Then Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and blessed them, and he came down from offering the sin offering and the burnt offering and the peace offerings. And Moses and Aaron went into the tent of meeting, and when they came out they blessed the people, and the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people.

(Leviticus 9.22-23)

It’s easy to remember that Moses’ brother Aaron was Israel’s first high priest, in charge of the sacrifices in the tabernacle. What’s harder to recall, or even understand in the first place, is that both the priests and the nation as a whole were responsible for a variety of different types of sacrifice, with distinct purposes. The first seven chapters of Leviticus present five major offerings.

Burnt Offering

When you think of an Old Testament sacrifice, this generic sacrifice is probably what comes to mind. It could be taken from the cattle, sheep, or goats. After selecting “a male without blemish” (Le 1.3) the Israelite was to bring his offering into the courtyard of the tabernacle, “lay his hand on the head” of the animal (v4), and then “kill it” (v11). Priests were to collect the animal’s blood and splash it against the sides of the altar, while the offerer processed the carcass for burning.

There’s a set of alternative rules for birds, but with the same result: “a food offering with a pleasing aroma to the Lord” (v17). In the case of stock animals, the hide was to go to the officiating priest (7.8), but the rest of the animal was to be burned up on the altar. This type of sacrifice was done daily and at feasts on behalf of the nation, but individuals could also bring burnt offerings of their own free will, or to pay vows.

Grain Offering

This is likewise called “a food offering to the Lord” (Le 2.16), but consists of the produce of the ground, rather than an animal. That’s not the only difference, though. This one typically accompanied a burnt offering (cf. Nu 28.31) or a peace offering (cf. Nu 6.17), and served to supplement that animal sacrifice. It could be offered in the form of flour, or as baked, unleavened loaves. Unlike the burnt offering, only a small portion—“a handful” (Le 6.15)—was to be burned on the altar. The rest was given to the priests, to eat (v16).

Peace Offering

This one starts out much like the burnt offering, except that the animal could be “male or female” (Le 3.1). The blood was to be drained and splashed as before (v2), and a few select portions burned on the altar. What to do with the rest of the meat?

And the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten on the day of his offering. He shall not leave any of it until the morning.

(Leviticus 7.15)

“His” and “he” in this verse both refer to the one who brought the offering. He is to make sure it’s all eaten by the next morning! Now, imagine an Israelite who brings “an animal from the herd” (3.1)—a cow—and you’ll see a problem! Clearly he is not expected to eat all that meat alone. A portion is allotted to the priests (vv31-32), but it’s the offerer’s job to make sure the rest is eaten or destroyed! The rule said the remainder of the meat must “be eaten”; it did not say by whom! This fosters generosity and sharing in a communal meal.

Sin Offering

The section on sin offerings is more than three times the length of any other. As the name suggests, this offering was intended to atone for sin. There are specific regulations for sin offerings made by priests, the whole nation, a leader, and a common person, for the last two of whom affordable alternatives to a bull are permitted. Their offerings were performed entirely in the courtyard, around the altar of burnt offering; but those of the nation and of priests were accomplished partly within the tabernacle itself, using the altar of incense (Le 4.7 & 16). The meat from the common people’s and leaders’ sin offerings could be eaten by “every male among the priests” (6.29), but the meat from the offerings of priests and the nation as a whole was to be taken “outside the camp to a clean place” and “burned up” (4.12).

Guilt Offering

This offering is basically an extension of the sin offering, when tangible damage was done, requiring “restitution” (Le 5.16). Divided into subsections on “the holy things of the Lord” (v15), harm done in ignorance (cf. v17), and loss inflicted on a “neighbor” (6.2), this offering consisted of the actual monetary amount plus one-fifth in damages (5.16), as well as “a ram without blemish out of the flock, or its equivalent” in money (6.6). The meat from the animal was to be treated “just like the sin offering,” given to the “priest who makes atonement with it” (7.7).

§

This is the law of the burnt offering, of the grain offering, of the sin offering, of the guilt offering, of the ordination offering, and of the peace offering, which the Lord commanded Moses on Mount Sinai, on the day that he commanded the people of Israel to bring their offerings to the Lord, in the wilderness of Sinai.

(Leviticus 7.37-38)

We don’t live under the same scheme of ritual sacrifice, so we tend to lump them all together. But the differences show us that there was a great variety of ways to render service to God. This is still true today.

Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.

(Romans 12.6-8)

Jeremy Nettles

I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet saying, “Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.”

(Revelation 1.10-13)

The Apostle John was given this commission by Jesus, and the resulting book has become the most difficult and contentious book in the Bible. But its beginning is straightforward, and contains valuable lessons for us.

Ephesus

Years before, Paul told the Ephesian elders,

“I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things…”

(Acts 20.29-30)

They took the warning to heart! Jesus now tells them, “you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested” and found out the false teachers (Re 1.2). This is a great success story! But at what cost? “I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first” (v4). Don’t ignore one of God’s commandments, to idolize another.

Smyrna

This church stands out as one of two on this list to encounter no rebuke. They’d suffered much earthly tribulation already, between the pagan surroundings and the local Jews, whose hatred of Christ and his followers made them “a synagogue of Satan” (Re 2.9). Jesus was pleased with their faithfulness, but warned them, trials were about to get worse. His instruction is as straightforward as it is timeless: “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” (v10).

Pergamum

The Lord was pleased, overall, with the Christians at Pergamum. He praised them because they “did not deny my faith even in the days of Antipas,” a martyr (Re 2.13). Yet he had complaints. Some in this church subscribed to “the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel” (v14a). It’s not obvious what this teaching was, but in light of its association to idolatry and fornication (v14b), as well as the incident mentioned (cf. Nu 3.16), it seems to have involved a perverse notion that Christ endorsed sexual depravity. While pleased his name is preached, Jesus does not want it tied with this behavior! He tells the church, “Therefore repent” (v16).

Thyatira

The story here is very similar to that in the previous section. This should be no surprise, since Thyatira is only thirty or so miles from Pergamum. While ascribed to another Old Testament figure, “Jezebel” (Re 2.20), rather than Balaam, the heresy at Thyatira is effectively identical. Jesus tells those who haven’t been seduced to “hold fast what you have until I come” (v25) and tells those led astray that temporal punishment is swiftly approaching, “unless they repent” (v21). This should remind us that the same, tired, old heresies can be repackaged to appear fresh, unique, and enticing. Don’t be fooled!

Sardis

“I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God.”

(Revelation 3.1-2)

This city was situated on steep cliffs and considered the best fortified in the ancient world; indeed, it was only occasionally conquered. In two instances, both several centuries before John wrote Revelation, it had fallen due to complacency among the rank and file. Of these, the more compelling story took place in 547 BC, when Cyrus the Great took the city easily. A soldier inside the citadel accidentally dropped his helmet over the wall and then climbed down the wall and cliff to retrieve it, not realizing he was seen by the Persian forces to whom he unwittingly betrayed the surprisingly easy and ill-guarded back way into the city. Jesus’ point is that the city’s Christians are showing a similar lack of awareness and need to keep a better watch on their own souls! Many today need to hear this same admonition.

Philedelphia

“Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth.”

(Revelation 3.10)

Despite what we might have thought, Jesus is not just looking for something to nitpick about each of these churches. Surely he could have come up with some shortcomings of the Christians at Philadelphia; but he’s not out to get us! Although “we all stumble in many ways” (Ja 3.2), it is within our grasp to be faithful to Christ and receive his blessing.

Laodicea

The last church on the list gets the harshest rebuke. Even “dead” Sardis wasn’t told, like Laodicea, “I will spit you out of my mouth” (Re 3.16). The problem in this church wasn’t so much complacency, as arrogance! Despite lacking any true zeal for the Lord, their attitude was, “I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing” (v17). How wrong they were! If we forget how badly we still need Jesus, we make ourselves repulsive to him.

§

These messages vary greatly, depending on each church’s situation and deeds. In broad terms, we all need to hear the same gospel; but its particular application differs, as we’ve seen. If Jesus were to send a letter to your church, what do you think he would say? Therefore, what should you be busy doing?

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

(Revelation 2.7, 11, 17, 29; 3.6, 13, 22)

Jeremy Nettles

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

(1 Timothy 5.20-21, KJV)

Even in childhood I loved science, so it was alarming to find God condemning it. It didn’t help that I only read from the King James Version, and foolishly thought other versions like the New American Standard, New International, or even the New King James, were dumbed down Bibles for people too stupid to understand the real word of God. I grew up and realized how ridiculous that was, and was relieved to reconcile science with faith through better translations such as, “contradictions of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’” (v20). That’s it, the problem isn’t science! The problem is when people think they know something, but really don’t.

This was further explained by the etymology of science, which comes from the Latin scio, meaning “I know.” But later still, I realized that—although for woefully wrong reasons—my childish interpretation of this passage hadn’t been all that far off the mark.

Take, for example, the recent history of teaching kids how to read. The traditional method was to sound out words, one letter at a time; but in the 80s and 90s it was widely replaced with a new style, “cueing.” We can decipher all sorts of nonsense, as long as we have sufficient contextual cues.

Do yuo uednratnsd tihs snetecne?

You probably didn’t have much trouble with it. As long as the first letter is in the right place (and ideally the last one), you can guess what jumbled words are supposed to say pretty well. I’d heard of kids reading this way, and thought it was just laziness—a failure to apply the lessons given by teachers. But no, cueing was the accepted institutional method to teach reading, for the last several decades! I don’t remember being subjected to this drivel myself, but my mother had taught me to read before I entered kindergarten, so I daydreamed (or read) through those lessons.

Yet I’ve also heard of several peers who reached 3^rd or 4^th grade, at which point their parents had to re-teach them how to read, one letter at a time, because this newfangled curriculum was so terrible. How did this happen? Well, a language scientist named Ken Goodman formulated a theory based on his research, and other scientists like Marie Clay and Lucy Calkins developed curricula based on that theory and their own related research. These scientists had concluded that cueing was a better way to teach reading. Despite every tradition reaching back to the invention of writing around 3,000 BC, modern science had found a better way!

Of course, literacy plummeted. I could bore you with statistics, but for a more visceral demonstration, read a children’s book from the mid-20th century or before—say, C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia, Orwell’s Animal Farm, R.L. Stevenson’s Treasure Island, or Kipling’s Jungle Book. All of these were aimed at upper grade school aged children, and you’ll probably find them more difficult than most adult-oriented literature produced in the past twenty years. It’s not just outdated diction. The vocabulary was larger, the sentences longer and more complex.

Eventually people started noticing this. Other scientists tried to raise the alarm, but nothing happened, until covid lockdowns put parents in the same room as their kids during Zoom school. Parents were shocked, and raised a fuss, finally creating enough momentum to legislate this trash out of most classrooms. A more scientific approach is becoming more common. What is that more scientific approach? It’s the same one people used ever since the invention of writing, until science messed everything up in the first place.

What’s the point of this little story? Simply that a generation of scientists rejected the wisdom of their forebears, and made a rotten mess of the very thing they promised to fix. Parents—representatives of tradition—saw what was going on, and exercised common sense to diagnose the problem and fix it; and then it was proclaimed that science had won out over ignorance! How absurd! Real science and knowledge are wonderful! But many people have rejected God, and pledged their devotion to science instead. By its very nature, science is a process of trial and error, slowly uncovering the truth; yet whatever new ideas scientists proclaim are immediately accepted by those who have set up science as an idol to replace God. Scientists blunder, and in time are corrected; in the meantime,  great mobs are led into folly. Often these idolaters will mock those who disagree, calling them stupid. When the science comes back around to proclaim what the holdouts always knew, the idolaters still  mock them for not having previously believed what they themselves now acknowledge to be false—if science itself was wrong, why should I be embarrassed to have been likewise mistaken?

These idolaters worship a god that can contradict itself with impunity and fail repeatedly without losing its worshipers’ trust. It deserves the same contempt Elijah had for Ba’al and his worshipers.

“Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.”

(1 Kings 18.27)

Knowledge is wonderful, and science has its place; but they are tools to be wielded, not gods to be worshipped. Worship the Lord,

who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, who keeps faith forever…

(Psalm 146.6)

Jeremy Nettles

In last week’s article, we examined a trend common among God’s people, in which they find themselves at times without a tribe, standing alone with both sides of a dispute attacking or heaping scorn upon them. This uncomfortable situation is part of God’s plan, as Jesus said to his brothers, “The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil” (Jn 7.7). In fact, Jesus is the touchstone example of this trend. The Judean Jews looked down on those from Galilee and the Galileans resented it; but they were united in rejecting Jesus! The Pharisees and Sadducees disagreed religiously and politically, and despised each other; but they were united to get rid of Jesus! The Jews and Romans hated each other; but they were united to kill Jesus!

This was symbolized neatly in Jesus’ crucifixion, when he was suspended between earth and heaven, out of place in either. He was out of place on earth, because he was truly righteous, despite enduring the same temptation “common to man” (1Co 10.13). He was out of place in heaven, because he had “emptied himself” and become human (Php 2.7). He had to finish his task on earth and be reborn from the grave, so to speak, in a “glorious body” (Php 3.21), before ascending back to his Father’s throne, “crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death” (He 2.9). As we observed last week, Jesus had predicted this very thing—as well as its dual nature, at once honoring and scorning him—in his nocturnal discussion with timid Nicodemus. Jesus referred to the incident recorded in Numbers 21 in which the Israelites grumbled against God in the wilderness and were punished by a plague of venomous snakes. Afterward God directed Moses to give them an emblem, suspended on a pole, to look upon in faith and be healed. The similarity to Jesus’ crucifixion is obvious,  but there’s another, more subtle, Old Testament reference embedded in this prediction from Jesus.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

(John 3.14-15)

Note the repetition of the phrase, “lifted up.” This doesn’t appear to be distinctive from the outset—it’s a common phrase. Forms of the Greek word, ὑψόω-hupsŏō, show up eighteen times in the New Testament, and nearly two hundred in the Greek Old Testament! But when we examine them, a clearer picture appears. Of the New Testament uses, nearly all of them refer to lifting up eyes or hands, or else make a promise or observation about the lowly being exalted. Only seven times does it refer directly to Jesus. Two of those are in successive versions of the same sermon by Peter in the book of Acts (2.33 & 5.31); the other five are all in John’s Gospel.

But could it be referring to a specific Old Testament passage, when the word in question is so commonly found there? It would be tedious to examine each case, but suffice to say, several of its uses, especially in the Psalms, could be construed as at least vaguely Messianic; but only one is blatantly obvious.

Behold, my servant shall act wisely;

he shall be high and lifted up,

and shall be exalted.

(Isaiah 52.13)

Jesus also spoke of this to the religious leaders in Jerusalem, who were already scheming to get rid of him (cf. Jn 7.32, 45-52). He said they did not know God (8.19), that they were “from below” (v23), and that they would die in their sins (vv21 & 24). Then he told them,

“When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he…”

(John 8.28)

He’s not talking about glorification. He means his upcoming crucifixion. Crucifixion was a horrible way to die, and part of the misery came from becoming a public spectacle of shame and death. Prior to being affixed to the cross, the victim was generally flogged within an inch of his life, so that his body was practically destroyed, even before he was stripped naked, stretched out on the cross, and lifted up for all to see. Back in Isaiah, right after saying his servant would be lifted up and exalted, God added,

his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance,

and his form beyond that of the children of mankind…

(Isaiah 52.14)

These two ways of being lifted up stand in stark contrast, and emphasize the point about being stuck in the middle, as we discussed last week. But Jesus said one more thing about his being “lifted up.”

“Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

(John 12.31-33)

Perhaps we no longer needed John’s interpretive note; and Jesus’ audience on this occasion likewise understood what he meant (cf. v24). But what about the rest of what he said? This is bigger than the nation of Israel, involving “all people”! Once again, that brings us back to the next lines from Isaiah.

…so shall he sprinkle many nations.

Kings shall shut their mouths because of him,

for that which has not been told them they see,

and that which they have not heard they understand.

(Isaiah 52.15)

This was always God’s plan—to send his Son into the world, to be lifted up by all men. You must choose whether to lift him up as an object of derision and contempt, or one of admiration and hope for life.

Jeremy Nettles

But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

And when he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples. And they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple.

(Acts 9.22-26)

When the Apostle Paul became a Christian, it required him to leave the comforts he had previously enjoyed. He had felt at home in the company of zealous colleagues who applauded his ruthless misapplication of the Law of Moses in dealing with the growing number of Christians. From a fleshly point of view, life was good, and the future was bright. Yet, after Paul was confronted by Jesus and surrendered his life to serve the Lord, his old friends turned against him and began to plot his murder, as they had plotted Jesus’ before. Yet, while Paul was ready to show love for his fellow Christians, most of them refused, at first, to accept him as a brother. There he stood, stuck in the middle.

When the gospel spread to gentiles, Jewish Christians struggled to accept that the church was no longer entirely Jewish. Hardliners insisted, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses” (Ac 15.5)—that one must be a Jew, to be a Christian. Meanwhile, the new converts’ gentile friends were no longer friendly. The “unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers” (14.2), until they were ready “to mistreat them and to stone” the messengers (v5). Jews and gentiles agreed on very little. The main reason recorded in extra-biblical sources for gentile persecution of Christians is that they were—as their former friends saw it—acting Jewish. Meanwhile, Jews despised gentiles, and resented those who—as they saw it—twisted the Scriptures to make Jesus into a false Messiah. New gentile converts were in a maddening position! Jews, Jewish Christians, and pagan gentiles could only agree on one thing, and that was malice toward gentile Christians. And there they stood, stuck in the middle.

Of course, Jesus had been through all of this, before. He blazed the trail! For example, after Judas betrayed him to the authorities, the priests, Pharisees, Roman governor Pilate, and king Herod played hot potato with Jesus through a long and miserable night. The only thing they could agree on was that Jesus would be killed, but no one wanted to take sole responsibility for it. In one instance that encapsulates the whole, Pilate tried to dump the problem of Jesus in Herod’s lap.

And Herod with his soldiers treated him with contempt and mocked him. Then, arraying him in splendid clothing, he sent him back to Pilate. And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other.

(Luke 23.11-12)

These individuals and groups usually spent their time wrestling with the others for power, often openly hostile toward each other. There Jesus stood, stuck in the middle.

This should not surprise us. In Luke’s Beatitudes, Jesus taught about this, saying,

“Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets.

(Luke 6.22-23)

Then, in the Woes that follow, he said,

Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.

(Luke 6.26)

It’s not that being universally hated is evidence of your righteousness; you could  more easily secure such hatred by doing evil to everyone, and Jesus gives us the opposite instruction! But he says it’s a blessing when you are hated “on account of the Son of Man!” In that case, they only hate you, because they hate Jesus. It’s also not as if you should be suspicious of anyone, purely on the grounds that too many people have good things to say about them. Consider Dorcas, who won glowing testimony from everyone present (Ac 9.29-40). This was not evidence of something insidious in her. But at the same time, you can be sure that someone not present on that occasion had bad things to say about Dorcas, because “everyone who does wicked things hates the light” (Jn 3.20).

If you follow Christ, you should expect to occasionally find yourself stuck in the middle, badly treated both by enemies and by those who should be friends. Don’t be surprised at this. Christians should not feel completely at home in this world, because “our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Php 3.20). Jesus provides for us the paramount image of one stuck in the middle. He had said, “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up” (Jn 3.14). This referred to his crucifixion. He was made an emblem of shame and misery—but also a spectacle to be sought in faith, leading to healing. He was suspended between the earth and heaven, not fully at home in either place. At the same time, while evil men thrust him upward in a gesture of defiance to God, Jesus found himself, symbolically, between his heavenly Father and the creatures who deserved his wrath. He was in the most uncomfortable position possible, and yet it was exactly where he needed to be—stuck in the middle. Follow him, even there.

Jeremy Nettles