Spiritual Food for Those Who Need Spiritual Milk
On the Need to Teach beyond the Foundation to Those Who Lack It
In a previous post, I had discussed how the author of Hebrews had reproved a congregation of Christians for neglecting their faith. In Hebrews 5, we see that this neglect resulted in a kind of intellectual immaturity. At the time of writing, he had expected that the congregation would have been qualified to be teachers of the faith, but instead, they needed to be taught again foundational doctrines and instructions. He thought that they should be retaught these things—what the author calls “milk”—before moving on to maturity, to the “solid food” of deeper theology. An order of learning is assumed: the Christian should learn the basics of the faith before learning more advanced topics; and if the Christian has neglected to remember or practice the basics, then he should reacquaint himself with the basics before moving on to advanced topics. While this is a reflection of the education of the author’s time, it is easy to see that this applies even today. I cannot learn about advanced functions, for example, unless I first have knowledge of basic algebra. Or if I have not been practicing guitar for an extended period of time, I should review rudimentary techniques and theory before trying “Giant Steps.” In the case of Hebrews, the congregation needed to be retaught the foundational doctrines and instructions before they were to be taught the doctrine of Christ as a high priest in the order of Melchizedek, a topic which the author broaches (5:6–10) right before he reproves the congregation for becoming “dull of hearing” (v. 11).
However, as we continue to read Hebrews, we see that the author nonetheless goes on to discuss Christ as the Melchizedekian high priest anyway (see ch. 7), without first reviewing the basics. This seems to be at odds with his reproof. Although he had admonished the congregation for their lack of intellectual maturity, saying that they needed to be retaught the basics of the faith (5:11–12), and although he was willing to be the one to teach them (6:3), he nonetheless goes on to teach them the very thing for which he said they were not quite ready. Why is this the case? It will be helpful to consider the following passage:
6:1 Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 and of instruction about washings, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do if God permits. 4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. 7 For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. 8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned. (Heb. 6:1–7)
Although he delays his discussion of Jesus as the Melchizedekian high priest until chapter 7, we can see here his motivation for writing on it: the danger of apostasy (6:4–7). Recall that the congregation had endured persecution and had subsequently been neglecting their faith, both intellectually and practically. By neglecting their faith, they were in danger of drifting away (2:1), of leaving the faith altogether. However, this drift was not a drift toward mere unbelief, but toward a belief in something else in particular. The congregation probably consisted of Jewish converts to Christianity, and the specific danger in their case was that they would leave Christianity in favour of returning to Judaism. The discussion of Jesus as Melchizedekian high priest is part of the author’s overall argument of the supremacy of the New Covenant over the Old, and he uses it as a means to keep his congregation from returning to Jewish religion. Even if it is not clear how much the congregation would have been able to comprehend given that they had become dull of hearing, the author saw that it was necessary to teach them for the preservation of their Christian faith.
It seems, then, that we can infer the following principles from Hebrews. Under normal circumstances a Christian should first learn (or relearn) foundational teachings and instructions of the faith prior to learning about more advanced topics. However, if there is matter that threatens the faith of a Christian, and if learning about a particular advanced topic would help to preserve his faith, then the Christian should learn about the topic, even if under normal circumstances he should learn (or relearn) the foundations first.
Much can be said about the application of these principles, but it would be beyond the scope of a short blog. I will suggest, however, that pastors and teachers within the church need to identify and address the particular issues that threaten the church’s faithfulness to orthodox Christian beliefs and practices. For the author of Hebrews, the threat was the potential return to Judaism. In our day, and at least in my particular place in the world, one threat (among others) is LGBTQ+ ideology. When pastors address these particular issues, they need to do so biblically, and with clarity and firmness. The author of Hebrews himself skillfully argued from the Scriptures and his warnings were stark. Finally, pastors and teachers should address these issues, even if they do not think that their church is “ready” to hear about them. They should be ready to review the basics if need be, but they need to go ahead and teach beyond the basics so as to preserve the faith of their congregations. Like the author of Hebrews, because of the danger of falling away from the faith, pastors and teachers should provide spiritual food, even if the congregation still needs spiritual milk.
I can see why this order of learning was included by God in His Word.. we know what happens when so-called Christians move onto advanced topics after getting rid of the foundational basics.
I believe there's a typo in your third paragraph with your reference to drifting away (did you mean 2:1?).
Yes, pastors should firmly address the issue of LGBTQ+ ideology, even - or especially - in a country that has made opposition to it a crime.
Interesting perspective. I see the omission of the fundamental doctrines in Hebrews as possibly due to the fact that the audience presumably already had access to the materials they needed pertaining to these doctrines, namely the Pauline and Petrine epistles, and perhaps even some of the gospels; and so the author of Hebrews felt no need to spend his precious parchment and quill resources rehashing what they could review for themselves and so carried on to the more advanced doctrine.
Either way, your conclusions are sound.