Article 69

“And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out, Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God” (Mk. 1:23-24).

Our Lord Himself warned of false Christs and false prophets (Matt. 24:24). The Apostle Paul warned of “another Jesus,” “another spirit” and “another gospel” (II Cor. 11:4). This “another gospel” is in fact not “another” but is rather a perversion of the gospel of Christ (Gal. 1:6-7). Even so it is with the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Although there are many opinions as to the person of Jesus Christ, there is but one truth as to the person of Christ. That which deviates from the truth is a perversion of truth and is damnable to those who preach it (Gal. 1:8-9). The truth of Christ, yea even more to the point, the truth of Jesus of Nazareth, is that He is “the Holy One of God.”

It is sad to have to write but true nonetheless, that at least some of the demonic minions of Satan know more of the truth of Christ than many professed Christians. Jesus of Nazareth (Jesus – the saviour, Emmanuel or God with us; of Nazareth – an actual town occupied by mankind, thus Jesus the God-man) is the Holy One of God. The son (the virgin’s kindred child) brought forth of Mary is God (Matt. 1:23). That which was born of Mary the virgin was “holy” (Lk. 1:35, this includes Christ’s humanity for Mary conceived and gave birth to a human child) thus would be called the Son of God. The whole of the truth here is that both Christ’s deity and His humanity was Holy in the purist sense and that holiness was intrinsic and of Divine origin. Jesus of Nazareth was and is man but He was and is the unique man. This man is the Lord from heaven (I Cor. 15:47). Jesus of Nazareth did not receive His humanity by mere human means, even from the virgin. Christ’s humanity was the product of God the Spirit producing in the virgin something holy (Matt. 1:18, 20).

The humanity of Jesus of Nazareth is certainly superior to that of fallen man (Heb. 7:26-27), and His humanity is even superior to that of Adam (I Cor. 15:45-49). The creation, including man (Adam and Eve), was seen by God to be good and even very good. However, never was the creation or man declared to be holy because all was susceptible to the fall and the curse by the fall. Man was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27) but the Son is the express image of God’s person (Heb. 1:1-3). Again, the first man (Adam) was of the earth, earthy: the second man (Jesus of Nazareth) is the Lord from heaven (I Cor. 15:47). Plainly stated, those who teach that Jesus of Nazareth could have sinned are saying that He could have ceased to be holy, He could have ceased to be God, He could have failed, He could have gone to Hell for His own sin and sins, and that God’s sovereign purpose could have been thwarted. Whether intentionally or otherwise, what a horror to promote such a Christ! We must say that either God got lucky and Jesus did not fail or God’s purpose could not fail because even Jesus of Nazareth was the Holy One of God. Scripture prophesied of Christ that: “He shall not fail…” (Isa. 42:4). To say He “shall not” but yet there was the possibility that He “could have” is contradictory.

There certainly is not space enough to try and answer the many objections to the truth. But one thing will be clear to any spiritually minded person: The manner in which we interpret scripture must be based upon precedent! Those passages which deal directly with the person of Christ, these passages are to guide our minds in those passages which deal with circumstances in the life of Christ. In other words, scripture says Christ was tempted of Satan. What does this “tempt” mean? Is this negative temptation? Did Christ, as is with fallen man, inwardly struggle with lust being enticed (Js. 1:14-15) but He was able to fight it off? Some people teach this yet where does any of those passages which deal with that temptation even hint at such? They do not! Eve, even before the fall, manifest the inward susceptibility by negative desire (Gen. 3:6 cf. I Jn. 2:16), with Adam then knowingly, willingly, and apart from deception (cf. I Tim. 2:14) joining her. Christ never had that inner, negative desire (Jn. 7:18; 8:46; 14:30; II Cor. 5:21; I Jn. 3:5). We have at least these preceding five passages which refute any inner susceptibility in Christ and yet men want to still teach that it existed. Why? They want to make their god altogether like unto themselves. As a matter of fact Christ was tempted (put to a test) by Satan for forty days (Mk. 1:13; Lk. 4:2) not with three enticements. The actual forty day temptation [testing] preceded what people call the three-fold temptation of Christ. In Luke 4:2 note that the forty day temptation had ended, then the final validation of Christ’s holy natures (divine and human) in three great statements from Christ as to who He was and where He stood in view of Satan’s last three assaults. Far from showing Christ could have sinned it clearly reveals that sin was abhorrent to Him. Some suggest Christ was tempted [negatively] in His humanity but not in His deity. In other words, as God He could not sin but as man He could. But we must note that He was tempted as to His actual deity: “If thou be the Son of God” in two of the three assaults. Christ was tempted [tested] not to see if He would sin but to show that He completely abhorred sin. Christ was tempted in all points like as we are, but let us never forget “yet without [apart from] sin [inward sinfulness or a sinful nature]” (Heb. 4:15). Thus He can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities (the weakness of our human maladies – hunger, thirst, physical weariness etc.) but He is not moved to feel with us in our sin. Sadly, some professed Christians want a Christ to sympathize with their sinfulness rather than their human weaknesses. This Christ does not do!

It must be granted, our human maladies stem from our sinfulness, but Christ partook of those human maladies apart from sin. He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, but never did He have sinful flesh. Moreover, He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, not to sympathize with our sin but to condemn sin in the flesh by the sacrifice of Himself (Rom. 8:3). To say otherwise is to say even more than He could have sinned, it is to say He was sinful. Herein is the real difference between the Holy One of God and the Jesus of so-called Christian religion. The elect have a Holy person who was the sacrifice for their sin and sins, thus securing their acceptance by God. In other words, He was the perfect sacrifice! False religion has a Jesus who died for their sins but since that could not secure them he can feel sorry for their sins and maybe let them go free. Since Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever, then Jesus Christ is not better now than He ever was. A Jesus who could have sinned then could still sin now or even in eternity. There is no hope in such a Jesus! But there is a sure hope in the Holy One of God!