By now you probably have the Offertory essay. Any discussion? I received one question asking this: “If Jesus is the bloody firmament that protects all on the earth, how can the magistrate have the right to exercise the death penalty? Isn’t the criminal protected?”
My answer, part 1: The same is true in the Old Covenant, for the blood of the Day of Coverings covered the firmament temporarily.
My answer, part 2: God has given to the more mature human race (after the Flood) the right/duty to remove from the earth and sent up to Him certain kinds of criminals. These people are removed from the protection of the bloody firmament, and they had better be In Christ, not merely Under Christ, at the time of their death, else they will lose all grace.
Dr. Jordan,
Isn’t it true that your preference for where the offertory is to take place in the liturgy is actually just reflective of what the vast majority of the older Western liturgies evolved into (i.e. the old Mass) after the first centuries of the Church’s practice? Your assertion (and that of Jeffrey Meyers) regarding the sacrificial nature of the worship of the Church and the corresponding support/model for it in certain reads of the Old Testament really doesn’t have wide support in and among the Fathers or the Reformers, does it? How do you avoid the charge of reading these passages and applying them to worship with no lack of hermeneutical prejudice?
Isn’t it likely that the preference for the Offertory to be where it is in most Western liturgies has to do with the practice of the early Church and the evolution of such an offering to bring forward the materials used in communion and then later doled out to those in need? In other words, can we really say that overall the Church has looked to Leviticus and other places for the theological basis for the offering or is it something born out of practical New Testament and early Church usage?
Also, there is some support for a box to placed in the back of the church since this is common Jewish synagogual practice.
Kevin, I’ll just have to refer you to Jeff Meyers’s book for evidence that the sacrificial order has long been recognized as useful for liturgical construction.
I agree that offertory before communion is practical in terms of bringing forward the bread. The function of the Tribute between Ascension and Peace also points to this. As for how and whether and to what extent the early Church was looking at Leviticus, I don’t know. Rushdoony had some information on this in Institutes Vol. 1.
I think you’re probably right about the Reformers. As I said in the essay, the Reformers drew up liturgies out of their systematics, liturgies that were all about sin and justification, and not about union with Christ. My paper was a critique of this approach.
Dr. Jordan,
Should the phrase “under the law” in Romans and other places be understood in a contrastive way to “under Christ?” Was the law the firmament boundary before Christ?
Kelly Kerr
Makes sense to me, at least for part of the meaning.
“Was the law the firmament boundary before Christ?”
Here’s an idea I would like to throw on the table: Was the missing ark of Moses the Restoration firmament?
Ezekiel described Judah’s false walls/firmament in his destruction of Solomon’s temple. It would fall like hail, and even the veils of the women would be torn away. The ark was taken to Babylon and never returned.
Zechariah saw two arks at the “Atonement” step of his visions (twin visions in ch. 5, [Feast 6]). The ark of Moses “ascended” as the first goat at the destruction of Solomon’s temple, and Zechariah saw it as an open scroll (its dimensions match the combined dimensions of the ark and cherubim in Solomon’s temple). He saw it as a scroll because he was only a chief priest. This ark/scroll, as a new firmament, spoke the liberating curses over the synagogues (houses) of a restored Israel. The second goat was the round basket (false ark) that was sent to the “wilderness” of Shinar carrying Israel’s idolatry.
Jesus, as Israel (in Eve’s place), ate this scroll, drank this cup of testing, absorbed the curses, and turned them into blessing. He was given a New scroll and opened its seals. As a new Adam he warned Eve. Israel, with a second chance, drank this New scroll, and was divided in two by Solomon’s wisdom (true mother and false mother).
The false Jews thought they were still protected under the old firmament/ark but had removed themselves from its protection by siding with the Babylon basket. With the massacre of Christians, it passed away, rolled up like a scroll. Their old crystal sea fell as hail.
The “ascended” ark of Moses was seen again in Revelation, still in operation, “following” the saints’ trumpets (around the city, in a sense). The new Jewish saints became Jerusalem’s wall of fire until they too ascended, leaving Sodom with no protection from the curses of Moses.
The Mosaic ark/firmament was replaced by the Christus totus, head and body, Jesus and saints, after their slaughter – a heavenly country permanently purified at its four corners by blood, a new crystal sea shaped like the walls of a city.
This confuses the ark and the laver a bit, though.
Bit off topic, too. Sorry.
Regarding the offering, it should be at Step 5 – Trumpets, with much more than Leviticus for proof. Throughout the Bible this is the step concerning riches and plunder. It’s the step where Adam seized the fruit; Noah received the animals; Abram plundered Pharaoh; defeated the kings; recovered a well; Moses repeated the Law to a “resurrected” Israel; Naomi returned to the House of Bread; the Ark returned with Philistine gold; David plundered the Philistines after killing Goliath; David plundered the Amalekites; David repented and retained his throne; Solomon’s government was established; the temple furniture was built; Manasseh built the outer wall; Jeroboam’s altar was defiled; the kings of Tarshish and Sheba render tribute and gifts (Ps 72); Ezekiel saw the armies of Israel resurrected; Daniel and friends were given gifts of wisdom and interpretation after testing; Nebuchadnezzar offered incense; Daniel was clothed in purple and given a chain of gold; Darius decreed the rebuilding of the Temple; Nehemiah finished the walls and the exiles’ gifts were numbered; Zechariah saw the Lampstand of abundance; the tents of Judah would be glorified; the saints would be refined as silver and gold; the silver and gold of the saints would be collected after Judah fought against Jerusalem; the name was inscribed on the warhorses’ bells; Esther went in to the king; Esther put on her robes and approached the king unbidden; Mordecai was robed in purple and linen. It is also Day 5 of Creation. Using images of birds, lilies and grass, and Solomon’s robe, Jesus said the saints would plunder the riches of the world if they put the kingdom first. (The Pharisees’ 5th woe was to be whitewashed graves – an unresurrected army).
Also at step 5, Jesus said, “You will always have the poor with you, but you will not always have Me,” He handed out bread and wine before sending Judas (2nd goat) to destruction; His robe was NOT divided; the elders bribed the soldiers; the Jews sold their lands; the Antioch saints sent their relief to Judea; foreign Gods were “plundered” in Ephesus; the Maltese filled Paul’s ship with supplies; Christ’s feet were like burnished bronze; He would come like a thief to Sardis; He counselled Laodicea to buy refined gold; the heavenly Levites threw their crowns at Jesus’ feet; the persecutors gave gifts to one another after slaughtering the saints; the saints were rewarded (within Trumpet 7)…
…all these at Step 5/Trumpets/Incense in their various contexts.
The Word/Pentecost should precede the offering (Step 4), and Atonement/Communion (Step 6) should follow. Then the water chariots ride out to baptize the world (7).
Our Baptist church follows this order (mostly) without even knowing why.
Jim,
I’m in agreement with your position on the offering/offertory in the service, but was wondering how you might address those who take their offertory position based on Mark 12:41? I suspect that in some churches that’s the model for having an offering plate or box situated somewhere just outside or inside the sanctuary door.
Thanks,
Joe
#5. I’m off to Russia, Mike, and I just can’t take the time to wrestle with all that right now. I’m very sorry, because it looks interesting.
#6. Joe, yes, I’m sure you’re right. And if there is no Offertory in the liturgy, I guess that’s as good an idea as any. But now that we are in the heavenlies and no longer at a distance, we can bring our gifts all the way to the throne, and follow the Biblical pattern of doing so. That is, we Ascend with Tribute and then enjoy Communion. We no longer have a treasury box at a distance. Make sense?
No worries. I shouldn’t post after a strong coffee. Safe trip!
Re: K. Johnson’s question.
It’s a good question. It’s something that I’ve researched a bit.
There are two published papers you should look at:
LEITHART, Peter J. “Synagogue or temple? Models for the christian worship.” Westminster Theological Journal 64 no. 11 (2002): 119-133.
Collins, C. John. Westminster Theological Journal 66 no. 1 (2004): 1-23, 23.
In addition, I have recently written a paper which argues that evidence for this can be found in the Didache.
Tim
The post engenders these more or less tentative observations:
Following Romans 5, no one can be out of Christ anymore than they can be out of Adam. Therefore the under/in distinction does not obtain.
To say that a man, a creature of a faithful Creator, can “lose all grace” is a bit of an oxymoron. What would prompt a loss of all grace? Sin? But Paul assures us God’s grace is greater than sin.
The death penalty is authorized partly on the principle that all blood must eventually be mingled with the sacrifice of Christ. Note that not only the believing thief was “crucified with Christ” but also the unbelieving. The difference was that one mingled his blood with Christ’s sacrifice willingly, the other unwillingly. The unbelieving thief was cut off in the flesh that his spirit, eventually reaping the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice, might ultimately be saved.