- ThinkBlog - http://thinkblog.org -
On Not Giving Honey to Infants
Posted By Michael On 13th March 2006 @ 20:50 In theology, phys & pharm | -1 Comments
Distance runners may or may not know that you should take a teaspoon of honey straight, before a long race, since it is a long-digesting sugar that will provide consistent energy without the sugar-fatigue of, say, Snickers bars or some such nonsense after only a few minutes.
It’s funny how Canaan, the Promised Land of Israel, was described as “flowing with milk and honey.” We think, in American hermeneutic fashion, that that’s simply the necessities and luxuries that are good for a person. Well, that’s true, and fine and dandy, but look closer: honey is not to be given to infants under one year. No, that’s not in the Bible, that’s on the label. Why is that, then?
Honey may or may not contain spores that can cause infant botulism; basically, that’s an infection that you don’t want your kid to get under any circumstances, as it’s been know to lead to sudden infant death and other (affirmatively somewhat less grievous) complications.
Let’s put two and two together and meditate, shall we? Some of us continue to ask why God doesn’t bless us with great gifts; we wonder why God has forgotten us in our troubles; we ask why we don’t have it so easy as the Joneses; we wonder bitterly why other believers seem so at peace while we are so deeply troubled or struggling with some huge life issue.
The answer may be that the good blessings God wants to give us contain elements of distraction or temptation that we are, as babes, as yet unable to handle. Remember how the author of Hebrews admonishes his readers that they “[1] need milk not solid food“? Why? Because they were weak in their faith. But is it conceivable that the reason that they need milk is because they would be tempted if they had “solid food” into doing something utterly destructive to their faith?
I think part of the point that so many believers miss, as they’re walking in their faith with Christ, is that they have stopped walking at infancy “under one spiritual year,” as it were; having been saved, they do not continue to get to know Jesus personally. It’s not a matter of education: just as many Bible college graduates are as carnal and embittered as disillusioned secular-institution grads. It’s a matter of getting close to Christ. As we go deeper with Him and yield ourselves to His Spirit, the more capable we are of receiving the honey of His good blessings.
On Not Giving Honey to Infants
Posted By Michael On 13th March 2006 @ 20:50 In theology, phys & pharm | -1 Comments
Distance runners may or may not know that you should take a teaspoon of honey straight, before a long race, since it is a long-digesting sugar that will provide consistent energy without the sugar-fatigue of, say, Snickers bars or some such nonsense after only a few minutes.
It’s funny how Canaan, the Promised Land of Israel, was described as “flowing with milk and honey.” We think, in American hermeneutic fashion, that that’s simply the necessities and luxuries that are good for a person. Well, that’s true, and fine and dandy, but look closer: honey is not to be given to infants under one year. No, that’s not in the Bible, that’s on the label. Why is that, then?
Honey may or may not contain spores that can cause infant botulism; basically, that’s an infection that you don’t want your kid to get under any circumstances, as it’s been know to lead to sudden infant death and other (affirmatively somewhat less grievous) complications.
Let’s put two and two together and meditate, shall we? Some of us continue to ask why God doesn’t bless us with great gifts; we wonder why God has forgotten us in our troubles; we ask why we don’t have it so easy as the Joneses; we wonder bitterly why other believers seem so at peace while we are so deeply troubled or struggling with some huge life issue.
The answer may be that the good blessings God wants to give us contain elements of distraction or temptation that we are, as babes, as yet unable to handle. Remember how the author of Hebrews admonishes his readers that they “[2] need milk not solid food“? Why? Because they were weak in their faith. But is it conceivable that the reason that they need milk is because they would be tempted if they had “solid food” into doing something utterly destructive to their faith?
I think part of the point that so many believers miss, as they’re walking in their faith with Christ, is that they have stopped walking at infancy “under one spiritual year,” as it were; having been saved, they do not continue to get to know Jesus personally. It’s not a matter of education: just as many Bible college graduates are as carnal and embittered as disillusioned secular-institution grads. It’s a matter of getting close to Christ. As we go deeper with Him and yield ourselves to His Spirit, the more capable we are of receiving the honey of His good blessings.
Article printed from ThinkBlog: http://thinkblog.org
URL to article: http://thinkblog.org/2006/03/13/on-not-giving-honey-to-infants/
URLs in this post:
[1] need milk not solid food: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=5&verse=12&version=49&co
ntext=verse
[2] need milk not solid food: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=5&verse=12&version=49&co
ntext=verse
Click here to print.