Precious Truths in the book of Numbers

My good friend and brother in Christ, Kwame, has been exchanging emails with me almost daily as he reads his way through Numbers with the help of one of my favorite teachers, Matthew Henry. He is finding much gospel in Numbers. I asked him, to explain.

Following is Kwame's email response to my question -- I enjoyed it so much I'm pasting it below. I would add that as I am currently reading through Exodus, I want to be very careful to learn and to see Christ - which sometimes is difficult for me. When I read of the showbread - do I see Christ the bread life? When I read of the Manna from heaven, do I see Christ who came from heavenly glory who is my daily bread? When I read of the veil separating the Most Holy from the Holy do I see Christ through whom alone we must come to the Father? When I read of the angel of death who passes over Egypt, do I see Christ whose blood covers and protects me from eternal judgment? When I read of the Sabbath rest, do I see Christ in whom I may rest from my own sinful works? Sometimes this is easy, but often I get lost in the "taches" and "knops" and fail to find Christ and fail to properly hear with understanding the Word of God to His Glory.

SO WITH THIS IN MIND Here is the Email I received from KWAME in hopes that OUR READING MAY BE EDIFIED IN CHRIST.

Wow that is a great question and I would love to just briefly type some of the awesome things that I have come to learn as it pertains to Numbers. I have only read chapters 1 - 5.

I wish i could list all the verses thus far but I would write these down off the top of my head anyway.

Numbers is about God!
Numbers is about God's word
Numbers is about God's holiness
Numbers is about God's power and sovereignty
Numbers is about God fulfilling his promises
Numbers is about God's election of a people
Numbers is about God's commission to man
Numbers is about man's need for God our Saviour
Numbers is about life being a warfare
Numbers is about God's work that man is to do
Numbers is about man's fellowship with family
Numbers is about the protection/preservation of holy precious things
Numbers is about the purity of this tabernacle/temple
Numbers is about God's redemption of those who are His
Numbers is about roles and leadership
Numbers is about army formations and processions
Numbers is about the truth of that first commandment to children that has a promise
Numbers is about God's provision for forgiveness of sin

As you already know, it's full of Gospel!

Romans - Chapter Five

Keywords:
Chap 1: Without Excuse
Chap 2: The Law Condemns
Chap 3: There is none righteous
Chap 4: Imputation/Logizomai
Chap 5: Headship/Representation and 1st Adam - 2nd Adam, or 1st Adam - Last Adam.

Alternate Keywords:
Chap 1: The Indictment Begins (Rom 5:18)
Chap 2: (open for suggestions)
Chap 3: All have sinned, Total Depravity
Chap 4: Counted Righteous
Chap 5: Federal Headship (the theological term)

Memory Verses:
Rom 1:20
Rom 2:13
Rom 3:10
Rom 4:3
Rom 5:19

Extended Memory Verses
Chap 1: Rom 1:1, Rom 1:8, Rom 1:16-20
Chap 2: Rom 2:12-16
Chap 3: Rom 3:10-12, Rom 3:18, Rom 3:21, Rom 3:23, Rom 3:28-29
Chap 4: Rom 4:23-25
Chap 5: Whole Chapter (If I had to select only two more Rom 5:8, Rom 5:14)

As we begin to look at Romans Chapter Five, I wanted to preface with a quick discussion of Rom 5:13. I have for many years found this a tough verse to fully understand. Maybe you have it down, but I always pause on this verse to wonder exactly how it should be understood.

Rom 5:13 For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Until the Law: The Law the came through Moses, that period of time from Adam to Moses.

Sin was in the world: There was sin in the world even before Moses brought the law.

But sin is not imputed when there is no law: Sin will not be accounted against anyone when there is no law to be broken.

Some Questions:
Q. How can there be sin at all with no law? It says plainly sin was in the world.
Q. Was there no law before Moses? This verse seems to suggest that.
Q. If sin is not accounted against anyone prior to the law then why was there judgment?
Q. Isn't judgment evidence that sin is counted against those judged. For example the Flood was judgment upon all except eight souls, ie. Noah, his sons and wives.
Q. Didn't individuals evidence a work of the law in their hearts when they approved some things and disapproved others.

For proof that there was evidenced a work of the law written on the heart, not in a regenerative way but as a remnant of that stamp of God's image. As also expressed in:

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

Consider the following instances:
Abimelech appealing to the justice of God:
Gen 20:4 But Abimelech had not come near her: and he said, Lord, wilt thou slay also a righteous nation?

Abimelech acknowledging the sanctity of marriage and the great sin of violating this union:
Gen 20:9 Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.

Abimelech again in the case of Issac and Rebekah, once more acknowledging the great sin of breaking the marriage union and evidencing that he does by nature things contained in the law:
Gen 26:8 And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife.
Gen 26:9 And Abimelech called Isaac, and said, Behold, of a surety she is thy wife: and how saidst thou, She is my sister? And Isaac said unto him, Because I said, Lest I die for her.
Gen 26:10 And Abimelech said, What is this thou hast done unto us? one of the people might lightly have lain with thy wife, and thou shouldest have brought guiltiness upon us.
Gen 26:11 And Abimelech charged all his people, saying, He that toucheth this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.

We could also mention the nature of Abrham's intercession for Sodom:
Gen 18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

ALSO SIN was imputed upon Cain who was judged for killing Abel. Also imputed to Sodom and Gomorrah judged by God not having even ten righteous men.

Perhaps the proper understanding of Rom 5:13 is this:

Look what Adam brought! Adam stood as the HEAD of the whole human race. Death passed upon all men from Adam's representative act.

Since where no law is made, then no man would then be punished. But men were punished and therefore were considered guilty, therefore sin was imputed to them, and thus then there was some law even before Moses. Look what Adam, the Head of all mankind, has brought upon us!

Verse Rom 5:12 enforces this:
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

And Rom 5:14 takes us to the next connection, that as Adam was the HEAD of all that are in Him, he was a figure of CHRIST, who is the HEAD of all that are in HIM.

Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

I leave with you with several commentaries on Rom 5:13 so you can weigh some of the same helps I have been reviewing.

Geneva Bible Notes:

That this is so, that both guiltiness and death began not after the giving and transgressing of law of Moses, is evident in that men died before that law was given: for in that they died, sin, which is the cause of death, existed then: and in such a way, that it was also imputed: because of this it follows that there was then some law, the breach of which was the cause of death.

JOHN GILL:
but sin is not imputed when there is no law. This looks like an objection, that if there was no law before Moses's time, then there was no sin, nor could any action of man be known or accounted by them as sinful, or be imputed to them to condemnation; or rather it is a concession, allowing that where there is no law, sin is not imputed; but there was a law before that law of Moses, which law was transgressed, and the sin or transgression of it was imputed to men to condemnation and death, as appears from what follows.

MATTHEW HENRY:
Further, to clear this, he shows that sin did not commence with the law of Moses, but was in the world until, or before, that law; therefore that law of Moses is not the only rule of life, for there was a rule, and that rule was transgressed, before the law was given. It likewise intimates that we cannot be justified by our obedience to the law of Moses, any more than we were condemned by and for our disobedience to it. Sin was in the world before the law; witness Cain's murder, the apostasy of the old world, the wickedness of Sodom. His inference hence is, Therefore there was a law; for sin is not imputed where there is no law. Original sin is a want of conformity to, and actual sin is a transgression of, the law of God: therefore all were under some law. His proof of it is, Death reigned from Adam to Moses

JOHN CALVIN:

But sin is not imputed, etc. Without the law reproving us, we in a manner sleep in our sins; and though we are not ignorant that we do evil, we yet suppress as much as we can the knowledge of evil offered to us, at least we obliterate it by quickly forgetting it. While the law reproves and chides us, it awakens us as it were by its stimulating power, that we may return to the consideration of God’s judgment. The Apostle then intimates that men continue in their perverseness when not roused by the law, and that when the difference between good and evil is laid aside, they securely and joyfully indulge themselves, as if there was no judgment to come. But that before the law iniquities were by God imputed to men is evident from the punishment of Cain, from the deluge by which the whole world was destroyed, from the fate of Sodom, and from the plagues inflicted on Pharaoh and Abimelech on account of Abraham, and also from the plagues brought on the Egyptians. That men also imputed sin to one another, is clear from the many complaints and expostulations by which they charged one another with iniquity, and also from the defenses by which they labored to clear themselves from accusations of doing wrong. There are indeed many examples which prove that every man was of himself conscious of what was evil and of what was good: but that for the most part they connived at their own evil deeds, so that they imputed nothing as a sin to themselves unless they were constrained. When therefore he denies that sin without the law is imputed, he speaks comparatively; for when men are not pricked by the goads of the law, they become sunk in carelessness. ¹⁶⁵¹⁶⁵ This verse, as bearing on the argument, maybe viewed rather differently. This and the following verse contain an explanation or an illustration of the last, Romans 5:12. He states in this verse two things: a fact and a general principle; the fact is, that sin, the first sin in its evident effects, (for he speaks throughout of no other sin, as to Adam, or as producing death,) was in the world before the law of Moses was given; and the general principle he avows is, that no sin is imputed where there is no law. Having made this last admission, he proceeds in the Romans 5:14 to say, that “nevertheless,” or notwithstanding, death, the effect of sin, prevailed in the world, and prevailed even as to those who did not actually or personally sin as Adam did. He takes no account of personal sins, for his object was to show the effects of the first sin. And then he says, that in is respect Adam was a kind of type, a figure, a representative of Christ who was to come; and in the three verses which follow, Romans 5:15, 16, and 17, he traces the similitude between the two, pointing out at the same time the difference, which in every instance is in favor of the last Adam. That τύπος signifies here likeness and not identity, is quite certain, whatever may be its common meaning because its import is exemplified and illustrated in the verses which follow. — Ed.

But Paul wisely introduced this sentence, in order that the Jews might hence more clearly learn how grievously they offended, inasmuch as the law openly condemned them; for if they were not exempted from punishment whom God had never summoned as guilty before his tribunal, what would become of the Jews to whom the law, like a herald, had proclaimed their guilt, yea, on whom it denounced judgment? There may be also another reason adduced why he expressly says, that sin reigned before the law, but was not imputed, and that is, that we may know that the cause of death proceeds not from the law, but is only made known by it. Hence he declares, that all became miserably lost immediately after the fall of Adam, though their destruction was only made manifest by the law. If you translate this adversative δε, though, the text would run better; for the meaning is, that though men may indulge themselves, they cannot yet escape God’s judgment, even when there is no law to reprove them.

Geneva Bible - Chaps 7 and 9

Reading Through the Geneva Bible in One Year - click here for intro. In which I post from It's Notes a few of those which I marked of particular interest with sporadic comments.

Gen 7: 23
So he destroyed everything that was upon the earth, from man to beast, to the creeping thing and to the fowl of the heaven: they were even destroyed from the earth. And Noah only remained, and they that were with him in the Ark.

Learn what it is to obey God only, and to forsake the multitude, (1Pe_3:20).

The Geneva Notes often take this form - counsel to the reader. SO LEARN....

Gen 9:2
Also the (b) fear of you, and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the heaven, upon all that moveth on the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea: into your hand are they delivered.

(b) By the virtue of this commandment, beasts do not rage as much against man as they would, yea and many serve his purposes by it.

As I read through Genesis this time, I noted that so much of this book is an explanation of the World in which we live now. Why things are the way they are. Why it is broken. Why there is death. Why sickness. Why marriage. Why wear clothes. I could go on and on here. But I think the notes like this in Gen 9:2 have helped me to see that. The beasts do not rage as much as they would by virtue of this command.

Gen 9:6
Whoso sheddeth man's blood, (f) by man shall his blood be shed: for in the (g) image of God hath he made man.

(f) Not only by the magistrate, but often God raises up one murderer to kill another.

(g) Therefore to kill man is to deface God's image, and so injury is not only done to man, but also to God.

What it really is to MURDER, to deface God's image. It is a sin against God.

Gen 9:27 - God persuade (t) Japheth, that he may dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant.

(t) He declares that the Gentiles, who came from Japheth, and were separated from the Church, should be joined to the same by the persuasion of God's Spirit, and preaching of the gospel.
I wrote about Japheth in a previous post, when I read Christian in Pilgrim's Progress telling the porter, "I came of the race of Japheth. click here I found this a most incredible thought then, and still do marvel at the promise that the Gentiles shall also partake in God's promises through Jesus Christ.

THE WORLD WE ALL WANT

Haven't seen the movie, 22 year daughter did. This article isn't really about the movie, it's about an idea the movie triggered.

On Jan 12, 2010, Over on Church Matters: The 9Marks blog was an article about the recent news piece concerning the apparent affect Avatar was having on some people. After watching Avatar some people were reporting falling into serious depression or even suicidal thoughts. 9Marks, Michael Mckinley quotes one fan as writing:

"Ever since I went to see 'Avatar' I have been depressed. Watching the wonderful world of Pandora and all the Na'vi made me want to be one of them. I can't stop thinking about all the things that happened in the film and all of the tears and shivers I got from it... I even contemplate suicide thinking that if I do it I will be rebirthed in a world similar to Pandora and the everything is the same as in 'Avatar.' "

Then Michael Mckinley goes on to say:

"...I think the reaction that people are having is completely reasonable; in fact I am amazed that it takes a movie to make them depressed. The world is a broken place. We instinctively know that it shouldn't be this way. Something has gone wrong.

This is why I really like The World We All Want, a small book by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis.

It uses Biblical Theology to communicate the gospel message. I find it particularly helpful because most unbelievers nowadays don't begin with the assumption that they are sinners. There's no "point of contact" there. But people do know that the world's a broken place, and we all feel a desire for a better world to live in. Hence all the Avatar-inspired depression.

TWWAW begins at that point of agreement and works back (or forward) to the idea of sin, redemption, and restoration. We've used it in evangelistic Bible studies and I've used it one on one with people. It's a great resource."

Mckinley's article arrested my attention and I ordered The World We All Want. Received the book yesterday and read it over my lunch hour over the past two days. Short book. I think the main body of the book was 77 pages long. I really liked it.

The book is written for an audience that has no biblical background. The subtitle of the book was "a course on how the Bible really works."

The booklet contains several "biblical extracts." Usually these are about a page to a page and half of text straight out of the NIV translation of the bible and relevant to the aspect currently under discussion.

Writing from memory, here is how I recollect the flow of the book:

(I found the title and bible passages online here)

FIRST:

Title:	God promises the world we all want
Bible Passages:	Revelation 21-22 and Mark 5

A discussion of what kind of world we want, with quotes from Revelation concerning no more tears and no more dying. Kind of an open discussion format also, hoping for a world without sickness and without poverty, without war and famines and tragedies and disasters. A world where we all get along in peace and happiness.

SECOND:

Title:	Jesus shows us God's new world
Bible Passages:	Mark 4-5 and Mark 8

Quotes from the gospel showing how Jesus gives us glimpses of "The world we all want." Jesus raising the dead, Jesus healing the sick, Jesus feeding the multitude. Demonstrating that Jesus, himself, has the power to create "The world we all want."

THIRD:

Title:	We have spoiled God's good world
Bible Passages:	Genesis 1-3

We go to Genesis, to the garden Eden, where we see what happened there. How sin entered into the world resulting in the GREAT FALL. Death entered and disease and hardship through the rebellion of Adam the representative of all mankind. God made the world very good but we messed it up.

FOURTH:

Title:	God promises a new world
Bible Passages:	Genesis 12 and 15 and Romans 4

Next to Abraham and the promise God made. A promise of a people who would believe in him and enjoy a land of plenty. I really liked in this chapter how the authors showed that GOD PROMISED A PEOPLE. Not just that God promised "to a people" but that he promised there would be a people. He made this promise to Abraham saying through the seed of Abraham many Nations would be blessed.

FIFTH:

Title:	We cannot create the God's new world
Bible Passages:	Nehemiah 9 and Ezekiel 36

It must be a world that God will create. To illustrate this we go to the nation Israel. A nation to which were given good laws through Moses. A nation that again and again proved that WE cannot create this world, God must do it. We mess it up. There was some quotes from Nehemiah and others where the long history of Israel is rehearsed.

SIXTH:

Title:	We can enjoy God's new world because of Jesus
Bible Passages:	Mark 15-16

Here is shown how Jesus made the way for his people to come to this world we all want and how therefore it was good that Jesus died. Jesus died in our place and for our sins. He did what he did as a representative so that all that are in Him will be counted as righteous. Some quotes here from the gospels and Romans 4. Also, that he rose from the grave on the third day having accomplished the work he came to do.

The bible is a book about God from beginning to End. And what he is doing here, he does for his own glory. We are even taken to Eze 36, to see how God said "it wasn't for your sakes but for my holy names sake that I will do this."

SEVENTH:

Title:	Christians are God's people waiting for God's new world
Bible Passages:	Acts 1-2

Here there was an emphasis on the community of believers who comprise his people and how this community should be and is intended to be a foretaste of the World we all want. The gospel is tied in with God's Church and God's purposes that his church should be to his glory. In this chapter we read that "Christians are a people who wait for the world God will create."

----------------------------------

I probably haven't done justice to the book here. But perhaps this will provide a flavor of how this book might be used as an evangelistic tool. Part of the methodology used in the book includes intermittent thought provoking questions. And questions to test the comprehension of the reader or student as you discuss your way through the book. Also, the book includes a series of pictures to correspond to each of the seven sections. The pictures were designed simplistically enough that one could draw them up during a course of discussion if so desired. Which is the author's purpose in the picture simplicity.

At the back of the book is about two pages of Leaders Guide material, with suggested methods and web links to talks corresponding to the sections of the book. Talks that could be used straight up as an aid in teaching or simply as a learning device for the leader. The book could be used in a variety of settings including: one on one, home groups, Sunday schools, and especially in these settings as an evangelistic aid. I actually purchased the book with my wife also in mind as a possible help in jail ministry.

I probably enjoyed it most for the reason: the book took me from Genesis to Revelation unfolding the gospel revelation in very simple terms, God-Centered and Gospel rich.

SOME LINKS OF INTEREST RELATED TO THIS ARTICLE:

Online Outline of The world we all Want, plus the pdf's for the talks through the chapters are found also at this link. click here

The Article, itself on 9Marks: http://blog.9marks.org/2010/01/avatar-suicide-and-the-gospel.html

A description of the book: http://www.thecrowdedhouse.org/books/what_we_all_want

The CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/index.html

Blog Post on Avatar, The Gospel According to James Cameron, http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2009/12/21/avatar-the-gospel-according-to-james-cameron/

Boomer-in-the-Pew's reaction to Avatar: http://www.boomerinthepew.com/2009/12/avatar-on-imax-3d-pantheism-and-ross-douthat.html

Geneva Bible - Genesis Chapter Six

Reading Through the Geneva Bible in One Year - click here for intro. In which I post from It's Notes a few of those which I marked of particular interest with sporadic comments.

Genesis Chap Six:

Gen 6:2 - Then the (a) sons of God saw the daughters (b) of men that they were (c) fair; and they took them wives of all that they liked.

(a) The children of the godly who began to degenerate.

(b) Those that had wicked parents, as if from Cain.

(c) Having more respect for their beauty and worldly considerations than for their manners and godliness.

I've been looking forward to this comment. I much prefer here the understanding that:

Sons of God - is equivalent to "children of the godly."
Daughters of Men - is equivalent to "those that had wicked parents."

John Owen in his book, Biblical Theology, points out that in Gen 4:26 we read "Then began men to call upon the name of the Lord. " He said it is here that the True was distinguishing and separating from the generality of mankind. He even suggested that not only did they begin to call upon the name of the Lord, but that they called themselves by the name of the Lord. In otherwords this is where they began to be known as "Sons of God." So that in Gen 6:2 when we read that the Sons of God took from the daughters of men for wives, what should be understood is that the visible church then began to so degenerate into ungodliness as to co-mingle even with those who were not part of the visible church.

John Gill concurs with John Owen in this writing in his commentary on Gen 4:26 and Gen 6:2:

Gen 4:26:
"...but called themselves by a different name; for so the words may be rendered: "then began men to call themselves", or "to be called by the name of the Lord" (p); the sons of God, as distinct from the sons of men; which distinction may be observed in Gen_6:2 and has been retained more or less ever since: "

Gen 6:2
"but rather this is to be understood of the posterity of Seth, who from the times of Enos, when then began to be called by the name of the Lord, Gen 4:26 had the title of the sons of God, in distinction from the children of men; these claimed the privilege of divine adoption, and professed to be born of God, and partakers of his grace, and pretended to worship him according to his will, so far as revealed to them, and to fear and serve and glorify him."

So also does Matthew Henry:
"The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose."

This is in contradistinction to another interpretation that "sons of God" should be understood of as being fallen angels. And fallen angels cohabiting with men or women were producing an offspring that must be destroyed by the flood. I prefer much Owen, Henry and Gill on this verse.

Geneva Bible - Genesis Chapter Five

Reading Through the Geneva Bible in One Year - click here for intro. In which I post from It's Notes a few of those which I marked of particular interest with sporadic comments.

Genesis Chap 5
Gen 5:2 - Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name (b) Adam, in the day when they were created.

(b) By giving them both one name, he notes the inseparable conjunction of man and wife.

This first note makes me think, "what do they mean inseparable conjunction of man and wife." I like it. But I have to stop and think about it, is the Note correct in really why they both were called "ADAM." I know in Hebrew the word means "MAN" sometimes as in "mankind." Reminds me of the previous note concerning "ish=man" and "ishah=woman." And isn't it neat how that's not so different from our English equivalents.

Gen 5:6 - And (d) Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:

(d) He proves Adam's generation by those who came from Seth, to show the true Church, and also what care God had over the same from the beginning, in that he continued his graces toward it by a continual succession.

This is similar to what I'm seeing in other notes. Kind of an attention to the BIG PICTURE. "to show the true Church..." There is a continuous regard to Christ and His Church reoccurring throughout the notes.

Gen 5:24 - And Enoch walked with God: and he [was] not; for (g) God took him.

(g) To show that there was a better life prepared and to be a testimony of the immortality of souls and bodies. To inquire where he went is mere curiosity.

Here I did not think before that I should learn even from this verse "To show there was a better life prepared." I certainly believe it, but never had I previously considered of exactly that as I read the verse. Good feature of the notes to make me stop and think.

Romans 4 - Justification and Sanctification

As we have studied Romans Four, I have tried to stress the importance of understanding and living in that knowledge of the distinction between Righteousness Imparted and Righteousness Imputed - or really Justification and Sanctification. Especially that we not find our merit of acceptance before God as a result of that inward work done IN us, but rather that perfect work of Christ done FOR us. With this in mind, my good friend, Mark, sent me this wonderful excerpt from J. C. Ryles Book, Holiness, as a further aid to us as we consider these truths.

You can find a PDF here: http://www.mountzion.org/PDFs/ Holiness Part 1. This excerpt starting on page 20.

Or Read Online Here: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/ryle/holiness.iii.ii.html, taken, It is from the section titled Sanctification, next to the marker [30].

A quote from Ryle at the end of this article highlights the importance we should give to this understanding, "I am persuaded that one great cause of the darkness and uncomfortable feelings of many well-meaning people in the matter of religion, is their habit of confounding, and not distinguishing, justification and sanctification."

In addition, the confounding of these two truths diminishes the glory of Christ in our minds. While we are robbed of our peace he is robbed of his Glory. But the pondering of these two truths their similarities and their distinctions, exalts Christ in our hearts, is a true preaching of the gospel to ourselves, and satisfies the conscience, and brings peace.

HOLINESS by J C RYLE, II. SANCTIFICATION
(approx beginning at the 38th paragraph)

III. The Distinction Between Justification and Sanctification

"I now propose to consider, in the last place, the distinction between justification and sanctification. Wherein do they agree, and wherein do they differ? This branch of our subject is one of great importance, though I fear it will not seem so to all my readers. I shall handle it briefly, but I dare not pass it over altogether. Too many are apt to look at nothing but the surface of things in religion, and regard nice distinctions in theology as questions of "words and names," which are of little real value. But I warn all who are in earnest about their souls, that the discomfort which arises from not "distinguishing things that differ" in Christian doctrine is very great indeed; and I especially advise them, if they love peace, to seek clear views about the matter before us. Justification and sanctification are two distinct things we must always remember. Yet there are points in which they agree and points in which they differ. Let us try to find out what they are.

In what, then, are justification and sanctification alike?

(a) Both proceed originally from the free grace of God. It is of His gift alone that believers are justified or sanctified at all.

(b) Both are part of that great work of salvation which Christ, in the eternal covenant, has undertaken on behalf of His people. Christ is the fountain of life, from which pardon and holiness both flow. The root of each is Christ.

(c) Both are to be found in the same persons. Those who are justified are always sanctified, and those who are sanctified are always justified. God has joined them together, and they cannot be put asunder.

(d) Both begin at the same time. The moment a person begins to be a justified person, he also begins to be a sanctified person. He may not feel it, but it is a fact.

(e) Both are alike necessary to salvation. No one ever reached heaven without a renewed heart as well as forgiveness, without the Spirit's grace as well as the blood of Christ, without a meetness for eternal glory as well as a title. The one is just as necessary as the other.

Such are the points on which justification and sanctification agree. Let us now reverse the picture, and see wherein they differ.

(a) Justification is the reckoning and counting a man to be righteous for the sake of another, even Jesus Christ the Lord. Sanctification is the actual making a man inwardly righteous, though it may be in a very feeble degree.

(b) The righteousness we have by our justification is not our own, but the everlasting perfect righteousness of our great Mediator Christ, imputed to us, and made our own by faith. The righteousness we have by sanctification is our own righteousness, imparted, inherent, and wrought in us by the Holy Spirit, but mingled with much infirmity and imperfection.

(c) In justification our own works have no place at all, and simple faith in Christ is the one thing needful. In sanctification our own works are of vast importance and God bids us fight, and watch, and pray, and strive, and take pains, and labour.

(d) Justification is a finished and complete work, and a man is perfectly justified the moment he believes. Sanctification is an imperfect work, comparatively, and will never be perfected until we reach heaven.

(e) Justification admits of no growth or increase: a man is as much justified the hour he first comes to Christ by faith as he will be to all eternity. Sanctification is eminently a progressive work, and admits of continual growth and enlargement so long as a man lives.

(f) Justification has special reference to our persons, our standing in God's sight, and our deliverance from guilt. Sanctification has special reference to our natures, and the moral renewal of our hearts.

(g) Justification gives us our title to heaven, and boldness to enter in. Sanctification gives us our meetness for heaven, and prepares us to enjoy it when we dwell there.

(h) Justification is the act of God about us, and is not easily discerned by others. Sanctification is the work of God within us, and cannot be hid in its outward manifestation from the eyes of men.

I commend these distinctions to the attention of all my readers, and I ask them to ponder them well. I am persuaded that one great cause of the darkness and uncomfortable feelings of many well-meaning people in the matter of religion, is their habit of confounding, and not distinguishing, justification and sanctification. It can never be too strongly impressed on our minds that they are two separate things. No doubt they cannot be divided, and everyone that is a partaker of either is a partaker of both. But never, never ought they to be confounded, and never ought the distinction between them to be forgotten."

JC Ryle