SIR ROBERT ANDERSON
Secret Service
Theologian
THE GOSPEL AND
ITS MINISTRY
Chapter Fourteen
HOLINESS AND SANCTIFICATION.
WORDS mean exactly what they pass current for, and with
the English Bible before us it is idle to insist on a distinction between
"holiness" and "sanctification." But an examination of the various passages
where the Greek correlatives of these terms occur will help much toward
accuracy of thought and a clear grasp of the truth upon this subject.
The
meaning of (hagiazein) in Scripture (and I am not aware that it ever has any
other meaning), is to separate, or set apart, for God, or to some sacred
purpose; and (hagiasmos) means either the act of consecration, or the condition
into which that act introduces the subject of it. There is no question of any
change of essential qualities. The subject may be (a) intrinsically holy
already, or (b) it may be, and continue to be, intrinsically unholy, or (c) it
may be incapable of moral qualities altogether. For example (a) Christ was
sanctified by the Father,1 (b) the sinner is sanctified on believing; and an
unconverted husband or wife is sanctified in virtue of marriage with a holy
person; and (c) the vessels of the temple were sanctified, as also the
creatures we use for food are "sanctified by the word of God and
prayer."
The word means, therefore, to make a person or thing holy, in
the sense in which to justify a person is to make that person righteous. His
condition is changed, but not necessarily his character. In the Appendix I give
a list of all the passages where the word occurs, and a careful perusal of them
will show that in one case only does the word seem to bear a different meaning.
I allude to the prayer of I Thessalonians v. 23. "The God of peace sanctify you
wholly." But a consideration of the context will show that "wholly" refers not
to progressive sanctification of the whole man regarded as a unit, but to the
absolute sanctification of every part of the man considered as a complex being,
made up of body, soul, and spirit. In John xvii. it is quite unjustifiable to
put a different meaning on the word "sanctify," when the Lord uses it of
Himself, and when He applies it to His disciples. And Ephesians v. 26 teaches
that He gave Himself for the Church "that He might sanctify it, cleansing it by
the washing of water by the Word."
It will be observed that we are said
to be sanctified by God the Father, sanctified by the Spirit, sanctified in the
name of the Lord Jesus, sanctified in Christ Jesus, and sanctified by blood.
These all refer to one and the same sanctification. God is the Author, the
Spirit the Agent, and the blood the means, of our sanctification, and it is in
Christ that all this is ours. The attempt of some commentators to cut up verse
eleven of 1st Corinthians vi., and to make "justified" refer to Christ, and
"sanctified" to the Spirit, is mere special pleading. The believer is
sanctified absolutely and for ever, even as he is justified; and of necessity
it is by the Spirit, for through Him it is that every blessing flows to
us.
All this is confirmed by a careful study of the passages where
(hagiasmos) is used. It is very remarkable that when sanctification is spoken
of as by the Spirit it is connected with election, and precedes faith. And the
reason of this seems to be that, though chronologically faith and
sanctification are simultaneous, there is nevertheless a moral order, varying
according as we view the subject from our own standpoint, or from that of the
sovereignty of God. In the former case, faith comes first, and sanctification
follows as a consequence; but when election comes in, we see our faith to be
the result of othe divine decree which set us apart to eternal life.
It
is further remarkable that, save as above noticed, sanctification is never
spoken of as being specially the work of the Spirit. But the reason of this is
clear ; the truth is too obvious to need even to be stated. It is only by the
help of the Holy Spirit that a believer can stand for a moment. Truth is
emphasised in Scripture, not, as in a creed, according to its doctrinal
importance relatively to other truths, but according to the practical need
which exists for enforcing it upon the believer.
Holiness means, as we have
seen, not merely the state of being sanctified, but also the moral character
akin to that state. And here the Greek, a language rich in such distinctions,
is not confined to a single word. The quality or attribute of holiness is
expressed by (hagiosunee), a word, which, strange to say, is used but thrice,
namely, Romans i. 4, "the Spirit of holiness"; not the Holy Ghost, but the
Spirit of Christ, in contrast with the flesh mentioned in the preceding verse;
2 Corinthians vii. i. upon which I have already commented and 2 Thessalonians
iii. 13, "unblameable in holiness," a very solemn and significant word,
especially in the connection where it occurs. The kindred word (hagotees) is
found only in Hebrews xii. 10, "That we might be partakers of His holiness."
And (hosiotecs) in Luke i. 75 ; and Ephesians iv. 24.
A comparison of
Ephesians iv. 24 with I Corinthians i. 30, will give an insight into the
difference between this last word and (hagiasmos). Israel's sanctification, and
indeed their entire position as a redeemed people, was maintained by the
"middle wall of partition" which separated them from other nations. But Christ
Himself is to His people, now, what the " middle wall of partition" was to the
Jew He is our sanctification. The words are plain and simple "But of Him are ye
in Christ Jesus who was made unto us wisdom from God, and both righteousness
and sanctification, even redemption." It is often in virtue of what Christ has
done for us that we gain the place we hold in redemption it is entire in virtue
of what Christ now is to us that we can be maintained in that place.
But
in Ephesians iv. 24, it is not a questioned what Christ is to us, but of the
essential qualities the new creation of which He is the Head, and of what we
ourselves ought to be in practical conformity therewith. The new man is created
in holiness. To ignore the truth that Christ is made unto us sanctification and
that therefore the believer is holy, independently of his life on earth, is to
abandon or deny the true position of the Christian but to suppose that Christ
is made unto us holiness in this further sense also, would lead to the still
deeper error of supposing that holy living is of no account.
CHAPTER
15
CLEANSING BY BLOOD.
CLEANSING with blood is a common expression in the book of Leviticus, but in
the New Testament it is found only in the 9th chapter of Hebrews, and the
beginning of the First Epistle of John. Of Hebrews I have already spoken; but
the other passage claims notice, not only because of its connection with the
present subject, but also on account of the difficulties that seem to surround
it :-" If we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one
with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all
sin."
It is a canon of interpretation that whenever the benefits or
results of the death of Christ are ascribed to His blood, the figure thus
implied is borrowed from the types. It behoves us, therefore, to turn back to
the Old Testament, and there to seek out the particular key-picture to which it
is intended to direct our minds. In i Peter i., for example, the second verse
will naturally turn our thoughts to the only occasion on which blood was
sprinkled on the people of Israel (Exodus xxiv.); while verse 19 brings us back
to their one great redemption sacrifice of the passover in Egypt.
Here
then we have a certain clew to the meaning of the text before us: " The blood
of Jesus cleanseth us from all sin." The particular type in the light which we
are to understand the word must be th of some offering which was for sin; and
one moreover which was for the people generally, as distinguished from those
which were for individuals and further, it must, be a sacrifice of which th
benefits were abiding. This at once excludes the offerings of the first fifteen
chapters of Leviticus and it will confine our consideration to the great day of
expiation, prescribed in the i6th chapter "For on that day" (was the word to
Moses) "he shall make an atonement for you to cleanse you, that ye may be clean
from all your sins before the Lord."
We can picture to ourselves some
devout Israelite telling of his God to a heathen stranger, recounting to him
the proofs of Jehovah's goodness and faithfulness to His people, and going on
to speak of His holiness, His terribleness - how He was "of purer eyes than to
behold iniquity," and how, for acts in which his guest would fail to see sin at
all, He had visited them with signal judgments. And we can conceive that, in
amazement, the stranger might demand whether the people were free from the
weaknesses and wickedness of other men. And, On his hearing an eager
repudiation of all such pretensions, with what deepening wonder and awe he
would exclaim, "How then can you live before a God so great and
terrible?"
And here the heathen stranger within the gates of the
Israelite, would have reached a point analogous to that to which the opening
verses of John's Epistle lead us. Eternal life has been manifested, and life is
the only ground of fellowship with God. But "God is light," and it is only in
the light, as the sphere of its enjoyment, that such fellowship is possible.
The light of God, how can sinners bear it? Is it by attaining sinlessness? The
thought is proof of self-deception and utter absence of the truth (v. 8). But
just as the question of his guest would turn the thoughts of the Israelite to
his great day of expiation, and call to his lips the words, "It is the
cleansing blood which alone enables us to live before Jehovah," so the
Christian turns to the great Sin-offering, and his faith finds utterance in the
words, "The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin."
"Washing with blood" is an expression wholly unknown to the law, and it
conveys an idea which is quite at variance with its teaching. It has no
scriptural warrant. For the correct reading of Rev i. 5, as given in R.V. is
"Unto Him that loveth us and loosed us from our sins by His own blood." Ps. II.
7, must of course be explained by the law; and the student of Scripture will
naturally turn to the 19th of Numbers, or to Leviticus xiv. 6-9, to seek its
meaning. A like remark applies to other similar passages in the Old Testament.
Overlooking this, Cowper derived his extraordinary idea of a fowntain of blood
from the i3th of Zechariah, construed in connection with the received reading
of Rev. i. 5. The fact is that though cleansing with water was one of the most
frequent and characteristic of the typical ordinances, it has been almost
entirely forgotten in our creeds. In that day there shal1 be a fountain
opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and
for separation for uncleanness. (Zech. xiii. i, see marginal reading, and
compare Num. xix. 9.) In that day the epoch referred to in
verses 914 of the preceding chapter Israel shall be admitted to the
full benefits of the great sin- offering typified in the 19th of Numbers. (See
also Rom. Xl. 2529) The washing of garments in blood is likewise wholly
unscriptural. save in poetical language-as e g Genesis xlix i i The
meaning of Revelation vii. 14 is too often frittered away thus as though it
were a merely poetical expression. But the figures used are typical, not
poetical: These are they that come out of the great tribulation [compare
Matt Xxiv 21] and they washed their robes [compare Rev. xix. 8], and made them
white by the blood of the Lamb" Their lives were purified practically from the
defilements that surrounded them, and purged in a still deeper sense by the
blood. In Rev. xxii. 14, also, the true reading is Blessed are they that
wash their robes.
It is not "has cleansed," nor yet "will
cleanse," but "cleanseth." it is not the statement of a fact merely, but of a
truth, and truths are greater and deeper even than facts.
But how
"cleanseth"?' Just as the blood of the sin-offering cleansed the Israelite. It
was not by any renewal of its application to him, but by the continuance of its
efficacy. With Israel its virtue continued throughout the year; with us it is
forever. It is not mere acts of sin that are in question. here, but the deeper
problem of our condition as sinners (compare v. 10 with v. 8). And neither the
difficulty, nor yet the answer to it, is the same. In. regard to the one the
Israelite turned to the day of atonement, and said "the blood cleanseth"; but
in case of his committing some act of sin, he had to bring his sin-offering,
according to the 4th or 5th or 6th chapter of Leviticus. But the need of these
special offerings depended on "the weakness and unprofitableness" of the
sacrifices of the old Covenant. And i John i. 7,9, seems clearly to teach that
all our need is met by the twofold cleansing - typified by the blood of the
great sin-offering of Leviticus xvi., and the water of the great rite of
Numbers xix. For the believer who sins against God.to dismiss the matter by
"the blood cleanseth," is the levity and daring of antinomianism. For such the
word is, If we confess our sins": no flippant acknowledgment with the
lip, but a solemn and real dealing with God; and thus he obtains again and
again a renewal of the benefits of the death of Christ. "He is faithful and
just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
And this, no doubt, is the truth intended by the popular expression
"coming back to blood." The Israelite "came back to blood" by seeking a fresh
sacrifice; but had he attempted to "come back to blood" in the sense of
preserving the blood of the sin-offering in order to avail himself of it for
future cleansing, he would have been cut off without mercy for presumptuous
sin. The most superficial knowledge either of the precepts or the principles of
the book of Leviticus, will make us avoid a form of words so utterly opposed to
both. With one great exception the blood of every sin-offering was poured round
the altar of burnt-offering, and thus consumed; and that exception was the
sacrifice of the i9th of Numbers, so often referred to in these pages. The red
heifer was the sin-offering in that aspect of it in which the sinner can come
back to it to obtain cleansing. And here the whole beast and its blood was
burnt to ashes outside the camp, and the unclean person was cleansed by being
sprinkled with water which had touched those ashes. But to confound the
cleansing by blood - the 16th of Leviticus aspect of the sin-oflering, with the
cleansing by water - the i9th of Numbers aspect of it - betrays ignorance of
Scripture. The one is a continuously enduring agency; the other a continually
repeated act.
There is no question, observe, as to whether the benefit
depends on the death of Christ. But with some, perhaps, it is a question merely
of giving up the "form of sound words"; with others, the far more solemn one of
depreciating the sacrifice of Christ and denying to it an efficacy which even
the typical sin-offering possessed for Israel. Christ has died and risen and
gone up to God, and now the blood cleanses from all sin. It is not that it
avails to accomplish a succession of acts of cleansing, for the believer, but
that its efficacy remains to cleanse him continuously. It is not in order that
it may thus cleanse him, that the believer confesses his sin: his only right to
the place he holds, even as he confesses, depends on. the fact that it does
thus cleanse him. It was only in virtue of the place he had through the blood
of the lamb that the Israelite could avail himself of the ashes of the red
heifer. And our life, our hope, our destiny, depend entirely upon the enduring
efficacy of the blood of Christ, that, whether in bright days of fellowship
with God, or in hours of wilderness failure, "the blood cleanseth from all sin"
: here it is a question only of the preciousness of that blood, and of the
faithfulness and power of Him in Whom we trust.
Chapter Sixteen
Literature | Photos | Links | Home