'Altars' in 'Christian' churches

[Asyncritus]

"Ad deum qui laetificat juventutem meam."

"I go to the altar of God, who gives joy to my youth."

Hey B

I don't see any evolution here? Shall I start a rumble? :D

 

[Asyncritus]

Handy

You're not listening to me.

As I said before, I do not knock the doing of good to all men, by whomsoever.

That is missing my point altogether.

It remains unbelievable to me that a church with zillions can still ask its parishioners to stump up the money to repair the church building. What's the odd million here and there?

If an individual believer is commanded to lay up treasures in heaven, then how much more must a church - composed of such individuals - heed that commandment?

 

[stovebolts]

Under the New Covenant, we have a table, not an altar. The Lord's Table. The sacrifice of Christ is once for all. But we still need to experience that sacrifice. Through our participation in the Lord's Table, we experience the once for all sacrifice of Jesus Christ on our behalf. And according to John 6 it is as necessary an experience as is Baptism, water and Spirit. But not a physical experience requiring an altar. Rather a Spiritual experience through the Spirit of God (John 6:63). The only physical aspect of the New Covenant experience is the bread and the wine. The ritual is more than symbolic as many Protestants believe. It is a window for our faith in God and our experience of the sacrifice of Christ.

The intention is that all who are in Christ experience this Table together as one. I’m not referring to together physically in one place as if we are all to gather in one large meeting hall in a central location, as the Jews did when they gathered in Jerusalem at specified times to worship in the Tabernacle/Temple. I’m referring to the oneness in the Spirit of God as explained by Paul in Eph 4.

Unfortunately, due to the influence of a man-made religion on those who are in Christ, the unity is not what it’s supposed to be. Not that the unity described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 10 is impossible, because of their adherence to a Christian denomination. Unity is intended to be Spiritual. While a right understanding of the teaching of Christ is the goal, it was never intended to be emphasized over the Spiritual unity of all who are in Christ, as it is in Christianity. Certainly not equated one with the other as it is in some denominations. Especially since doctrinal unity in Christianity is unity in denominational interpretations that imposes closed communion on those who disagree with the unity of the denomination.

People find it odd when they come into our church for corporate worship and do not see an Altar, nor a cross. But they do see a table.

BTW, we share the exact same sentiments in what you have so clearly articulated above only to add that it's a crying shame to know that something which was put forth to unite us, has caused great division. Thanks Brother.

 

[stovebolts]

Free

I am not against having wealth - Abraham was a classic example.

I am against this hoarding of vast amounts of wealth by 'Christian organisations' while the poor starve in their millions. How can anyone behold this travesty and be unmoved by it?

Just what are they doing with it all? What is the object if all this wealth accumulation?

Is the following some kind of a joke?

​

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/catholic-hypocrisy

I actually agree as well. And when one looks where said institution received said funds to build such beautiful, and ostentatious structures which makes one of the most beautiful cities in the world.. it makes my stomach turn. It's not the structures, they are beautiful... it's how they got the cash.

 

[Webb]

Amen and amen and amen to that written by Asyncritus and Stovebolts!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[handy]

Handy

You're not listening to me.

I know the feeling. Believe me.

As I said before, I do not knock the doing of good to all men, by whomsoever.

But you are...quite vehemently. To the point of questioning the conscience of believers and refusing to worship with believers because you have decided they are not doing enough good. You (not God, but you) have determined that there is only a certain amount of wealth or assets a congregation should have and are railing against those who have exceeded this amount, not that they do not do good, but that they don't sell all they have and do even more.

(See, I am listening to you...)


Now, back to the altars...

I think we have established clearly that altars of whatever description have no place in NT worship, and therefore should have no place in ours (if, that is, we are intent on faithfully copying what the Lord's disciples instituted and maintained).

We have? When did we do that? You've stated this several times, but it's not universally agreed to. Just because someone repeats something doesn't "establish" it, otherwise some of my oft repeated statements must be "established" as well.

What I believe is established...maybe not by this particular thread but by Biblical exegesis, is that a point should not be imposed upon others if the Bible is silent on the subject. And, the Bible is indeed silent on the subject of just how our NT brothers and sisters worshiped. There is no set outline in the Bible as to what happened when the congregation gathered. Did they begin with a prayer, or with a hymn? Did they use instruments or sing a cappella?

Did they follow the same form of worship that God's people had followed all along, but with the joy of knowing the fullness of worship had come to them in the form of Jesus Christ? This is where the liturgies come from. The liturgy has been handed down through the church from the early church, which based it on the style of Jewish worship. And the Jews received their style of worship from God. So many people have this impression that the early church worshiped in this loose, carefree fashion. When one studies the history of the church...not just the evil Roman Catholic Church but the early church from the time of the Apostles throughout the first 100 years, we see firm evidence of the liturgy.

Now, does this mean that we are "commanded" to a liturgical style of worship...no, not at all. That's the point, the Scriptures have no command whatsoever regarding how we are to go about this thing we call corporate worship. However, the core parts of the liturgy are well established from the 100's onward and some parts of the liturgy can be traced back as far as 60 AD...making it older than some parts of the New Testament.

Whatever the altars etc may symbolise in the minds of their creators, that symbolism - according to the NT - is vain, since the NT has nothing of the sort anywhere in it.

Not true.

"We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

It's sort of surprising to me that Hebrews 13:10 is being interpreted as meaning that the Church should not have an altar, when what the text states is that we do, indeed, have an altar.

Consider also 1 Corinthians 10:14-21:

Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; you judge what I say. Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread. Look at the nation Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices sharers in the altar? What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

In this passage we see "altar" and "table" being used interchangeably in reference to the sacrifices that each group partakes in...the Israelites, the OT sacrifices; the Gentiles, demonic sacrifices; Christians, His body and blood. We cannot be partakers of the altars/tables of Gentiles, nor Israelites, but rather must partake of our own altar/table, that which holds the communion, the body and blood of Christ.

It is simply not true to say that the New Testament has "nothing of the sort anywhere in it". Those two passages right there directly speak to the issue.


Asyncritus and Webb,

I know what Jeff's answer to this question is, but I'd like to ask the two of you specifically this:

In your churches do you have any:

crosses
candles
flowers
musical instruments
microphones and microphone stands
sound system
any kind of raised platform
podium
pulpit
pews
bulletins
collection plates
Is communion served in little trays that have tiny little communion cups in them?

I know it's obvious where I'm going with this, but I'd really like an answer anyway. I know in Jeff's church, crosses, altars and musical instruments are banned, yet microphones are not.

I am wondering what your churches have decided is OK to have within the church and what is not OK and by what criteria the decisions were made.

 

[stovebolts]

Dora,
with all due respect, the alter and table have never been interchangeable, nor do I believe Paul uses them interchangeably.

you have to ask yourself what function the alter serves, and you will see the the cross served the same function.

in like, the table served another function. This is why we can say that the alter grounds the table... Because what occurs at the alter, is what you talk about at table, because it had to go to the alter, before it comes to table.

 

[handy]

And, with returned respect, I have to disagree you, Jeff.

I do see the altar and table being interchangeable in the text from 1 Corinthians. When Paul speaks of the "table" of demons, what is he referring to, but that which is sacrificed to the demons.

This sentence really spells it out:
You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

What is the "cup of the Lord" and "table of the Lord" in this context...especially when he adds the "cup of demons" and the "table of demons"...he is speaking of the sacrifices offered to the demons. The whole point that Paul is getting at in this text is that when one partakes of that which is sacrificed at an altar, whether it be the altar of the Israelites, the altars of the Gentile gods (demons) or the altar of Jesus Christ (His body and blood sacrificed at the cross, but partaken of during communion) then one is joined in worship of whatever god the sacrifice is being offered to. The Israelites were still sacrificing animals on the altar in the temple, worthless now, and therefore the Christians could not be joined with them. The Gentiles sacrificed animals on altars dedicated to idols which were nothing but demons parading as gods. The only sacrifice that the Christians can be partakers of is the sacrifice of Christ, yes, at the cross, but carried on at the Lord's Table via communion.

I would agree with you fully, if we did not have communion instituted for us by Christ. If He went to the cross and died, sacrificially for our sin, and that was that...then yes, the cross would be the final altar. But, He instituted communion in which we are to partake in the broken body and shed blood...

And just as those who ate what was sacrificed on altars dedicated to Gentile gods were partakers of the "cup" and "table" of demons...so are we who partake of the "cup" and "table" of the Lord meeting at an altar as well.


Now, are we in agreement with this...no. But this is not something I made up on the spur of the moment here, trying to tie some "proof-text" to shore up an argument.

This interpretation that I'm sharing here has been taught within the Christian Church for a very long time. Not just the Orthodox and Catholic churches, but also many Protestant churches as well.

This is why we can say that the alter grounds the table...

Now, this is language that really isn't used in the New Testament.

Let's go back and look very carefully at Hebrew 13:10:

"We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

Before, I emphasized the "We haven an altar..." part. Now let's look at the rest of the verse, "from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

Again with the eating. As I said before, if Christ had not instituted communion, then the cross would be the final altar. But, He did institute communion and this text ties communion with the altar. There really isn't anything here that suggests that we have an altar, which was the cross, and then we have this table and what we eat is served from the table. The text doesn't allow for that. It states very simply that we have an altar and those who serve the tabernacle (unbelieving Jews) have no right to eat from it. The altar is tied directly to the eating.

 

[Asyncritus]

But you are...quite vehemently. To the point of questioning the conscience of believers and refusing to worship with believers because you have decided they are not doing enough good. You (not God, but you) have determined that there is only a certain amount of wealth or assets a congregation should have and are railing against those who have exceeded this amount, not that they do not do good, but that they don't sell all they have and do even more.

Hearken unto me, Handy. I have criticised no individual - that is neither my place nor intention.

I AM criticising the organisation's policies(?) and behaviour which I think is quite disgraceful.

What I still can't understand is why you are defending this behaviouur so zealously. You seem to be a reasonable and fair-minded person: so why this defence of the unreasonable and the unfair?

Now, back to the altars...

What I believe is established...maybe not by this particular thread but by Biblical exegesis, is that a point should not be imposed upon others if the Bible is silent on the subject. And, the Bible is indeed silent on the subject of just how our NT brothers and sisters worshiped.

On the point of NT altars, the NT is perfectly clear, and I simply cannot comprehend why you should choose the ONLY passage in the NT which speaks of CHRIST the Altar, and use that to support the insufferable practices we see.

You now go on to HOW they worshipped. That is not really relevant to the subject, I'm afraid.

There is no set outline in the Bible as to what happened when the congregation gathered. Did they begin with a prayer, or with a hymn? Did they use instruments or sing a cappella?

Maybe.

Now, does this mean that we are "commanded" to a liturgical style of worship...no, not at all. That's the point, the Scriptures have no command whatsoever regarding how we are to go about this thing we call corporate worship. However, the core parts of the liturgy are well established from the 100's onward and some parts of the liturgy can be traced back as far as 60 AD...making it older than some parts of the New Testament.

So why are you going on about it?

Not true.

"We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

It's sort of surprising to me that Hebrews 13:10 is being interpreted as meaning that the Church should not have an altar, when what the text states is that we do, indeed, have an altar.

Yes, but it's not in a church. It's in heaven.

See above.

Consider also 1 Corinthians 10:14-21:

Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; you judge what I say. Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread. Look at the nation Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices sharers in the altar? What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

In this passage we see "altar" and "table" being used interchangeably in reference to the sacrifices that each group partakes in...the Israelites, the OT sacrifices; the Gentiles, demonic sacrifices; Christians, His body and blood. We cannot be partakers of the altars/tables of Gentiles, nor Israelites, but rather must partake of our own altar/table, that which holds the communion, the body and blood of Christ.

SB has commented correctly on this point, I think, and I can't really add anything to it.

Asyncritus and Webb,

I know what Jeff's answer to this question is, but I'd like to ask the two of you specifically this:

In your churches do you have any:

crosses: No, absolutely not.
candles: No, absolutely not.
flowers: some do, some don't. Mine doesn't.
musical instruments: We have a guitar in mine.
microphones and microphone stands: Not that I can think of, though some congregations, expecially the larger ones, do.
sound system: As above.
any kind of raised platform: Some do, some don't. Mine doesn't.
podium: as above.
pulpit: No, absolutely not.
pews: No, absolutely not. But I seem to remember one that does (I've been to hundreds).
bulletins: No. We don't even have a noticeboard.
collection plates: No, we use a bag.
Is communion served in little trays that have tiny little communion cups in them? Not mine. (Though I know that some do).

I know it's obvious where I'm going with this, but I'd really like an answer anyway. I know in Jeff's church, crosses, altars and musical instruments are banned, yet microphones are not.

I am wondering what your churches have decided is OK to have within the church and what is not OK and by what criteria the decisions were made.

Convenience more than anything else.

But I emphasise the point that the individual congregations are autonomous, and do as they see fit. There is no central organisation to make decrees and such-like.

 

[Asyncritus]

[...] The only sacrifice that the Christians can be partakers of is the sacrifice of Christ, yes, at the cross, but carried on at the Lord's Table via communion.

I agree fully - but where do you see an altar in all this?

And just as those who ate what was sacrificed on altars dedicated to Gentile gods were partakers of the "cup" and "table" of demons...so are we who partake of the "cup" and "table" of the Lord meeting at an altar as well.

This is rather a long stretch, isn't it? CHRIST is the altar - not the 'table'.

Let's go back and look very carefully at Hebrew 13:10:

"We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

Before, I emphasized the "We have an altar..." part. Now let's look at the rest of the verse, "from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat."

Again with the eating. As I said before, if Christ had not instituted communion, then the cross would be the final altar. But, He did institute communion and this text ties communion with the altar. There really isn't anything here that suggests that we have an altar, which was the cross, and then we have this table and what we eat is served from the table. The text doesn't allow for that. It states very simply that we have an altar and those who serve the tabernacle (unbelieving Jews) have no right to eat from it. The altar is tied directly to the eating.

Christ is the sacrifice and the altar. The whole shoot, in other words.

So why these dangerously pagan-like altars in Christian churches?

Look altars up on google. I won't reproduce these things here.

 

[reba]

One might think by the time she is 64 years old some of this stuff would not be a puzzle..
132 posts about this... The Word says this ...

Act 7:47 But Solomon built him an house.
Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,
Act 7:49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?

1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Eph 2:21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
Eph 2:22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


As you all know there are others also.....
I see Jesus preaching on the mountain, in homes on the streets.... and 2000 years later we are talking about furniture for a building?

Not trying to diminish someones thoughts or beliefs i just dont 'get it"

 

[glorydaz]

One might think by the time she is 64 years old some of this stuff would not be a puzzle..
132 posts about this... The Word says this ...

Act 7:47 But Solomon built him an house.
Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,
Act 7:49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?

1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Eph 2:21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
Eph 2:22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


As you all know there are others also.....
I see Jesus preaching on the mountain, in homes on the streets.... and 2000 years later we are talking about furniture for a building?

Not trying to diminish someones thoughts or beliefs i just dont 'get it"

LOL I've checked in on this thread every once in awhile, and must admit...I don't "get it", either.

 

[stovebolts]

Dora,
The Altar cannot do the work of the Table, and the Table cannot do the work of the Altar. Thus, they are not interchangeable.

However, they are tied together because without the work that is performed at the altar, the table isn't possible.. unless you like raw meat Ok that was a bad joke and probably a pretty bad example. :waving

Let's take the sin offering that you might present for example. (And I hope I recall this correctly) You would go in front of the altar with your animal, and you would participate in the slaughtering of that animal. Blood would be poured out on the altar and certain innards would be offered as a burnt offering to the LORD. Other portions of the offering would be given to the Priests as their wage and the rest of the meat would be eaten in a communal meal. During this time, you would reflect on you sin, and through the sin offering, you would be forgiven of that sin. Because you were forgiven, and the price for your sin was paid for, the Table where you at the offering would be a pretty happy table. Also, at the time of the offering, you could make an oath, or a re-commitment to God.

You see, the Table is linked to the Altar, but they are not interchangeable.

Likewise with the Greeks when they would give offerings to Zeus, except Zeus usually got the hoves and the head if I remember correctly, and the table was full of revelry.

Paul is saying that you can't partake of both tables... and we shouldn't.

 

[stovebolts]

I know it's obvious where I'm going with this, but I'd really like an answer anyway. I know in Jeff's church, crosses, altars and musical instruments are banned, yet microphones are not.

We don't "ban" anything per say. We simply choose not to have them. We also don't berate anyone who has these items in their churches.

 

[stovebolts]

crosses: No
candles: No
flowers: Yes
musical instruments: No
microphones and microphone stands: Yes
sound system: Yes
any kind of raised platform: Yes
podium: No
pulpit: YES
pews: No
bulletins: Yes
collection plates: Yes
Is communion served in little trays that have tiny little communion cups in them?:
We have trays for the Bread, and trays for the Fruit of the Vine with wee little cups.

 

[handy]

I'm not going to have a lot of posting time for the next couple of days...so I won't be able to participate in this discussion as much.

However:

Let's take the sin offering that you might present for example. (And I hope I recall this correctly) You would go in front of the altar with your animal, and you would participate in the slaughtering of that animal. Blood would be poured out on the altar and certain innards would be offered as a burnt offering to the LORD. Other portions of the offering would be given to the Priests as their wage and the rest of the meat would be eaten in a communal meal. During this time, you would reflect on you sin, and through the sin offering, you would be forgiven of that sin. Because you were forgiven, and the price for your sin was paid for, the Table where you at the offering would be a pretty happy table. Also, at the time of the offering, you could make an oath, or a re-commitment to God.

What is your source material for this, Jeff...I'd like to study up on this.

 

[reba]

Could be some of the reason i dont 'get this' whole idea....

I have lived in the church building.... transforming the the bedrooms to Sunday School rooms Sunday morning... The sanctuary was where we played in bad weather. It was the big dark room we ran through to get to the bathroom. Old wooden pews ? more like board benches with backs, made the coolest forts. We were taught to be most respectful while in church/service.

Kids back then and there would sleep on the floor on a folded blanket, under the pew in front of their moms, she could get ya with her toes. Some would sleep and miss the occasional hot chocolate , served up in the living room/ fellowship hall.

This may seem off topic to some of you but i am wondering your view of the above in light of the topic.

 

[Webb]

Hi Handy

I've failed to notice until now that your questions in post 126 were addressed partly to me.

I shall not take time to address each item in your list but only one as the principle of which I will speak will apply to all in your list. I have already referred to this principle in this thread and others but will attempt again. The subject is not simply "altars" for altars in the NT chiurch are but a symptom of our problem. So lets look at one item on your list.

You wrote: "Is communion served in little trays that have tiny little communion cups in them?''

I have previousliy stated that the Bible teaches in several ways: By direct command. By an approved example. By necessary inference or implication. By its silence.

We have the direct command for the Lord's supper: Matt.26:26,28; I Cor. 11:24,25.
We have the approved example of this: I Cor.11; Acts 20:7
We have the approved example of when to observe the Lord's supper: Acts 20:7.

This much the Bible teaches. This much we must do. Since we are told what to do and when to do it but not given the minute details of the matter those details are clearly left to us such as tray or no tray, little cups for the individuals or one common cup from which all drink, when done in the order of service before the sermon of after, for those who partake in the evening service who were not there in the 1st service do they come down front to partake, go to a separate room, raise their hand and the emblems are brought to them (long sentence, pardon me). The point is we are told what to do and when to do it. The incidentals of carrying out the command to do is left to us.

Not all the items in your list can be justified by direct command, approved example or implication. We can achieve much unity (for which Jesus prayed) if we adhere to this. Some one (not you) said "Idon't get it). Well, we can get it if we approach the scripture with the same common sense we do other important matters.

I shall withdraw from this thread and most others for now but will be glad to continue with PM or e-mail, this old Texas cowboy has other matters at hand not to mention the windmill which will not stop pumping water and in this drought we have been having in Texas water is especially precious right not
God bless

 

[Former Christian]

1Co 10:21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.
Heb 13:10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.

In the OT era, there was a physical altar. That altar no longer exists. That altar represented something in heaven, something which has been fulfilled by Christ. There is no other physical altar that represents the true altar in heaven. The heathen sacrifices included the eating of the sacrifice, as in the tabernacle ritual. They ate at tables. Making them seem to be similar to the Lord’s Table. They were not. And to eat at a table associated with a sacrifice was indicative of identity with that which was eaten.

Jesus didn’t go to the altar of the Temple. He didn’t offer sacrifices on our behalf as High Priest of the New Covenant. It wasn’t his place to do so. Nor did he create a new altar that would represent the sacrifice he was about to make. Though he knew he would be the eternal sacrifice on an eternal altar in heaven. Instead he instituted the Lord’s Table. After they ate the Passover meal, he instituted the Lord’s Table. A meal at a table would be the New Covenant way of connection to the eternal sacrifice of Christ on the eternal altar before God in heaven. The physical altar in the tabernacle looked forward to the sacrifice of Christ on the altar in heaven. The physical table is the way to the experience of the sacrifice of Christ accomplished.

Therefore, we have an altar that they which serve the tabernacle, they who offer sin offerings on an altar in the tabernacle, have nothing whatever to do with. Because their altar looks forward to an event already accomplished. Our altar is in heaven, not on earth.

Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels

The temple of God is God himself and his Christ. While the New Jerusalem is still in heaven today, it will eventually be on the New Earth. What is said of the New Jerusalem in Revelation written by John, is not just for the future, but for our understanding of the New Jerusalem that is in heaven today.

Heb 13:15 By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.
Heb 13:16 But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

These are the kinds of sacrifices we offer because of our experience of the real altar in heaven. On earth we have a Table. It leads us to experience the Altar in heaven.

Hebrews 4:
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

There is no more labour in relation to the Tabernacle because it is fulfilled in Christ. The word of God is Christ. It isn’t a reference to the Old Testament or the Bible as it is commonly interpreted. There are no more high priests on the earth because the real high priest has come and is in heaven. But there is a priesthood on earth. Not an ordained priesthood, but the Priesthood of all who are in Christ.

1 Peter 2:
1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

The only true ordained special priesthood was part of the Old Testament Tabernacle ritual. The existence of which went out with the Old Covenant.

Heb 8:
1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Where is that throne of grace if not in heaven where Christ is today as our high priest?

Heb 8:
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

There is now a New Covenant in Christ wherein are better promises than that under the Old Covenant. And the New makes the Old ready to vanish away. Which it has. Some believe to be revived during the thousand year reign of Christ. But the promises to the OT believers are fulfilled in Christ.

Hebrews 10:
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
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.

This is the reality we should Spiritually experience when we are participating in the Lord’s Table. The veil has been divided at the cross of Christ so that all who are in Christ may follow their high priest into the holiest, all the way to the throne of grace.

All Biblical references from the KJV.

FC

 

[Former Christian]

SteveBolts

“it's a crying shame to know that something which was put forth to unite us, has caused great division.â€

Yes it is. But I expect no more from a man-made religion that centers itself in unity in Biblical interpretations instead of keeping the unity of the Spirit. A religion that in its denominations practices closed communion against one another for no other reason than disagreements concerning those Biblical interpretations. Can we blame Satan for that? We can, but without cause I believe. Just as Satan didn’t make Adam do anything, so also today. Adam wasn’t deceived. He acted on his own. Humanity is quite capable of doing those things not in its own best interest, apart from the help of any opposer. The book of Job was written with that in mind.

FC