All articles on Walking the Dogma and other original photos are Copyright©2003-2008 HarryTick.com
Comments are the property of their respective authors, permission required.
| < | August 2008 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||


A comment was made recently in regards to what the writer of Hebrews was saying when he was talking about Meat vs. Milk (Hebrews 5 & 6) for the believer. Standard disclaimers apply, as this is coming from the mind of the HarryTick™, but I think we read something there that isn’t there and totally miss the point of what is being said.
1. What is NOT being said? I don’t believe the author is talking about two different levels of knowledge and learning for the believer, not in the sense that we would see it. In fact, I believe it is because we see things in levels of knowledge that the author says it just as he does:
“You need milk, not solid food!” (NIV)
2. What IS being said? Those whom the author is addressing seem to have assumed that they were “feasting” on the greater learning in the scripture, while the author reminds them that such “meat” is merely a continued understanding of “the elementary truths of God’s word”. There is a voice of frustration from the author. “Why do we have to keep on bringing you back to the beginning?”
There is a point where the author describes that meat is for the mature who have practiced to distinguish good from evil.
Aha! This must mean those who have learned how to eradicate sin from their lives, who devote themselves to the study of scripture and the doing of all kinds of good deeds…
Oh, wait. Now I seem to be distracted from those elementary aspects of the gospel all over again.
That means you have moved on to the meat of doctrine!
Then why do I feel like I’m running around in circles, getting nowhere?
You must not be ready for the meat and need to go back to the milk.
Consider that the author’s point may be that the milk is the gospel and that the meat is nothing more than such a firm grasp of the message that anything NOT of the gospel is easily distinguished as evil compared to the good news. How else could the discussion on determining a loss of salvation (Hebrews 6) receive treatment as a such a worthless exercise by those who do not understand the nature of salvation?!!
But then, we take that part of the discussion somewhere else, in turn.
Posted by: HarryTick™ on 1. May 2007, 12:29 |