100% Decontamination, 100% Guaranteed

[Webers_Home]

.
● Heb 10:21-22 . . Since we have “a great priest over the house of God,” let
us approach with a sincere heart and in absolute trust, with our hearts
sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed in pure
water.

Sprinkling was a common ritual in the Old Testament-- sometimes with
water, sometimes with oil, and sometimes with blood --for example: Ex
29:16, Ex 29:21, Lev 14:7, Lev 14 16, and Num 8:7, et al.

Sprinkling typically serves to de-contaminate someone or some thing in
order to make it suitable for God's purposes. Well, in point of fact; none of
the Old Testament's sprinklings served to cleanse people's conscience once
and for all time. They had to keep bringing one sacrifice after another in a
perpetual stream of sacrifices because each sacrifice cleansed their
conscience just that one time instead of for all time.

● Heb 10:10-14 . . By this “will,” we have been consecrated through the
offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest stands daily at
his ministry, offering frequently those same sacrifices that can never take
away sins. But this one offered one sacrifice for sins, and took his seat
forever at the right hand of God; now he waits until his enemies are made
his footstool. For by one offering he has made perfect forever those who are
being consecrated.

So; then, what's the catch. Well, the catch is that in order to take advantage
of this one-time sanitation that the letter to Hebrews speaks of, Catholics
have to bypass their father confessors and go directly to Christ himself to
obtain it.

● Heb 4:14-16 . .Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has
passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our
confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize
with our weaknesses, but one who has similarly been tested in every way,
yet without sin. So let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive
mercy and to find grace for timely help.
_

 

[justbyfaith]

Eze 36:25, Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
Eze 36:26, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27, And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Here is a sprinkling in the Old Testament that provides for the new birth to take place as the result of it.

I suggest to you that rantizm in Jesus' Name is a valid form of entry into the kingdom.

The original word for sprinkle in the above passage is rantizo.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Water is not the proper fluid for decontaminating the conscience spoken of in
the 9th and 10th chapters of the letter to Hebrews. Not even close.
_

 

[justbyfaith]

.
Water is not the proper fluid for decontaminating the conscience spoken of in
the 9th and 10th chapters of the letter to Hebrews. Not even close.
_

I was not referring to what it says in Hebrews.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
It would be futile to bathe one's body in Jesus' blood. That kind of
decontamination would have no effect upon one's conscience as it's spoken
of by the OP because this is not a physical issue, it's a heart issue; i.e. the
core of one's being.

And besides, the purification of one's conscience as per the letter to Hebrews
is done by means of sprinkling rather than bathing. (Heb 10:22 cf. Heb
12:24)
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
The sprinkling of water in Ezekiel speaks of something very different than
the sprinkling of blood in the letter to Hebrews.

In addition, the sprinkling of water spoken of by Ezekiel is performed by
God; the Catholic Church's baptisms are performed by humans.

Just to be on the safe side: why not find a private spot and tell God, in your
own words, that you'd like to have the sprinkling of water spoken of in
Ezekiel, and also the sprinkling of blood spoken of in the letter to Hebrews?

"For if the blood of goats and bulls and the sprinkling of a heifer's ashes can
sanctify those who are defiled so that their flesh is cleansed, how much
more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit offered himself
unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works to worship
the living God." (Heb 9:13-14)

"The sprinkled blood that speaks more eloquently than that of Abel." (Heb
12:24)
_

 

[justbyfaith]

A person is being sprinkled by God (by proxy) if they are sprinkled by someone who is filled with the Holy Ghost.

There is also a unity between the water and the blood (1 John 5:8).

 

[Webers_Home]

.

A person is being sprinkled by God (by proxy) if they are sprinkled by
someone who is filled with the Holy Ghost.

Just to be on the safe side: why not find a private spot and tell God, in your
own words, that you'd like to have the sprinkling of water spoken of in
Ezekiel, and also the sprinkling of blood spoken of in the letter to Hebrews?
_

 

[justbyfaith]

I suppose that He is able to cleanse us from all our filthiness and from all our idols simply by hitting us with a drop of rain.

But I tend to think that Ezekiel 36:25-27 is testimony of baptismal regeneration via sprinkling baptism (rantizo).

 

[justbyfaith]

Eze 36:25, Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
Eze 36:26, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27, And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Here is a sprinkling in the Old Testament that provides for the new birth to take place as the result of it.

I suggest to you that rantizm in Jesus' Name is a valid form of entry into the kingdom.

The original word for sprinkle in the above passage is rantizo.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
● Heb 9:13-14 . . For if the blood of goats and bulls and the sprinkling of a
heifer’s ashes can sanctify those who are defiled so that their flesh is
cleansed, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal
spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from
dead works to worship the living God.

Basically; one's conscience is sort of like a moral compass, i.e. it provides
people with a sense of right, wrong, fairness, and justice. The conscience not
only provides people with some guidance in those areas, but it has the
rather annoying propensity to sit in judgment on its owner.

● Rom 2:14-15 . . For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do
instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to
themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts,
their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or
else defending themselves.

In it's current condition; the human conscience is unacceptable, and that's
because of its source. We have to go all the way back to the beginning for
that.

● Gen 3:5 . . God knows well that when you eat of [the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil] your eyes will be opened and you will be like
gods, who know good and evil.

Was the Serpent's prediction true? Yes; to a certain extent.

● Gen 3:22 . .Then the Lord God said: See! The man has become like one of
us, knowing good and evil!

In other words; the Serpent neglected to inform Eve that the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil has a side effect that alters people's conscience.
But is the alteration an acceptable substitute for the people's original
conscience; the one that came with them when they were created?

No, because now people are "like one of us" i.e. like supreme beings.

● Ps 82:6 . .I said: You are gods

Along with their ill-gotten supremacy as beings came their ill-gotten
supremacy in matters of right, wrong, fairness, and justice. In other words;
the current condition of the human conscience is unacceptable because it
was obtained by eating the fruit of a tree known to be unsuitable for human
consumption. As a result; the current condition of the human conscience is
diseased; hence the need to sprinkle it, so to speak, with Jesus' blood.

The sprinkling doesn't cure a human's diseased conscience. The sprinkling is
actually for God's sake, i.e. it makes the human sense of right, wrong,
fairness, and justice tolerable for God to endure whenever somebody
approaches Him in prayer and/or worship. I don't think many fully
appreciate that the human conscience is just as repulsive to God as a case of
full-blown leprosy is to us.

Anyway; In the Old Testament, it was necessary to sanitize the people's
conscience each and every time they approached God; which back then
meant either the Tabernacle or the Temple. But a sprinkling of Jesus' blood
is necessary only once, and it's adequate for all time.
_

 

[justbyfaith]

The sprinkling doesn't cure a human's diseased conscience.

I think that it does:

Heb 10:22, Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

1Ti 1:5, Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:

1Ti 1:19, Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:

1Ti 3:9, Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

Heb 13:18, Pray for us: for we trust we have a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly.

1Pe 3:16, Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.

These verses show that we can indeed have a good conscience from the Lord's perspective. As opposed to a diseased (evil) conscience.

 

[Webers_Home]

.

I think that it does

Regardless; be very, very certain that your conscience has been sprinkled
with Jesus' blood otherwise all your prayers and your worship will be pings
because Christians are instructed to approach God not in a Tabernacle or a
Temple down here, but in Heaven itself; which requires a sprinkling much
superior to the rituals that Aaron performed.
_

 

[justbyfaith]

Yes, the blood is applied when the water is applied.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Christ's followers retain a guilty conscience; else the passage below would
be unnecessary.

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in
us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins
and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we
make Him out to be a liar and His word has no place in our lives." (1 John
1:8-10)

It appears to me that Christ's followers have two consciences: there's the
conscience they obtained via their natural birth, and there's the conscience
they obtained via the Spirit birth about which Christ spoke at John 3:3-12.
The "born again" conscience i.e. the new man's conscience, is of course
totally free of guilt.

"No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him;
and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (1 John 3:9)

One morning in Sunday school class several years ago, a man asked our
speaker about the status of unconfessed sins? Do they follow us into the
afterlife?

Unfortunately the speaker ignored the man's question and continued with his
lesson plan. But later at home I pondered that man's inquiry because it
seemed to me something very important to think about.

Well; as it turns out, the old man and the new man don't share a common
conscience. By means of a mysterious procedure performed by the power of
God, the new man is its own person distinctly separate from the old man.

"In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands,
in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ" (Col
2:11)

So then, I think we can safely assume that when his followers' body of the
flesh passes away, their natural-born conscience passes away right along
with it, and they go into eternity with only their Spirit-born conscience,
which of course is not responsible for the old man's sins. Neato!
_

 

[bbyrd009]

ha, y'all just not comfortable with that Naive Dialectic dealy at all, huh.

 

[justbyfaith]

Those who are born again of the Holy Spirit do not retain a guilty conscience:

Heb 10:1, For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Heb 10:2, For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

Heb 1:3, Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Heb 10:14, For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

The blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins; but the blood of Jesus Christ certainly can: 1 John 3:5.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Internet forums have given many of Christ's obscure followers a convenient
venue for sharing their time-won knowledge and experience with a
worldwide audience. For the world's sake, I highly recommend making an
effort to compose legible posts; neatly arranged, sensible, and tidy.

Shouting with oversize bold letters, scribbly italics, lack of adequate
paragraphing, twitter spelling, unnecessary emogies, horrible grammar, and
a confusing mixture of fonts, sizes, and colors, makes for tiresome clutter
and annoying forum graffiti that leave a bad impression.

I rather suspect that some people regard forums as a canvas for painting
their comments instead of composing them. Well; that might be okay for
outsiders, they can be as messy as they want because it doesn't matter. But
for those of us who honestly believe ourselves to be representing God's son;
it's unacceptable.

● Phil 1:27 . . Conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of
Christ.

Some people's posts resemble the obnoxious placards of worked-up
protesters and political activists; yelling, shrieking, and sometimes even
spraying spittle like lunatics.

They are beyond reason and sensibility in their desperation to be take
seriously. Apparently they assume that if only they shout loud enough, and
make themselves annoying enough, maybe they'll get their point across and
somebody will finally listen.
_

 

[justbyfaith]

I make my letters larger for the sake of emphasis.

Accuse me all you want of misrepresenting Christ in doing so; I know that I am making the main point easier to find in the way that I normally post what I post.

I suppose that I could emphasize things in a different way; such as by putting certain things in color.

But I have developed this style over time and I think Galatians 1:10 does apply. I am not here to please men; but Christ.

I will go as far as to say that I believe He gave me the style that I now have in posting by direction of His Holy Spirit.

So your complaining is not going to change the way I post in a moment of time.

Something tells me you want me to post differently over the fact that I make my points more succinctly in the way that I do post.

I know that it can be frustrating for you to be defeated in your theology over the fact that your opponent emphasizes certain things so as to make his point abundantly clear.

If only we didn't make our posts that way, perhaps you might be able to make some headway in preaching things that you believe in; but are nevertheless contrary to scripture. Because our posts would be less clear and the main point of what we are trying to say would be lost in the middle; and you would be able to capitalize on that by making your points in such a way as to point away from what is now emphasized in our posts: thus you might be able to gain the victory over us by virtue of the fact that we failed to make sure that our points were brought to the main forefront of what is being spoken.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Some time ago I ran across an article in our local newspaper about a military
funeral that was disrupted by activists with bull horns screaming anti-war
slogans. They were all arrested for interfering with a lawful assembly and
disturbing the peace.

In court, the activists defended their behavior as free speech. The judge
agreed they had a right to free speech, but he instructed them that their
right to free speech does not grant them a right to be heard.

On another forum, some people tattled to management that I wasn't
responding to their posts. So management asked why. I told them, in so many
words, that I don't quarrel, I don't listen to loud mouths, and I don't accommodate
cry babies.
_