The Milk and the Meat (Biblical Principle of Simplicity)
by Dave Brown
[This page contains two articles. The first explains the biblical terms milk and meat as they apply to biblical complexity. The second article (below) discusses a related topic -- the biblical principle of simplicity.]
Did you ever pick up a religious track and read something that was puzzling?. But then they gave a scriptural reference for their assertion, so you just accepted that it was true without further investigation? We hope not. This is a very common ploy of false teachers, and we hope you do not fall for it.
If you did not accept it, you went to the bible and checked it out. Good for you!!! But when you read it, it was quite difficult to map what was said in the passage to what the writer was asserting. So you were just left in a puzzled state. Again, this is the ploy of false teachers, for many in this state come to the conclusion that they (the reader) cannot really understand what the bible says on this subject, and that the writer, being a scholar who has studied this for some time, must understand it. So, should you just accept their conclusions?
The issue is analogous to feeding meat to babies. Now, we are not accusing you of being a babe in the scriptures, although to some extent we should all recognize that we are not as mature in our bible knowledge as we should be.
Let’s first establish that this concept of milk and meat has a biblical foundation. It is referenced in the following passages:
The principle of building a foundation of the simpler concepts first is practiced in all secular education. We do not teach calculus to first graders. We start with simple addition and subtraction and build from there -- calculus is several years away.
To start a study of the bible in the book of Revelation is as unreasonable as trying to feed meat to a baby. Similarly with a book like Daniel, or even some of Paul's writings (2 Peter 3:16). It is essential to start with the milk of God’s word and to build up the spiritual maturity that comes from a total understanding of the milk. Then from there go on to the meatier matters of God's word. We recommend at least one of the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John) first, followed by the book of Acts. Once these are digested thoroughly then the epistles can be taken in fairly systematic order, perhaps starting with First Corinthians, which it fairly basic.
But even the predominantly "milk books" will have some passages that might be more complex and difficult to understand. However, the concept of milk and meat can help in making the sense that God intended if the following fundamental two-part principle of biblical interpretation is observed:
Do you see why false teachers start with the meat? Their goal is to baffle you and convince you that you cannot understand any of it. If they can do this, then perhaps you will think that your only hope is to depend on them for the answers. That is what cults are made of -- dependency on the teaching of one or more men, and a failure of the individual to go to the bible and verify that what is being taught is the truth.
What are the conditions of salvation given by Jesus?
Biblical Principle of Simplicity
By Dave Brown
This article was inspired by a question on one of the bible discussion web sites regarding the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4. It is very important that you read this passage in Thessalonians before going on (see immediately below). Just one comment that might help. When you have time, we encourage a reading of 1st Thessalonians -- this will show that Paul talked about the second coming of Jesus and it is obvious from what is said there that some had the misimpression that Paul was teaching that his coming was “just at hand” i.e., imminent. With that, let us read the entire passage.
2 Thessalonians 2:1-4:
2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him;
2:2 to the end that ye be not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled, either by spirit, or by word, or by epistle as from us, as that the day of the Lord is just at hand;
2:3 let no man beguile you in any wise: for (it will not be,) except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,
2:4 he that opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God.
PLEASE – before you go on, ponder and meditate over this passage, and even if you have no idea what it means, try to come to SOME conclusion in your mind about it. Don’t just write it off as being complicated; it really isn’t, it means exactly what it says. Read it again if you need to, especially verse 1 where it talks about “our gathering together unto him” – a reference back to the teaching in 1st Thessalonians.
Now here is (word for word) the question that was posed about the passage above: “Are these verses talking about Christ's second coming. Or could they be talking about the destruction of Jerusalem, with the man of sin being General Titus of the Roman army? I believe it is about the second coming, but heard it preached the other way.”
My feeling is that at least the majority of people reading this article could very well respond to this question. But that is not the major point that we are trying to make. In fact, in the remainder of this article keep the following in mind:
With that, here is basically my response to the on-line question:
“Let me try to answer this question with a principle. I need you to consider some questions. First – how long did it take him to try to convince you of his interpretation? If he did not convince you, then for sure you can rest assured that you have answered your own question. There is no reason to abandon a simple understanding of a passage for one that is more complicated. But let us suppose for the sake of argument that he did convince you. How long did it take him to do that? On the other hand, how long did it take for you to read it and get your first impression of its meaning? Is not your first impression just as good as the one that took so long to explain?”
The principle we are trying to convey is one of the simplicity and understandability of the scriptures, given by the following examples (underlining mine – dbb):
2 Corinthians 11:3: But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ.
Ephesians 3:1-4: For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus in behalf of you Gentiles, — if so be that ye have heard of the dispensation of that grace of God which was given me to you-ward; how that by revelation was made known unto me the mystery, as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye can perceive my understanding in the mystery of Christ.
Ephesians 5:17: Wherefore be ye not foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: Every scripture inspired of God (is) also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.
Jude 3: Beloved, while I was giving all diligence to write unto you of our common salvation, I was constrained to write unto you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints.
Revelation 1:3: Blessed is he that reads, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Stated negatively, the principle is this: God did not give us scripture with the intent that we are required to have someone (scholar, super-preacher, priest, whoever …) to explain to us why it does not say something other than our common sense tells us.
Now, this does not mean that we cannot or should not learn from those that have demonstrated to us through their life and their teaching that they have a better grasp of God’s word than we do. There are many passages that indicate the value of teaching and teachers (e.g., Mt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:42; Rom. 12:7; 1 Tim. 4:13, etc., etc.). But we should never allow a teacher to overrule our common sense without due explanation. The burden of proof is on the teacher, and if he cannot give sufficient evidence to prove the interpretation that he is giving, then he really should not be teaching it.
There are some passages that are hard to understand as we read about in 2 Peter 3:15-16 “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; as also in all (his) epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as (they do) also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”
Seeking help in coming to a better understanding of the scriptures is no sin. But let’s read the next two verses as well: 2 Peter 3:17-18: “Ye therefore, beloved, knowing (these things) beforehand, beware lest, being carried away with the error of the wicked, ye fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him (be) the glory both now and forever. Amen.”
These words are for each of us who claim to be Christians. Each of us has the personal responsibility to challenge our teachers to explain the scriptural reasons that they are teaching what they are. That does not mean they have to know the answers on the spot – but if they still fall short after given adequate time to produce scriptural proof, then we need to trust our own first impressions as to what a passage states. In the vast majority of cases, that first impression is going to be correct because the bible was written with the promise from God that it can be understood, and that it should be understood by each one of us.
As for 2 Thes. 2:1-4, I am confident that most of you do not need my help to understand it. However, if you have any questions about anything in this article, please contact us or reply to this e-mail. We will be glad to discuss it further.
What are the conditions of salvation given by Jesus?
Did you ever pick up a religious track and read something that was puzzling?. But then they gave a scriptural reference for their assertion, so you just accepted that it was true without further investigation? We hope not. This is a very common ploy of false teachers, and we hope you do not fall for it.
If you did not accept it, you went to the bible and checked it out. Good for you!!! But when you read it, it was quite difficult to map what was said in the passage to what the writer was asserting. So you were just left in a puzzled state. Again, this is the ploy of false teachers, for many in this state come to the conclusion that they (the reader) cannot really understand what the bible says on this subject, and that the writer, being a scholar who has studied this for some time, must understand it. So, should you just accept their conclusions?
The issue is analogous to feeding meat to babies. Now, we are not accusing you of being a babe in the scriptures, although to some extent we should all recognize that we are not as mature in our bible knowledge as we should be.
Let’s first establish that this concept of milk and meat has a biblical foundation. It is referenced in the following passages:
- 1 Cor. 3:2-3: “I fed you with milk , not with meat; for ye were not yet able (to bear it): nay, not even now are ye able; for ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not carnal, and do ye not walk after the manner of men?”
- Heb. 5:12-14: “For when by reason of the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that some one teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk , and not of solid food. For every one that partaketh of milk is without experience of the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But solid food is for fullgrown men, (even) those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil.”
- 1 Peter 2:1-2: “Putting away therefore all wickedness, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, as newborn babes, long for the spiritual milk which is without guile, that ye may grow thereby unto salvation; if ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious …”
The principle of building a foundation of the simpler concepts first is practiced in all secular education. We do not teach calculus to first graders. We start with simple addition and subtraction and build from there -- calculus is several years away.
To start a study of the bible in the book of Revelation is as unreasonable as trying to feed meat to a baby. Similarly with a book like Daniel, or even some of Paul's writings (2 Peter 3:16). It is essential to start with the milk of God’s word and to build up the spiritual maturity that comes from a total understanding of the milk. Then from there go on to the meatier matters of God's word. We recommend at least one of the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John) first, followed by the book of Acts. Once these are digested thoroughly then the epistles can be taken in fairly systematic order, perhaps starting with First Corinthians, which it fairly basic.
But even the predominantly "milk books" will have some passages that might be more complex and difficult to understand. However, the concept of milk and meat can help in making the sense that God intended if the following fundamental two-part principle of biblical interpretation is observed:
- Always reason from the milk to the meat; that is, always interpret the new and more difficult passages in light of what you KNOW and have learned from the simple passages; conversely:
- Never set at naught a simple, clearly understood biblical concept based on a passage that is clearly quite difficult to understand (see the article below on Simplicity).
Do you see why false teachers start with the meat? Their goal is to baffle you and convince you that you cannot understand any of it. If they can do this, then perhaps you will think that your only hope is to depend on them for the answers. That is what cults are made of -- dependency on the teaching of one or more men, and a failure of the individual to go to the bible and verify that what is being taught is the truth.
What are the conditions of salvation given by Jesus?
Biblical Principle of Simplicity
By Dave Brown
This article was inspired by a question on one of the bible discussion web sites regarding the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4. It is very important that you read this passage in Thessalonians before going on (see immediately below). Just one comment that might help. When you have time, we encourage a reading of 1st Thessalonians -- this will show that Paul talked about the second coming of Jesus and it is obvious from what is said there that some had the misimpression that Paul was teaching that his coming was “just at hand” i.e., imminent. With that, let us read the entire passage.
2 Thessalonians 2:1-4:
2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him;
2:2 to the end that ye be not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled, either by spirit, or by word, or by epistle as from us, as that the day of the Lord is just at hand;
2:3 let no man beguile you in any wise: for (it will not be,) except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,
2:4 he that opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God.
PLEASE – before you go on, ponder and meditate over this passage, and even if you have no idea what it means, try to come to SOME conclusion in your mind about it. Don’t just write it off as being complicated; it really isn’t, it means exactly what it says. Read it again if you need to, especially verse 1 where it talks about “our gathering together unto him” – a reference back to the teaching in 1st Thessalonians.
Now here is (word for word) the question that was posed about the passage above: “Are these verses talking about Christ's second coming. Or could they be talking about the destruction of Jerusalem, with the man of sin being General Titus of the Roman army? I believe it is about the second coming, but heard it preached the other way.”
My feeling is that at least the majority of people reading this article could very well respond to this question. But that is not the major point that we are trying to make. In fact, in the remainder of this article keep the following in mind:
- I am not going to answer the question specific question posed – you will see why shortly.
- If all of this is seems too complicated for you, please do not feel bad. You are no less saved than anyone else if you have obeyed the gospel as indicated by our Lord Jesus Christ. As you study the New Testament you will gain in your knowledge and at some point you will understand the passage in question. It is not a sin to be a babe in Christ even at my age (71), as long as we continue to hunger and thirst after righteousness (Mt. 5:6; Heb. 11:6), and continue to live according to God’s’ will (Acts 10:34-35).
- What we are trying to convey with this example is a principle of biblical interpretation; the meaning of the passage itself is secondary.
With that, here is basically my response to the on-line question:
“Let me try to answer this question with a principle. I need you to consider some questions. First – how long did it take him to try to convince you of his interpretation? If he did not convince you, then for sure you can rest assured that you have answered your own question. There is no reason to abandon a simple understanding of a passage for one that is more complicated. But let us suppose for the sake of argument that he did convince you. How long did it take him to do that? On the other hand, how long did it take for you to read it and get your first impression of its meaning? Is not your first impression just as good as the one that took so long to explain?”
The principle we are trying to convey is one of the simplicity and understandability of the scriptures, given by the following examples (underlining mine – dbb):
2 Corinthians 11:3: But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ.
Ephesians 3:1-4: For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus in behalf of you Gentiles, — if so be that ye have heard of the dispensation of that grace of God which was given me to you-ward; how that by revelation was made known unto me the mystery, as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye can perceive my understanding in the mystery of Christ.
Ephesians 5:17: Wherefore be ye not foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: Every scripture inspired of God (is) also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.
Jude 3: Beloved, while I was giving all diligence to write unto you of our common salvation, I was constrained to write unto you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints.
Revelation 1:3: Blessed is he that reads, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Stated negatively, the principle is this: God did not give us scripture with the intent that we are required to have someone (scholar, super-preacher, priest, whoever …) to explain to us why it does not say something other than our common sense tells us.
Now, this does not mean that we cannot or should not learn from those that have demonstrated to us through their life and their teaching that they have a better grasp of God’s word than we do. There are many passages that indicate the value of teaching and teachers (e.g., Mt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:42; Rom. 12:7; 1 Tim. 4:13, etc., etc.). But we should never allow a teacher to overrule our common sense without due explanation. The burden of proof is on the teacher, and if he cannot give sufficient evidence to prove the interpretation that he is giving, then he really should not be teaching it.
There are some passages that are hard to understand as we read about in 2 Peter 3:15-16 “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; as also in all (his) epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as (they do) also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”
Seeking help in coming to a better understanding of the scriptures is no sin. But let’s read the next two verses as well: 2 Peter 3:17-18: “Ye therefore, beloved, knowing (these things) beforehand, beware lest, being carried away with the error of the wicked, ye fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him (be) the glory both now and forever. Amen.”
These words are for each of us who claim to be Christians. Each of us has the personal responsibility to challenge our teachers to explain the scriptural reasons that they are teaching what they are. That does not mean they have to know the answers on the spot – but if they still fall short after given adequate time to produce scriptural proof, then we need to trust our own first impressions as to what a passage states. In the vast majority of cases, that first impression is going to be correct because the bible was written with the promise from God that it can be understood, and that it should be understood by each one of us.
As for 2 Thes. 2:1-4, I am confident that most of you do not need my help to understand it. However, if you have any questions about anything in this article, please contact us or reply to this e-mail. We will be glad to discuss it further.
What are the conditions of salvation given by Jesus?