I gotta have my orange juice.

LinkedIn told me in 2012 that my LinkedIn Premium free trial offer expired soon. I was excited at the possibility, but alas, they did not keep their word, and I have received many more such offers over the years, including another one this week.

Last weekend I deplored Andy Stanley’s reopening decision and was waiting to hear The Summit’s plans. This week they announced they are also not meeting corporately for the rest of the year. Have we forgotten the very meaning of ekklesia?! Are we not the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven?! The falling–apart of all the big things is approaching faster than I expected; a year ago I put BigEva on a ten–year timetable. I had in mind creeping wokeness when I wrote that, not a doubling down (O Paul Tripp!), much less an anxious, managerial, focus–group–tested abandonment of ekklesia altogether. It’s blustery out there, but ordinary, small, boring, plodding, faithful churches know just how to minister fruitfully in a good wind like this, even if we have to reckon with sailing into it. At the same time, as more and more big things fall apart, we also need to be working on strengthening bonds between fellow local churches.

By contrast, John MacArthur takes an admirable stand.

John McLeod does an outstanding and stirring job summarizing the tithe. The main thing I want to add is that there is a connection between the tithe and the tribute offering, or minchah. We see this in that firstfruits could be in the form of a minchah (Leviticus 2, Numbers 28) and also since the twice–daily (Exodus 29, Numbers 28) and weekly (Leviticus 23, Numbers 28) minchah were probably formed from the tithes that Israel brought to God’s house. Tribute is an ordinary and necessary part of God’s order of worship. We might even gather from this regular service of bread an argument for weekly communion (see number 3), another confirmation that our tithing and feasting and worshipping are always ever so tightly coupled. This, taken together with Deuteronomy 16:16 and 1 Corinthians 16:2, is why I strive to bring a weekly tithe.

And of course you can see how the importance of keeping this, our good lord’s weekly throneroom–assembly–feast, informs my opinion about closing the church’s doors.

As Oliver O’Donovan pointed out in The Desire of the Nations, “we must look to the horizon of God’s redemptive purposes if we are to grasp the full meaning of political events that pass before our eyes.” On that horizon is the unification of all things in Christ (Eph. 1:9f.), a unity contradicted by all stoking of animosity and vengeance. But unity pursued without Christ is likewise a violation of God’s purposes. Before him alone, every knee shall bow.

Lessons about justice and human dignity that the Church presents to the world are only intelligible in light of the whole Christian message. Checking our theology at the door when we speak of matters of public significance—silencing the claim that Christ is King—may satisfy the segregational rules of liberalism, but then, O’Donovan warns, “the democratic ‘creed’, not the Gospel, becomes the heart of the church’s message to the state.” (Ken Myers, Mars Hill Audio summer fundraising letter)

“Courage, friends,” came Prince Rilian’s voice. “Whether we live or die Aslan will be our good lord.” (C. S. Lewis, The Silver Chair)

I’ve been working through Absalom’s conspiracy in 2 Samuel. There is some fascinating typology and biblical theology in here! I’ve previously mentioned that there are two obvious baptisms in this passage, including the baptism of little ones. It seems to me that John is consciously playing on this episode in his account of the crucifixion and resurrection. I am sure that I am barely scratching the surface here, but consider: (1) David and Jesus both cross the brook Kidron. (2) Caiaphas is a kind of Absalom, the son of the house usurping the master of the house. (3) Judas is a kind of Ahithophel–advisor to the priests, even to the point of hanging himself, and the ESV’s footnotes even acknowledge this similarity in Matthew. This episode does not occur in John, however, so it may be that Annas fills the shoes of Ahithophel in John’s account. (4) John enters Caiaphas’s house, so he could be a kind of Hushai in this account. Alternately, his and Peter’s entering Caiaphas’s house could mirror Jonathan and Ahimaaz spying for David. (5) Even the humorous episode of Ahimaaz outrunning the Cushite is reproduced in John’s outrunning Peter. There even is a possibility that, like Ahimaaz, John is of a priestly family. (6) Peter’s fishing expedition mirrors the elders of Judah crossing the Jordan to welcome David back. As above, this is a kind of baptism into David, into Jesus. (7) There are of course a few interesting reversals or twists. Absalom violates ten of David’s concubines and David withdrew from them. Jesus’s disciples are scattered at his crucifixion, and John 20:19ff allows for a reading where Jesus visits ten of them (if you assume it is the twelve minus Judas and minus Thomas as we later learn). (8) In a sense, the fact that Caiaphas and Annas live while Jesus dies is the opposite of David’s account. However, in reality, in his resurrection Jesus enters into transfigured life, into the new creation, his kingdom; and Caiaphas and Annas are excluded from all this.

Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. (Hebrews 13:13 ESV)

I’m also fascinated by Chimham. From Jeremiah 41 we learn that David’s gift to him may have been an inn. Is this by any chance the place at which, but not in which, Jesus was born?