"Milk" is Doctrine, "Meat" is.....?

[marks]

No the old man died

I thought you had said the old inner man was changed by being joined to Christ, am I remembering incorrectly?

Much love!

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I thought you had said the old inner man was changed by being joined to Christ, am I remembering incorrectly?

Much love!

Yes, changed. He's different. And so he is 'new' that way. Like when your alcoholic Uncle Bud turns over a new leaf and 'becomes a new man', so to speak. It's like being born anew, or again, from above (John 3:3-7).

 

[marks]

No the old man died—the old task master of the flesh who, by force of law, ruled over us like an overbearing husband over his wife, forcing her to submit to his desires and bear his fruit, which he was lawfully entitled to do. Romans 7:1-6

But with old husband 'flesh' out of the way now (he died), we are free to marry new husband Jesus and submit to him, bearing his fruit. The law of marriage which required the wife to remain in submissive relationship to her now deceased husband can no longer do that because that spouse has died.

As you use "died" and "deceased" in this context, what exactly does that mean to you?

Much love!

 

[Ferris Bueller]

As you use "died" and "deceased" in this context, what exactly does that mean to you?

Much love!

His power and authority has ceased. And so he is dead to you that way. You no longer have to submit to him 'by law'. Understand? (Romans 7:8)

 

[marks]

His power and authority has ceased. And so he is dead to you that way. You no longer have to submit to him 'by law'. Understand? (Romans 7:8)

So this is a purely judicial thing?

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't understand your answer. Can you say this another way?

Much love!

i would consider it along with other Scripture that points to the same thing, i would doubt it absent any other Scriptural “witness”

Maybe picking up our cross is what moves us from milk to meat.

Much love!

ha well i would advocate going the other way, but im also not trying to stop anyone doing as they feel led :)

imo we only naturally start out seeking facts and proof, a la courts of law, and only come to realize later that truth doesnt really work like that, enter “hidden manna”

 

[Ferris Bueller]

So this is a purely judicial thing?

Much love!

No, it's not just a purely judicial thing. The law can no longer literally make you serve the flesh (like how a marriage license makes a woman submit to and serve her husband). That's a very real thing. The marriage license (the law of Moses) that once bound you to your flesh to serve it's desires can no longer do that because there has been a death—the death of your flesh. And so the wife is released from the power of the husband 'flesh' she was once bound to by reason of law. That release is a very real and practical thing. But like the voice of a deceased abusive husband haunting a woman, she may still hear his voice speaking from the grave instilling fear and intimidation in her causing her to serve his desires once again.

 

[marks]

ha well i would advocate going the other way, but im also not trying to stop anyone doing as they feel led :)

To me this speaks otherwise,

Hebrews 5:12-14 KJV
12) For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13) For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14) But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

This 'you ought to be teachers', is saying to me that we are to progress from milk to meat, that a failure to progress shows that a person is unskilful in the word of righteousness, a sign of immaturity.

In that these ought to be teachers, I see this as saying they ought move from infancy to maturity, from being taught to teaching, from milk to meat.

Although there is the sense you talk about that I agree with on an applicational level, to become as little children, and that's a part of growing up too.

Much love!

 

[marks]

But like the voice of a deceased abusive husband haunting a woman, she may still hear his voice speaking from the grave instilling fear and intimidation in her causing her to serve his desires once again.

I think that's a really good analogy! I like that!! The echoes of the dead man, and she responds as though he were still alive.

Much love!

 

[marks]

imo we only naturally start out seeking facts and proof, a la courts of law, and only come to realize later that truth doesnt really work like that, enter “hidden manna”

Yeah, I began with a search for truth, but my desire now is for my Maker.

Much love!

 

[marks]

well, the cult of sol was the leading religion of the day i guess, and it held that “afterlife” in the Elysian Fields was only for a select few, and i am 90% convinced that the NT was written with this belief in mind. Everyone else was considered “greys,” or what we might call “water,” or even “the sea” in Scriptural terms, but tbh it was what i learned from rabbis that had the most impact there.

I should prolly stress again that cult of sol is not “bad” imo, Jesus gave some of the highest praise to the Roman Centurion, and i am in a “cult” imo right now, “cult” is not a bad word, i equate it with the Scriptural “tree,” or like “Oaks of Mamre,” wherein oaks are almost surely…not the best trees to be from, but the Bible seems to acknowledge that evabody gotta start somewhere. I forget where i picked up “oaks bad,” guess inshoulda held onto that one. Ps, “eagles” suck too i guess lol

I think I missed this before . . .

Are you thinking then that the NT was written communicating what was the prevalent view of the day, but not necessarily the most accurate?

Also, are you saying that our common idea of Christianity, that we believe in Jesus Who died for our sins so that we can be forgiven and go heaven when we die (I'd tweak some things there if I were really wanting to be complete, but just the basics), that this idea is more a reflection of the cultural norm at the time the NT was written than of what God is really doing?

Much love!

 

[quietthinker]

So the Bible says you should love your enemies. Do good to those that are mean to you.
I can read it. I can know it. But now I have to put that into practice.
I have to DO it.
In my own personal experience...
I have an 86 year old father who has a 78 year old girlfriend. They been together for over 20 years. I have just come on the scene that last 5 years, after having been hmm.. awol the last 20 busy with my own life.
Now she is very possesive. But my dad is going through some medical issues at this time and he needs to stay with me probably for a good while.
I am living in a mobile home he doesn't use because he has been living with her at her house. Now her house is pretty crowded. She does crafts, and has a tendency to be a hoarder (putting it mildly) and he can't get around her place and walk and exercise as he needs to.
So he has decided to come stay with me.

For the last 5 years that I have been "in the picture" , it has been pretty intense between me and his girl. She doesn't like me, at all.
When I talk she rolls her eyes and curses under her breath, exasperated that I dare even open my mouth.
I'm not the type that enjoys confrontation to begin with, BUT SOMETIMES!!!

And always, just as I'm about to come back with some smart alec remark, I think to myself.. what is the right way to deal with this?
And it always comes back to: Love overcomes Hate.
And the more I put into practice the actual forgiving as the occurance is happening, those feelings of resenfulness or hurt get less and less.
Instead of reacting in the moment, I just focus on trying to make a bad situatioin better. Sometimes it's just being silent and letting the moment pass. Other times it's trying to gently reason without getting upset or impatient.

I've never been one to hold a grudge, but I usually have a tendency to say what's on my mind. And sometimes I can say things not very nice.

In the midst of being crucified and dying on the cross. After having been subjected to torture and humiliation,
Jesus could have lashed out and said, Father destroy them. There is no good in them.
But he didn't.
He asked His Father to forgive them for they knew not what they were doing.

To me, this is moving from the milk to the meat.
Not only knowing what the will of God is, But performing it as well.

My Meat is to DO the Will of Him that sent me.
What is God's will?

Just my thoughts..
Hugs

I'm persuaded all God's children struggle with the default position ie, having the tendency to retaliate to justify and flatter ourselves.
Our struggle is indicative that an opposed principle is at work in and on our hearts. Jesus struggled as well, revealed in the fact that he was tempted. I've never fasted for 40 days but I can imagine that bread would have a pretty strong attraction. At times I wonder how he handled the pretty girls doing their thing on him?

It's easy to become discouraged when my shortcomings load up; at times the springs look flat however, I am reminded that 'greater is he who is in you than he who is in the world'.....I am reminded that 'neither height nor depth nor any other thing can seperate me from the love of God' ...and I am encouraged.....I put behind me the self focus and walk with chin held high...I am a Prince of the Kingdom!

I know that my understanding of God's love has limitations I'm not even aware of.....and become aware when some treasure is brought into my orbit. I can concede this will be an ongoing process. I also think that 'meat' has to do with understanding the intensity with which God loves.....which I have barely scratched the surface of.

 

[bbyrd009]

To me this speaks otherwise,

Hebrews 5:12-14 KJV
12) For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13) For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14) But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

This 'you ought to be teachers', is saying to me that we are to progress from milk to meat, that a failure to progress shows that a person is unskilful in the word of righteousness, a sign of immaturity.

all i can say to that is you might be absolutely right...or, you might be reading a translation by a scribe who was convinced the same as you, and thus slanted the v the better to read that way? Particularly the wording of v14, which is, to me, a restatement of eating the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil

but again i will say that this is a recent suspicion--after all, we are talking about Paul, right; iow i would highly suspect the corporate interpretation--and i dont know for sure, and have even gone to some lengths to try and "prove," before finally realizing that the very nature of "milk" and what is it? might be defined by "no one is sure, no one has proof," as the instances of "meat" appearing to be beneficial/praised in Scripture maybe indicates. Put another way, i might even expect a meat adherent to be able to "prove" their pov, while a milk adherent might not, as weird as that sounds

 

[bbyrd009]

Are you thinking then that the NT was written communicating what was the prevalent view of the day, but not necessarily the most accurate?

my guess is that it is written on two levels, to cater to the wise in their own eyes who held the prevalent view, while also communicating the real plan in plain enough "english" that will invariably be ignored or reasoned away, so categorically "yes"

Also, are you saying that our common idea of Christianity, that we believe in Jesus Who died for our sins so that we can be forgiven and go heaven when we die (I'd tweak some things there if I were really wanting to be complete, but just the basics), that this idea is more a reflection of the cultural norm at the time the NT was written than of what God is really doing?

almost surely, yes, particularly given the prevalence of the Cult of Sol Invictus then, with its "Apollos" and all of the relevant mythology that we have, "son of God, Messiah, king of kings" etc. I mean can you Quote "Jesus died for our sins" anywhere? no, not even one time. Are you going to, or i mean do you have any chance whatsoever of becoming an immortal? There is only One Immortal Or of "going to heaven after you have died?" Then by def the kingdom of heaven is not within you, right

but fwiw i suspect the cult of sol was just the best reflection of Yah they had then, and imo we are talking about earnest, thoughtful people who were seeking God as best they knew how, virgin worship and all The virgin will be with child

 

[bbyrd009]

not disagreeing

not disagreeing, but i suggest a context change from other than the one assumed


and this preceeded that,

Christ died for our sins.

for anyone who has not yet discovered the secret trackback button!
oh wow, just change the color of the banners and it lights up like a Christmas tree!

 

[marks]

all i can say to that is you might be absolutely right...or, you might be reading a translation by a scribe who was convinced the same as you, and thus slanted the v the better to read that way?

If that's the case, I think we're all just chasing our tails, nothing more profitable than that. We should all go home and grow carrots, or something like that, something useful.

That is, if we're just discussing the cognitive bias of 3rd century scribes.

Put another way, i might even expect a meat adherent to be able to "prove" their pov, while a milk adherent might not, as weird as that sounds

I think I understand what you are saying here. But I don't think we're being called to repudiate all knowing.

Much love!

 

[Ziggy]

I put behind me the self focus and walk with chin held high...I am a Prince of the Kingdom!

I read a book once called: How to live like a King's kid.
It was a good book :)

 

[marks]

my guess is that it is written on two levels, to cater to the wise in their own eyes who held the prevalent view, while also communicating the real plan in plain enough "english" that will invariably be ignored or reasoned away, so categorically "yes"

OK, I've heard this sort of view expressed before. I think @Episkopos has said things like that. That's very different from what I see. I see God communicating on different levels throughout the Bible, but I see a progression of revealing of truth that starts at the simple and surface level, and goes deeper from there, yet never disagrees with the simple statements.

This idea that there are hidden meanings that are contrary to surface meanings, I only see that leading into error.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Then by def the kingdom of heaven is not within you, right

How does eternal life negate the idea of the kingdom within you? That's something else I don't understand how you mean this.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Jesus died for our sins" anywhere?

Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, but somehow that doesn't mean Jesus to you.

Who is Christ?

Much love!