, which indicated the contrast with earthly fathers.  (two verses, Matt. 15:13, 18:35)
    d)

“Holy Father”, which indicates the moral character of Christ.  (one verse, Jn. 17:11)
    e) “Abba Father”, which indicates child like trust with mature appreciation.  (one verse, Mk. 14:36)
    f) “O My Father”, which indicates the intensity of supplication to the Father.  (two verses, Matt. 26:39, 42)
    g) “The Father”, indicating the personal and unique glory of God as Father.  (sixty verses)
    h) “Righteous Father”, which indicates the judicial character of the Father.  (one verse, Jn. 17:26)
 

 
 

When our Lord spoke to God or about God, it was never in a light manner but in dignified reverence.  One can feel the plaintive cry when He said: “O my Father” (Matt. 26:39 & 42), or the calm assurance when He said: “That the world may know that I love the Father” (Jn. 14:31).  When the disciples asked Him to teach them how to pray, the first clauses were: “which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name” (Matt. 6:9).

The Son of His love we so respectful of God then how much more ought we to be?  Jokes about God should have no place in the life of a believer.  This is expected of the unsaved since they are the dupes of Satan and know not the seriousness of such speech.

 The Preacher said: “Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few” (Eccles. 5:2).  If we were in a court  of law and spoke to the judge saying: “Hi Willie” or “The old man on the bench”, there would be repercussions.  How much more if we speak lightly to God or about Him.  The one who lived an unblemished life will never have the slightest tint of irreverence when speaking to God.

 Furthermore, not only will the unblemished Lord manifest intense reverence when speaking to God.  He will also be dignified in His speech for He represents God!  He will be very careful in that which He teaches about God and what He says in the presence of God. ⃰ 
       ⃰  In our prayers we are a little Jewish in terminology. They came before God in the Tabernacle and Temple, and often a prayer is begun with: “Father we come to Thee in the Name”; “We come into thy presence”.  We are always
           in the presence of God, and if this were a reality to us we would not say a lot of things and when praying, our terminology would be the same as the Lord’s with the exception of our need of His mediating sacrifice. I wonder,
           is our terminology to remind us of whose presence we are in?

 Some of us have a quick wit and foolishness is a part of our makeup.  Sadly it can get carried away.  What of our representation of God?  Worse still, when brethren are preaching the gospel or ministering to the saints they tell funny stories or use time with “idle talk”.  The speech of the Lord was dignified and while He was a happy man and knew joy, boisterous foolish speech was not becoming to Him.  Can a fountain give forth sweet water and bitter?  How His ministry would have demised in weight had He been a fool and foolish.  As God’s representative, dignity of speech at all times became an unblemished life.

In His speaking for God there was never foolish talk but all His silences and speech was directed by God.

James and Peter made mention of the tongue.  Peter knew full well the sorrow his tongue brought Him.  James 1:26 and 1 Pet. 3:10 has a great deal to say about the tongue.  It is in this area where humanity constantly slips.  Moses, who was very meek (Num. 12:3), got angry with the people of God and spoke rashly calling them “rebels” (Num. 20:10).

The Lord lived in the truth of: “He that hath knowledge spareth his words” (Prov. 17:27); “A time to keep silence, and a time to speak” (Eccles. 3:7).

 He was unblemished in word because all His words found their origin in God.  How wondrous it is to hear He who is the Truth say: “The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself” (Jn. 14:10); “He whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God” (Jn. 3:34); “I speak that which I have seen with my Father” (Jn. 8:38).

 It was not only what he said but how He said things.  The Lord made three resurrections during His earthly sojourn and in all three his tone of voice was different.  It would not have been suitable to cry with a loud voice when raising the little girl as it was at the grave of Lazarus.  When speaking to Judas there was a tenderness in His voice for He knew the immediate and eternal darkness that lay ahead of him (Jn. 13:27).
   

4)

 How Did His Holy Unblemished Life Effect God’s Purpose For Him?
   
 

God is the great Evaluator, and it is He, the righteous Judge who evaluated the perfection of the Lord and determined His integrity?  God is not taken by partial views of a person as when one only sees an individual at meetings.  God is not deceived by outward appearance for God looks on the heart (1 Sam. 16:7), He who is of holier eyes than to behold iniquity (Hab. 1:13), who is light and no darkness at all (1 Jn. 1:5), and in whom there is no shadow caused by turning (Jas. 1:17).  He evaluates the perfections of the Lord.  This leads to the following questions:
    a) Could the God, who cannot change, look on Christ with pleasure if there was sin in Him?
    b) Could the God of Light have fellowship with the Lord if He walked in darkness?
 

 
 

Because of God’s righteous evaluation of the Lord there must be a righteous recompense for that which He has been and done so perfectly. Knowing God’s honoring of the Lord, Peter preached to the assembled multitudes:

    a) “Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made this same Jesus, whom ye crucified, both Lord and Christ”.  (Acts 2:36)
    b) God raised Him from the dead.  (Rom. 1:4)
    c) God has decreed that every knee to Him shall bow.  (Phil. 2:10)
    d) Justified in the Spirit.  (1 Tim. 3:16)
    e) God has declared, “Yet have I set my King upon my Holy Hill of Zion”.  (Psa. 2:6)
    f) God has said to Jesus the man, “My Son, sit Thou on my right hand”.  (Heb. 1:13)
    g) The Spirit has justified Him by His coming that God has exalted Him and so declared all that he said and claimed to be perfectly true.  (1 Tim. 3:16)
 

The unblemished life of the Lord has eternal consequences of glory.

That Which The Lord Never Needed, To Have A Holy Consciousness   

Because we are fallen creatures, there is, by necessity for spiritual growth, the graciousness of God using our failures from which we learn the holiness of God.  The Lord prayed that Peter’s faith would not fail but never do we read of His praying that Peter would not fall!  God used Peter’s fall to help him develop spiritually, emptying him of pride and self glory.  Furthermore, the Lord said: “When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren” (Lk. 22:32).  It is observed that when God was going to use certain individuals, there was given to them an appreciation of the holiness of God but not always by a fall.
 

1)

 Moses had such a fearful privilege given to him at the burning bush.  (Ex. 3:1-6)
  2) Isaiah had the vision in the year that King Uzziah died.  (Isa. 6:1-4)
  3) Ezekiel saw the glory of God (Ezek. 1:4-28), as did Abraham (Acts 7:2) and Habakuk (Heb. 3:3-6).
     
The Lord never needed a manifestation of God as Moses, etc., and He never experienced a fall into sin to make Him aware of the holiness of God.
 

1)

 The Lord never had to reckon Himself dead unto sin as we are told (Rom. 6:11), for He never had sin within.
  2) He never had to be told not to love the world as we are (1 Jn. 2:15), for He lived in fellowship with God.
  3) Christ never needed to hear the exhortations to holiness of life, never had to be told to: “Be ye holy in all manner of conversation” (1 Pet. 1:15).
  4) He never had to be told to: “Cast off the works of darkness” (Rom. 13:12)
His was a life of unblemished perfection.

In Summary 

Being the epitome of perfection, it is evident the Lord never knew what it was to:
 

1)

 Grieve due to the ruling body of sin.  (Rom. 7:24)
  2) Suffer in the flesh because of sin.  (1 Pet. 4:1)
  3) Have a conscience that pricked with dark memories of words and deeds.  (Jn. 8:9)
  4) Be a carcass before God.  (Heb. 3:17)
  5) Know the devouring of Satan.  (1 Pet. 5:8)
  6) Nor have any part of His life burned with fire due to its displeasure to God and worthlessness.  (1 Cor. 3:15).

He was thus perfectly qualified to be:

Title

Reference

The judge of all

Jn. 5:22

The executor of all judgment

Jn. 5:27

The King of Israel

Jn. 1:49

The High priest after the order of Melchisedec

Heb. 5:6

The Advocate

1 Jn. 2:1

The Saviour of the world

Jn. 4:42

The captain of their salvation

Heb. 2:10

The mediator of the new covenant

Heb. 12:24

The Testator

Heb. 9:16

The corn of wheat that fell

Jn. 12:24

The good Shepherd

Jn. 10:11

The covert from the tempest

Isa. 32:2

The Days-man

Job 9:33

The Hope of Israel

Acts 28:20

The Apostle

Heb. 3:1


Christ fully declared the Father’s name (Jn. 17:26), that is, the personality, power and principles of God were fully manifested.  Only the unblemished Son could do this and being so, He has fully revealed the Father, in finality revealed the Father and faithfully represented the Father. 

He will forever be the only Man whose entire life was beautiful to God.  His character was totally void of any ugliness, His service before and to God was void of any defect, His motives were void of any deceitfulness, His genuineness was void of any hypocrisy and His name was void of any reproach.  

Being unblemished, He never knew what it was to have a conviction of sin, the embarrassment of having sinned and then approaching God, to need an offering to approach God, to have his senses excited by fleshy indulgences, a hunger for that which is contrary to God or be agitated by those who would hinder his being free to follow the pathway of sin. 

Being unblemished no perfection was disproportionate to other perfection, and no fault or failure damaged His testimony or reputation.  He knew the Fathers will and came to fulfill it, knew the Father’s work and came to do it, knew the Fathers mind and came to reveal it and knew the Fathers word and came to speak them.  He alone in fulness could speak about the “because” of the Fathers love.  The Father Himself loveth you because ye have loved me (Jn. 16:27); My father loveth me because I lay down my life (Jn. 10:17).  

Our Lord had no blemishes. We have blemishes in our personalities, blemishes from past experiences of feelings when people hurt us.  He never held a grudge or had an unforgiving spirit.  Spitefulness was unknown to Him. When these truths are seen, then Gethsemane becomes the greatest verbalization of worship and the humiliation and Calvary become the greatest activities of worship this world has ever and will ever see.  All He did in word and deed was perfectly done because:
 

1)

 His empowerment came from God.  (Jn. 14:10; Acts 2:22; 10:38)
  2) My servant whom I uphold. (Isa. 42:1)
  3) His goal was the glory of God, not self aggrandizement.  (Jn. 13:31, 17:4)
  4) His motive was love for God, not self delighting.  (Jn. 14:31; Rom. 15:3)
  5) For the fulfilling of divine purposes.  (Heb. 10:5-7)

Being unblemished He saw the effects of sin more keenly, and sadly as all others, His sufferings were felt more keenly than the sinful sons of man.  He was not liable to death, He was a clean vessel for the Holy Spirit to work through, had the fulness of insight into divine things and He was the only true and final revelation of God and the Father.  Here we stop as on a mountain peak, realizing that no matter how saintly one may be, or how deep is ones appreciation of glories of Christ, in reality we are only touching the border of the immeasurable heights of the glory of Christ. 

Surely with worshipping amazement we can sing:

O Lord when we the path retrace, which Thou on earth hast trod
To man thy wondrous love and grace, Thy faithfulness to God. 

Thy love, by man so sorely tried, Proved stronger than the grave
The very spear that pierced Thy side, Drew forth the blood to save. 

Faithful amidst unfaithfulness, 'Mid darkness only light,
Thou didst Thy Father's name confess, And in His will delight. 

Unmoved by Satan’s subtle wiles, by suffering shame and loss
Thy path uncheered by earthly smiles led only to the cross.

 

 
 May God grant us good understanding as He, by His Holy Spirit, deigns to guide us into all truth.
John 16:13

Copyright © 2010 by Rowan Jennings, Abbotsford, British Columbia