Milk Before Meat

[Deborah]

Why should we let the critics write our internal discussions?

I'm not sure what you mean but it seems that if we started teaching up front all the things the critics want us to teach then we would be letting them write our discussions.

[CV75]

basics

God teaches each of His children personally and individually, one by one, lifelong, in their own tongue and language, understanding of “all that He seeth fit that they should have.”

Ancillary to that, He has put the keys and His Church in place to give the saints opportunity to learn His ways by assisting Him in reaching out spirit-to-spirit. This is done primarily by bestowing the Gift of the Holy Ghost and performing the ordinances, the need for which are communicated through the distribution of scripture and preaching.

To demand meat over milk from His Church is like saying. “O that you were an angel …according to my desire …and desire more than to perform the work …which the Lord hath allotted.”

The allotted teaching is to get people moving in the right direction on the right course in their personal relationship with God, which is really what saves them.

Edited July 1, 2012 by CV75

[Deborah]

Exactly, CV. It seems critics would rather we cram everything down everyone's throat whether they want to hear it or not, whether they are ready to hear it or not. People who really want to know something will find a way to do it and if they use the spirit to guide them they will find it the right way.

[Judd]

There's a particular problem that invariably arises when speaking about milk and meat. That being, we attribute the wrong things to milk and the wrong things to meat. We take milk to mean the atonement of Christ and the principles pertaining to it and the meat to be everything else, the stuff less focused on. Too often we fail to acknowledge the atonement and basic principles of the gospel as being the meat.

[Teancum]

Over and over again we hear people complaining about how the church is simplifying the curriculum in the church setting. People are whining about being spoon fed and wanting to hear more of the deeper matters. Several thoughts have come to mind in these matters.

I am curious. This is the second post today by you where you refer to those who may view things differently than you or vary in their opinion as whining about whatever it is you don't like about what they are saying. Do you do this a lot? Does it foster reasonable discourse?

Just wondering.

[Calm]

There's a particular problem that invariably arises when speaking about milk and meat. That being, we attribute the wrong things to milk and the wrong things to meat. We take milk to mean the atonement of Christ and the principles pertaining to it and the meat to be everything else, the stuff less focused on. Too often we fail to acknowledge the atonement and basic principles of the gospel as being the meat.

Completely concur.

[Calm]

I am curious. This is the second post today by you where you refer to those who may view things differently than you or vary in their opinion as whining about whatever it is you don't like about what they are saying. Do you do this a lot?

Deborah has used the terms "whining" or "whine" 5 times in discussions in this forum going back to 2007....so I would say, "no, she doesn't do this a lot." Edited July 1, 2012 by calmoriah

[BlueDreams]

It sometimes amazes me how little we understand “the basics.” The basics are now, probably my favorite thing to learn about. they are key to understanding the mysteries of the Lord and the world around us. I would prefer that the basics be taught again and again. They’re foundational. The deeper foundation one has, the greater one can build on it. More than that, the simple things are the building material all throughout. When I feel that I’ve learned more about a deep/meaty topic I’ve often found that it is based heavily within the constructs of the atonement, faith, hope, charity, etc.

With luv,

BD

[Deborah]

Too often we fail to acknowledge the atonement and basic principles of the gospel as being the meat.

I agree with this but unfortunately when we focus on these things it is the critics who complain that we aren't teaching enough and we are spoon feeding everyone because we don't talk about the secondary subjects. BTW I really like BlueDreams' comments and think this is the principle the GA's are aiming for when the simplify the lessons.

[Deborah]

This is the second post today by you where you refer to those who may view things differently than you or vary in their opinion as whining about whatever it is you don't like about what they are saying. Do you do this a lot?

No doubt I've been influenced by all the ruckus at MI and the whining of a certain party who has made claims that are unsubstantiated plus all those people who make a public display of leaving the church spouting their nonsense about suppression of information and finally finding peace and happiness as if it were up to the church to provide that for them.

[Calm]

That makes 6 times.

[BCSpace]

What I am sure is disturbing is the contention that arises because of these things. If we as members can’t come to a unity of the faith, how can we hope to be able to establish Zion in the last days where the Lord himself can come down and dwell? Over and over we see in the scriptures where the bickering and complaining of the people resulted in the chastisement of those people until they humbled themselves and called again on God with unified voices. I fear that we as a church are in for some chastisement before we can truly move forward.

The question is always who's unity? It's easy to say the prophet's or the Lord's and not yours or mine. But it doesn't always work out that way. However, I think the things the Church isn't unified on are pretty minor; evolution for example. Where it appears there is no unity on major things, it actually comes down to unbelief and apostasy rather than a simple matter of unity; gay marriage for example.

You have to recall that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a divider (Matthew 10 etc.) and unity is only achieved among those who actually believe, teach, and practice it.

[CASteinman]

Is section 132 still doctrine or not? It seems to be treated like section 89 in that the emphasis is almost always on the first half with only passing reference to the second half. I noticed this in the priesthood manual lately.The last half of 132 was not referenced AT ALL. Milk before meat apparently still applies even to those who have been in the church for over 50 years. I miss the separate manuals,sorry.

The whole section is doctrine. Some of it contains doctrine on a practice that we no longer follow. But the whole section is doctrine. This has nothing to do with Milk before Meat. This has everything to do with teaching the Gospel correctly.

[Senator]

No doubt I've been influenced by all the ruckus at MI and the whining of a certain party who has made claims that are unsubstantiated plus all those people who make a public display of leaving the church spouting their nonsense about suppression of information and finally finding peace and happiness as if it were up to the church to provide that for them.

Why do you let them bother you so much?

[Deborah]

Why do you let them bother you so much?

They don't. I've just lost patience with them.

[Teancum]

Deborah has used the terms "whining" or "whine" 5 times in discussions in this forum going back to 2007....so I would say, "no, she doesn't do this a lot."

Not sure how you figured that out/ But thanks. Odd that two of those were today.

[Judd]

I agree with this but unfortunately when we focus on these things it is the critics who complain that we aren't teaching enough and we are spoon feeding everyone because we don't talk about the secondary subjects. BTW I really like BlueDreams' comments and think this is the principle the GA's are aiming for when the simplify the lessons.

I'd say that a good deal of this also comes from within the church and especially from many who fancy themselves as having a great knowledge of gospel doctrine. It's fascinating, however, to be able to gain an appreciation for the depth of knowledge someone has for the gospel by their understanding of the depth of basic gospel principles. One of the things I really liked about Elder Maxwell wasn't necessarily how he spoke and illustrated ideas, but the fact that nearly everything he spoke about was an incredibly basic doctrine and pertained to the atonement and Christlike attributes, yet he explained them in such a way that he really showed how deep and rich these principles really were and how far reaching their applicability was to every day life. It's a shame that a lot of that understanding is somehow missed, often times in favor of some 'meatier' subjects that deserve more time than to be insulted with 'the basics'. The gospel is more about what we become. Although what we know is necessary for what we become, it is most certainly not sufficient.

Edited July 2, 2012 by Judd

[Deborah]

Not sure how you figured that out/ But thanks. Odd that two of those were today.

Me either, but it's interesting to know.

Also a note that some of this whining I keep hearing (oops said it again) is on a site other than this one.

[Calm]

Search on the terms with the author's name...of course a ton might have been deleted with upgrades because she happened to complaining about whining in threads that weren't saved but rarely mentioned in it threads that were, but I suspect that it was about even so let's say she used the terms "whine" and "whining" in total 12 times in 5 years here....well, since now she's said it 7 times that we have documented, let's go for 14, or about 3 times a year and if this time is typical, they are grouped so we can estimate that on average once a year she goes off on whiners.

Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah