- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Apr 18
3 edits
Originally posted by @thinkofone
t's clear that you don't care what Jeremiah 31, Ezekiel 18 and Isaiah 1 actually say or don't say.
I care about the Old Testament probably more than any Atheist masquerading as a theologian would.
I care for what God speaks in the book of Hebrews as the writer compares the old covenant and the new covenant.
It's also clear that you don't care what I've written either.
See above.
You just make things up your head regardless of either.
There are 13 verses in Hebrews chapter 8 about the old and new covenants. Which one did I make up in my head?
There are 28 verses in Hebrews chapter 9.
Which one/s did I make up in my head?
You have no experience.
You have no touch with the living God.
And you have no clear conscience as to your own sins.
And you have not yet experienced the new covenant of God causing you not to need anyone to replace the intimate knowing of God as your God.
That's hard when you want to not believe God is to begin with.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Apr 18
6 edits
Now I'll say this. The writer of the book of Hebrews does not say the entire 31rst chapter of Jeremiah is relevant to the promise of a new covenant. He specifies in Hebrews 8:8 through 12 that the pertinent portion is Jeremiah 31 verses 31 through 34 .
Your arguments? Ie. " But you see I can go outside of the scope of those verses and find some things to prove Hebrews didn't know what it was talking about."
I believe that same God of the whole chapter of Jeremiah 31 and the whole chapter of Ezekiel 18 is enlightening the new covenant saints as to what must be seen in the New Testament revelation of Jesus Christ.
I would refer readers to the very opening words of the whole book of Hebrews.
"God, having spoken of old in many portions and in many ways to the fathers in the prophets, Has at the last of these days spoken to us in the Son, Whom He appointed Heir of all things, through whom also He made the universe" (Heb. 1:1,2)
God now is speaking to man in the Son.
You stumble on "God" for you're an atheist.
You stumble even more on "the Son".
You're not getting off to a good start.
And another underlying theme of the coming pages of Hebrews is that Christ made purification of sins once and for all.
Continuing the prologue:
" ... through whom also He made the universe;
Who, being the effulgence of His glory and the impress of His substance and updolding and bearing all things by the word of His power,
HAVING MADE PURIFICATION OF SINS, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." (va.2c,3)
Man starts living unto God and living in oneness with God standing on the finished redeeming work of Christ on His cross - making purification of sins, exalted as the eternal High Priest.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Apr 18
7 edits
ThinkOfOne is relying on Jewish "counter missionary" arguments against the Messiah Jesus to help his Humanism.
JewsForJudiasm (Thiests) treat the New Testament like it is an error prone faulty commentary on the Hebrew Bible. Christians regard the whole New Testament as it should be, as divinely authoritative as all of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).
The New Tetament book of Hebrews is part of the oracles of God, not the imaginative gropings of religious revisionists. It explains how the "new covenant" is "new".
The Israelites had some proverbs of cynicism by which they viewed their relationship with God's law and their own disobedience. God scolded them about these cynical and sarcastic proverbs by which they rationalized their poor moral state and punishment.
"Then the word of Jehovah came to me saying, What do you mean by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?" (Ezek 18:1)
This cynicism referred back to all the curses God said would overtake the nation of Israel if they forsook God and His righteous law. They thought they were being unfairly punished for sins that previous generations had committed.
In short God comes in to correct them and inform them of each one of their personal responsibility.
This was nothing NEW.
And the "new covenant" Jeremiah predicted was not God introducing personal responsibility as something NOT accounted for before.
The new covenant" does not negate a need to repent. It does not negate a need to turn from sinning.
It does not negate any of the exhortations to move from iniquity to righteous living.
It is about eternal redemption, justification, and the eternal inheritance, and the dispensing of God's Spirit Himself and divine life into the recipient who puts faith into the new covenant.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 May 18
How to be Washed in the Blood of Jesus is to BELIEVE in His redemption. And claim that redemption for yourself in faith.
If some think "washed" is too strong a word (which is highly arguable) then the point remains the blood of Christ is there to remove the offense of your sins.
To know God is to more and more also know yourself.
And when you see yourself in God's light your deep need for the sin cleansing blood of Christ's redemption will be welcomed.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
02 May 18
Originally posted by @sonshipAs I said earlier in the thread “washed” Is scriptural despite “cleansed” being so. We are cleansed through the washing of the word and the sprinkling of the blood which “cleanses” our conscience and frees us from condemnation.
How to be Washed in the Blood of Jesus is to BELIEVE in His redemption. And claim that redemption for yourself in faith.
If some think "washed" is too strong a word (which is highly arguable) then the point remains the blood of Christ is there to remove the offense of your sins.
To know God is to more and more also know yourself.
And when you see y ...[text shortened]... God's light your deep need for the sin cleansing blood of Christ's redemption will be welcomed.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 May 18
2 edits
Originally posted by @divegeesterI appreciated your reference to the washing of the water in the word.
As I said earlier in the thread “washed” Is scriptural despite “cleansed” being so. We are cleansed through the washing of the word and the sprinkling of the blood which “cleanses” our conscience and frees us from condemnation.
"That He might sanctify her, (the church) , cleansing her by the washing of the water in the word." (Eph. 5:26)
This is not to be neglected or underappreciated at all.
I think this is the removal of old things from us and the addition of new things to us by means of His instant speaking in His word.
This removal of the old blemishes from our soul by means of the word of God speaking in an express way to us, is a washing. It is critical.
I may start a thread dedicated just to this kind of washing.
Having said that I reiterate that this is not negating the washing in the blood of Jesus. "Washing" as it says they have WASHED their robes in the blood of the Lamb.
" ... These are those who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."
The Lamb is symbolic of the Redeemer Jesus.
The robes must be symbolic of something pertaining to the lives and expression of people.
The washing must be symbolic of the effect of redemption on those lives, those records of living before God and those expressions of living.
While sprinkling of the blood is no doubt also seen.
Here, and as well as in Revelation 22:14 [some ancient copies of the Greek NT].
Sprinkled by the blood - Washed in the blood. Its all good.
Don't you think so?
I found it interesting when you brought up "sprinkled" verses "washed" in the blood.
The main thing is that it is the redeeming blood of Christ that does the work. It would be vain to debate that washing is better or sprinkling is better or cleansing is better.
As long as it is Christ's efficacious redeeming work, it is all good.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
02 May 18
Originally posted by @sonshipNo, being "washed" in the blood is scriptural as I've been saying through this thread. If it is unscriptural, how can it be "all good"?
Sprinkled by the blood - Washed in the blood. Its all good.
Don't you think so?
I found it interesting when you brought up "sprinkled" verses "washed" in the blood.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
02 May 18
Originally posted by @sonshipStanding in a field with a crow on its head.
HUMOR ME !
Where's the strawman argument?
😞
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 May 18
1 edit
Originally posted by @divegeester
No, being "washed" in the blood is scriptural as I've been saying through this thread. If it is unscriptural, how can it be "all good"?
being "washed" in the blood is scriptural as I've been saying through this thread.
So you have changed your opinion?
You are saying differently from when you first objected to me using WASHED in the blood ?
As far as I recall the phrase “are you/you must be washed in the blood” is not in the bible.
What is in the bible is a description of robes being made white through the blood of the lamb (Rev 12: 10-11) and instructions to be washed in the word, (Ephesians 5:26)
Why am I noting this? Because I feel you have a propensity for what Rajk999 calls “church speak” and it is important to stick to what the word actually says. Sorry to be harsh.
The bible talks about being “washed in the word” because the word of god will cleanse us in a similar way to symbolic washing of baptism. But we are to die daily and only the blood of the lamb “sprinkled” (Ex 24 and Lev 1) plus importantly for this topic:
“In the same way, he sprinkled with blood the tabernacle and all the vessels used in worship.”
Hebrews 9:21
We are NOT washed in the blood, we are washed in the word, we are baptised in the spirit and the blood is sprinkled.
[My bolding]
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
02 May 18
Originally posted by @sonshipbeing "washed" in the blood is scriptural as I've been saying through this thread.
So you have changed your opinion?
You are saying differently from when you first objected to me using WASHED in the blood ?
As far as I recall the phrase “are you/you must be washed in the blood” is not in the bible.we are baptised in the spirit and the blood is sprinkled.
What is in the bible is ...[text shortened]... e word,
[My bolding][/b]No it’s “unscriptural”...
No change, just typos. I’m working off phone as am travelling.
Sorry for confusion.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
03 May 18
4 edits
Originally posted by @divegeesterSo why is Hebrews 9:14 scriptural about the sprinkling of the blood for the conscience but Revelation 7:14 unscriptural about washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb?
No it’s “unscriptural”...
No change, just typos. I’m working off phone as am travelling.
Sorry for confusion.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
03 May 18
Originally posted by @sonshipBecause Revelation is symbolic sonship. Seriously my friend how many times do I have to explain this to you.
So why is [b]Hebrews 9:14 scriptural about the sprinkling of the blood for the conscience but Revelation 7:14 unscriptural about washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb?[/b]
The dipping of robes in blood is symbolic, probably linked to Joesph’s coat being dipped in blood and the symbolism of that true story. And “dipping” is not washing, and “robes” are not people.
The sprinkling of blood was factual in the OT and and is described elsewhere as our hearts/conscience being sprinkled in Heb 10:22
As usual you are just too proud to admit when you are wrong old chap.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
03 May 18
Originally posted by @divegeester<<Sure, just post the scripture which says “we are washed in the blood.”>>
Sure, just post the scripture which says “we are washed in the blood.”
We are washed in the water and the word and the blood is sprinkled.
Your vanity gets the better of you every time doesn’t it.
“And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,”
(Revelation 1:5)
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
Originally posted by @sonshipI’d be interested to see if you are sticking to your beloved Recovery version...
So why is [b]Hebrews 9:14 scriptural about the sprinkling of the blood for the conscience but Revelation 7:14 unscriptural about washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb?[/b]