It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

"Under the blood" is a phrase some people use to explain what they believe happens to our sins when we confess them, and ask Jesus to forgive us for them. They believe those sins are hidden "under the blood" that Jesus bled at Mt. Calvary.

I struggle with the phrase because I don't believe our sins are "under the blood" so much as they are washed in the blood. There is a huge difference between a covering and a cleansing. The work that Jesus did on the cross goes far beyond a blood covering. His work was so perfect that anyone who calls on Him in faith & repentance experiences a complete washing away of sins - forever.

Peter claimed that removal of sin could not come without repentance (Acts 2:38). This means that sin can not be ignored, overlooked or tolerated. In fact, there is only one thing to do with sin. Repent.

To repent means to turn around. Top stop sinning. To express sorrow for wrong actions.

With that in mind, we should remember that unrepentant sinners stand in grave danger of the judgment of God. Their sins are neither covered nor washed. I am not required to forgive an offense that God Himself has not forgiven, and neither are you. There can be no reconciliation until contrition is evident.

We are all sinners. We all need mercy and forgiveness. But forgiveness is not available to those who refuse to acknowledge they need it.

It may be politically incorrect to say so, but some things are not "under the blood."

Re: It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

you know what i like... there is one thing God cant remember. Infact Its like amnesia.

You has no clue what your sins are once you have repented. There cast as far as the east to the west is. There Gone..

I have heard the phrase many times. Its under the Blood.. no... its not even hiding under there .. its Gone

problem is we remember :depressed

Re: It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

Hebrews 1:3, Who being in 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[ cleansed] our sins, sat down on the right hand of majesty on high.
Hebrews 9:12, Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in ONCE into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption for us.
Verse 25, Nor yet that he should offer himself often as the high priest entered into the holy place every year with blood of others.
Verse 26, For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world, but NOW ONCE in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

In the OT the blood of goats and calves only covered the Hebrew peoples sin and rolled them back that the penalty of their sin would not come up them. They had no cleansing of sin.
So that old term , under the blood is a habit of saying and not a reality of truth.
Even though I know what they mean it should be corrected and put in proper tense. Tell the devil " The blood of Jesus has cleansed me from all sin. And the righteousness that I now have is the righteousness of Jesus.
I no longer am a sinner saved by grace, I'm a saint because he has sanctified me, justified me, and declared me righteous through his blood. I have within me a new nature, one created after him and I no longer practice sin as a habit. But in all things acknowledge him in whom I have to do.

Re: It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

woo hoo
:woohoo:woohoo


:shockamoo:shockamoo:shockamoo:shockamoo:shockamoo

Re: It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

When people say UNDER THE BLOOD they actually means the same thing as washed away by the blood. It's just a manner of speaking. I am sure they would agree that the point is in whatever case that the sins are GONE and we will not be judged for them.

Re: It's Not "Under the Blood."
 

It is a conditional pardon. Jesus teaches such in the parable of the King and the unforgiving servant.

I agree

I agree

correct within certain context.

It is neither available without true repentance as you said above. Knowledge and then proper response to such knowledge is that natural law of sequential response.

I would agree the usage is very poor and clearly is what I would consider a vague term that people will and do abuse.