Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Doctrine 612

Gordon b hinkley Manuel

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Very funny.
The doctrines contained in D&C 132, the promises of the marriage covenant, the Abrahamic covenant, and the teachings of the prophets on eternal marriage would suffice.

Just took a quick read through the new President Hinckley manual lesson on marriage.
Same old same old. 

Start with a sweet story about President Hinckley and his wife.  Check!
Throw in the SAME teachings as contained in every single previous "Teachings of the Presidents" manual.  Check!
Quote the exact same scripture's as last year manual.  Check!

Check out this amazing new piece of information sure to spark great learning, progression, and an increase in knowledge:

  • In the temple, a husband and wife can be sealed together for all eternity.

    [The] temples … offer blessings that are had nowhere else. All that occurs in these sacred houses has to do with the eternal nature of man. Here, husbands and wives and children are sealed together as families for all eternity. Marriage is not “until death do ye part.” It is forever, if the parties live worthy of the blessing.


Now let's look at the teachings of President Hunter:

  • In the temple we receive the highest ordinance available to men and women, the sealing of husbands and wives together for eternity. We hope our young people will settle for nothing less than a temple marriage.  (Not even true by the way).

Or Joseph F. Smith

  • It is a glorious privilege to be permitted to go into a Temple of God to be united as man and wife in the bonds of holy wedlock for time and all eternity by the authority of the Holy Priesthood, which is the power of God, for they who are thus joined together “no man can put asunder,” for God hath joined them.

Or Harold B. Lee

  • Those who make themselves worthy and enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage in the temple for time and all eternity will be laying the first cornerstone for an eternal family home in the celestial kingdom that will last forever. Their reward is to have “glory added upon their heads forever and forever”

Or Ezra Taft Benson

  • The Lord’s desire is for every adult man and woman in the Church to receive the ordinances of the temple. This means that they are to be endowed and that all married couples are to be sealed for eternity. These ordinances provide a protection and blessing to their marriage.


These aren't bad.  But is it any wonder there is so little progression.  Each of these quotes from the manual contains a possible tangential topic (in bold) that could lead to a much deeper discussion.  But then we wouldn't get through the lesson would we.

 

 

I think the manuals contain an email address you can email your thoughts too. I'd be interested in what they say

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for contacting the curriculum committee. Your thoughts are important to us, and they will be ignored in the order they were received . . . ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I think the manuals contain an email address you can email your thoughts too. I'd be interested in what they say

I have zero issues with the basics contained in the manuals.  I have big issues with the refusal of members to go off manual or in depth on any doctrine.  And especially when they then complain they didn't know something.

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I have zero issues with the basics contained in the manuals.  I have big issues with the refusal of members to go off manual or in depth on any doctrine.  And especially when they then complain they didn't know something.

aha! well..............................do you have loads of ice cream?

Share this post


Link to post

Some people in here talk as though the only possible type of manual to be used in Relief Society and Priesthood is a Teachings of a President of the Church manual, even though such a manual was never even used until 1998. I think once the Church has finished with the series that they should start using a different type of manual (and then revisit it whenever there's a new manual to add?). Maybe it could go back to using Hugh Nibley books as manuals. Or I could write something.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/9/2016 at 6:29 PM, consiglieri said:

 

I would only add that in the LDS Church, we spend 95% of the time talking about 5% of the scriptures.  ;)

 

Because 95% of the members don't follow that 5% yet, when they do, it'll be time to move on, until then, it would be a worthless pursuit.

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I have zero issues with the basics contained in the manuals.  I have big issues with the refusal of members to go off manual or in depth on any doctrine.  And especially when they then complain they didn't know something.

I love the fact that we are to stick to the manuals. I get tired of speculation being taught as fact by well-meaning but misguided teachers. I have walked out of a few classes where the instrutor has brought up their pet beliefs as if its the gospel truth. I suppose I should have stayed and refuted it, but I can't abide even listening tosome of their strange ideas

Edited by mnn727

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, mnn727 said:

I love the fact that we are to stick to the manuals. I get tired of speculation being taught as fact by well-meaning but misguided teachers. I have walked out of a few classes where the instrutor has brought up their pet beliefs as if its the gospel truth. I suppose I should have stayed and refuted it, but I can't abide even listening tosome of their strange ideas

Nobody is talking about pet doctrines although I'll acknowledge that does happen.
It's simply an issue of depth and progression.  I do not now nor have I ever believed God is pleased when we refuse to learn and study beyond the basics.
And repeating those basics ad nauseam is not a scriptural principle.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post
On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 7:55 AM, bluebell said:

I agree that church members do seem to struggle with new concepts that require dedication and change.  We tend to cave to a form of instinctual drift where we start out with good intentions but quickly fall back to old patterns of behavior.

From my perspective, the challenge will be for the church to show specific steps for parents to take on how to change the worship focus.  Throwing out directions like read the scriptures, say prayers, have family home evening isn't going to cut it.  Neither is letting the parents figure it out on their own.  That's what we've been doing and more of the same isn't going to change anything.

There was a conference talk (don't remember details) that talked about this.  That just reading through the scriptures won't be enough.  I think it was in the same talk as the idea that many have been ok without FHE, but now it will need to happen for our children to be ok.  

The change thing.  PART of that is a lack of knowledge. It is difficult to change how things are done if you don't see examples and if you're current examples have that same problem then it solves nothing. 

I think the church recognizes this and that is why it is starting with Come Follow Me with the youth and with training seminary teachers. As the youth see the examples of this then they will be better prepared as they start to be the example.  

Obviously, it will take time since seminary teachers don't pick things up right away either and there are a limited number of professional teachers in CES, but as youth in these classes start to pick it up then it will spread.  Just kind of frustrating to wait. 

You see the same idea with counseling in our councils.  That was talked of long ago, but I find many,  including me,  struggling with knowing how to do it and I am reading things to help me find out how to do it.  As church leadership gets more instruction,  then they can start to teach by example. 

Part of it also goes right along with what you are saying. In order to learn how to read scriptures with our families it may take some time with the Spirit and researching lds.org, education week, etc and people often find they don't "have time" to do that.  One of the things we keep getting asked to do is to "simplify" so we have time for the needed things.  There are some who have simplified and still don't have time for that research or have it available nor is it something that, individually,  they are supposed to focus on,  but I have to think that since those resources are there and we still get the message to simplify that, like you said,  people have a hard time with change. 

23 hours ago, rongo said:

Church members are crying for more, and they like hearing from those who are well-read and well-studied. I have been approached multiple times about forming study groups, but I have explained to these members why the Church discourages home study groups outside of priesthood oversight. I have recommended reading, but the people wanting study groups hardly ever do it. They prefer to outsource it to others and get the Cliffs Notes versions from them. :( 

Are most of the people who approach you women or men? 

I can tell you I would love a study group,  but not to outsource my learning. I belong to a book club. I love that it had me reading things I would not normally read, but I have gained a lot through reading them.  But I could just ask my friends for book reccomendations if that were the only point of the book club. 

Number 1 is friendship. I love being with these women and it is a reason to get together.  

Number 2 is I learn more through discussing the books.  Things I missed.  Experiences of others that explain things in the books. Things they had a question about that never came to my mind and that helped me understand better.  I would love to see this with a scripture study group. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 08/10/2016 at 11:33 AM, Tacenda said:

It may have been mentioned or I'm shooting from the hip, but our church needs more scripture study at church. Similar to other faiths focus on what's in scripture. Especially for those that struggle understanding them on their own.

Well, there are seminary and institute, but I hear what you are saying. I remember Bible Study from my Baptist church where we progressed through the scriptures line by line. This is basically why I was suggesting a church-created commentary. However, I believe this would require a separate class from Gospel Doctrine.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I do not now nor have I ever believed God is pleased when we refuse to learn and study beyond the basics.
And repeating those basics ad nauseam is not a scriptural principle.

Well said. So many people think there's some virtue in "only sticking to the basics" and "don't go beyond that; don't delve into the mysteries; just do your hometeaching and serve others" (as though studying the Gospel intently means you don't serve others) when usually their idea of "the basics" is a few hand-me-down ideas that get circulated amongst the Mormon subculture.

Edited by CMZ

Share this post


Link to post
On 08/10/2016 at 10:05 AM, RevTestament said:

Creating a commentary on the scriptures might help. It could raise questions to "ponderize" with your family. It could suggest Hebrew roots of OT scripture words. Point out meanings of various Old English words. What church leaders have written about various passages, etc. It could actually be interactive, and put on LDS.org and contain links to Ensign articles, Joseph Smith papers, new church videos on various passages, etc which should help with visual learning. It could also have an audio reader option.

I think this would help keep the interest of children. When a passage they have a question about is reached, they can look for a link to a commentary page with further links to all these things. Allowing the children to search the links will give them a feeling of participation and discovery in the process. It might go so far as to provide an interlinear Hebrew version and other interlinear language versions. This might also be a great help in the mission field.

The same type of thing could be done with a family home evening manual online arranged in subjects which has links to scriptures, videos, commentary pages, etc. (I realize there are some limited links to scriptures already). Perhaps families could submit videos of their own experiences and testimonies, which subject to approval, might be able to get linked to. Maybe create something like an LDS Testimonial channel with videos arranged by subject?

Rather than trying to "change" the worship focus, just creating and providing the tools might help to change the focus by creating a place the family is more inclined to go and use.

 

On 08/10/2016 at 0:24 PM, Doctrine 612 said:

That already been done

app called lds scripture citation index.

Thank you, I downloaded that app. However, what I am thinking of is more of a read along version of the scriptures with links to many definitions possible interpretations, videos, and many other things. So I believe the LDS scriptures index has a good start. See the Oxford Annotated Bible for an idea of what I am suggesting.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, CMZ said:

Well said. So many people think there's some virtue in "only sticking to the basics" and "don't go beyond that; don't delve into the mysteries; just do your hometeaching and serve others" (as though studying the Gospel intently means you don't serve others) when usually their idea of "the basics" is a few hand-me-down ideas that get circulated amongst the Mormon subculture.

I Nephi 10:19 19 For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost
Mosiah 1:5 that we might read and understand of his mysteries, and have his commandments always before our eyes
Mosiah 2:9 open your ears that ye may hear, and your hearts that ye may understand, and your minds that the mysteries of God may be unfolded to your view.
D&C 6:7 behold, the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto you, and then shall you be made rich.
D&C 107:19 To have the privilege of receiving the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, to have the heavens opened unto them
D&C 97:5  5 And I will bless him with a multiplicity of blessings, in expounding all scriptures and mysteries to the edification of the school, and of the church in Zion.
D&C 84:19 And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God.
Ephesians 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery;

Nowhere does God say to leave the mysteries alone except in what we proclaim publicly as missionary work.  THEN and only then are we to stick to the First Principles  (D&C 19:31, TPJS 292)
If we as members want to stay as new converts for all eternity and never progress God may eventually be forced give up on building his kingdom.  And by refusing to study the mysteries we are disobeying God.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/13/2016 at 0:06 PM, rongo said:

Thank you for contacting the curriculum committee. Your thoughts are important to us, and they will be ignored in the order they were received . . . ;)

 

:PThis is my life!!

Share this post


Link to post
On August 10, 28 Heisei at 10:05 AM, RevTestament said:

Perhaps families could submit videos of their own experiences and testimonies, which subject to approval, might be able to get linked to. Maybe create something like an LDS Testimonial channel with videos arranged by subject?

Rather than trying to "change" the worship focus, just creating and providing the tools might help to change the focus by creating a place the family is more inclined to go and use.

They are already somewhat set up for this, it would not be complicated (I am assuming though I may be wrong) to add this as a specific project, though they would probably have to add staff:

https://www.lds.org/topics/service/create?lang=eng

https://createldsmedia.lds.org/

Share this post


Link to post

I will be somewhat surprised if they repeat the Teachings series based on what they said when they first came out (or rather my memory of it, I should see if I can find it).  The implication was they would have the series and then it was hoped it would be used as a reference by members.

Share this post


Link to post

I believe this is where I got the idea...if not it, something very similar.  It speaks of the manuals being used first for the lessons and then being meant for personal study:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1997/12/major-curriculum-changes-in-priesthood-and-relief-society?lang=eng

Section on second and third Sundays, second paragraph.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Calm said:

I will be somewhat surprised if they repeat the Teachings series based on what they said when they first came out (or rather my memory of it, I should see if I can find it).  The implication was they would have the series and then it was hoped it would be used as a reference by members.

This is what I was trying to remember.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, one thing that the book will clarify is that there is a "C" in Hinckley and there is no "E" in Manual (unless you're talking about your cousin Manuel):P

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Well, there are seminary and institute, but I hear what you are saying. I remember Bible Study from my Baptist church where we progressed through the scriptures line by line. This is basically why I was suggesting a church-created commentary. However, I believe this would require a separate class from Gospel Doctrine.

I have sat in on a lot of Bible studies from many denominations including Baptists. All of which I was left wishing there was more substance to them, because I personally get more out of the Bible when I study it myself than with a differing denomination's so called Bible study. I do admit that my limited experiences couldn't possible reflect a majority of Bible study styles so I may be off base in my assessment of them, but at least every single one around here isn't so much a study of the Bible as it is listening to one person's interpretation of what the Bible is saying, line by line or not. It just doesn't seem to ever enlighten me enough to even be worth the time. Often times the preacher's views are just a watered down version of what the gospel is, and even at times teaching something that is completely off base, and no one is able to interject with a raised hand to explain what it is that they have personally studied on their own and their own interpretation of the same scripture. I don't even know why they call it a study if you can't interject and ask questions, like you can do in Gospel Doctrine's class, or any other LDS church class for that matter. A study shouldn't be based off of what one person is saying, but should be study of what many people are saying as they read the same line by line scriptures.

I'm not trying to knock the good you got out of your Bible study, nor am I trying to knock other people's faith. If you read the actual teacher's manual for Gospel Doctrine, you will also see a line by line teaching of the scriptures. Unfortunately there isn't enough time allotted in Sunday school class to go through the whole lesson so it does get shortened and parts are skipped. We are actually expected to have already read the scripture chapters that are to be discussed each week in class. The same goes with Seminary and Institute classes, which are separate classes that go more into detailed scripture study than Gospel Doctrine. All students are expected to have read the scripture chapters before these classes as well. If we actually did our part as students of Gospel Doctrine, Seminary, or Institute classes we would end up reading the scriptures through line by line, and then going back and studying them in greater detail during class time, instead of just expecting a teacher or a preacher to do all the work for us. I'm quite certain there would be a lot less complaining going on about how boring classes are because they teach the same old basics, if we came prepared with our own sets of questions based off of what we personally studied before hand.

The same could be said of the church manuals that are taught out of, in priesthood and Relief Society classes as well. If we actually studied the chapters before hand, we would come to class armed with better questions and comments that would foster a more thorough study of what is being taught. The Holy Spirit would guide the lessons better as well because we would already be more in tune to what is being taught before it even starts to get taught.

Just my two cents worth anyway.

 

Share this post


Link to post

It's not just your two cents but very true that the learning is primarily to be done by individuals on their own time and that class time is for discussion time on principles already studied by each individual. There's nothing wrong with happening to learn something in a class, but we don't go to Sunday School (or RS/Priesthood, etc.) to just sit there and wait for the teacher to tell us something we've never heard before. That's not the type of Saint the Lord is hoping to raise up.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, CMZ said:

It's not just your two cents but very true that the learning is primarily to be done by individuals on their own time and that class time is for discussion time on principles already studied by each individual. There's nothing wrong with happening to learn something in a class, but we don't go to Sunday School (or RS/Priesthood, etc.) to just sit there and wait for the teacher to tell us something we've never heard before. That's not the type of Saint the Lord is hoping to raise up.

Personally I am NOT advocating that the manuals become full of deep doctrine or that the classes at Church go off on every tangent and pet doctrine.

What I personally would like to see is what you describe here being publicly declared by the Church.  What I wish is that the Church would tell the members clearly that the information in the manuals is NOT sufficient doctrinally to teach them all they need to know.

My annoyance with the manuals comes only because I know it is all many members ever bother to learn.  Not because the manuals are a problem.
When members don't study and delve into deeper doctrines but the entirety of their doctrinal learning comes from the manuals and lessons that is where I have the problem.  Because it is not enough.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.lds.org/new-era/2013/01/how-to-never-have-a-boring-church-class-ever-again?lang=eng

Quote

 

Spiritually speaking, our experiences at church can lead to the fire of conversion only if we come prepared—if we are in a spiritual condition to receive the spark and keep it burning within us.

Elder David A. Bednar of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles recently taught: “Young people increasingly need to be learners who act and thereby receive additional light and knowledge by the power of the Holy Ghost—and not merely passive students who primarily are acted upon.”3 Come, Follow Me is designed to help you become a learner who acts.

It is possible to never have a boring Church class again. It’s a choice you make to come to class spiritually prepared, to actively participate in discovering the truths of the gospel for yourself, and to make those truths part of your life.

 

 

Edited by CMZ

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, waveslider said:

I have sat in on a lot of Bible studies from many denominations including Baptists. All of which I was left wishing there was more substance to them, because I personally get more out of the Bible when I study it myself than with a differing denomination's so called Bible study. I do admit that my limited experiences couldn't possible reflect a majority of Bible study styles so I may be off base in my assessment of them, but at least every single one around here isn't so much a study of the Bible as it is listening to one person's interpretation of what the Bible is saying, line by line or not. It just doesn't seem to ever enlighten me enough to even be worth the time. Often times the preacher's views are just a watered down version of what the gospel is, and even at times teaching something that is completely off base, and no one is able to interject with a raised hand to explain what it is that they have personally studied on their own and their own interpretation of the same scripture. I don't even know why they call it a study if you can't interject and ask questions, like you can do in Gospel Doctrine's class, or any other LDS church class for that matter. A study shouldn't be based off of what one person is saying, but should be study of what many people are saying as they read the same line by line scriptures.

Note my highlight. The Bible study I am speaking of was when I was a child. We had a good teacher. It was my first real exposure to anything about the KJV. I believe he introduced the OT with a little spiel about the Hebrew and Greek, which I didn't quite understand, but it was my first exposure to it. As we read in class, he would ask us what we thought of the stories - even why God put Jonah in the belly of the whale, etc. So yes, we did get the Baptist point of view but he encouraged us to try to understand the scriptures. 

I will give an example of the type of thing I think my suggested commentary would discuss. When it came to the "name" Melchisedek, it would show a linked name. which would take the reader to the commentary page. As another poster has posted here:

"MLK is Semitic for king, so any variation of that will have that meaning in related languages. Mulek, Melek, Molock, etc. are all different versions with the same idea. No surprise that Pashtun, Urdu, or other area languages have that. 

MLKZDK = Melchizedek = king of righteousness"

So it appears Melchizedek was not the person's name, but an acquired title. It may then go on to say that traditionally, the Rabbis have believed that this Melchizedek is Shem. It may then discuss whether this was possible given Shem's age etc. It does not need to give a definitive answer as to whether this is all in fact true as a revelation. But I think this information provides a good background to help the reader understand what is going on with Melchizedek and  Abraham. I don't  know of any  talk by a GA that will go into this kind of detail. The page could also provide links to any upcoming OT church videos on point. So it would kind of be like an expansion of the "dictionary" index portion of our current quads. Now if anything like this interests people, it would be available online, and could also be a source of further discussion in a class. My guess is 99% of the church membership does not know anything like this as to the name of the "Melchisedek priesthood"  which is used so prominently in our church.

 

Quote

I'm not trying to knock the good you got out of your Bible study, nor am I trying to knock other people's faith. If you read the actual teacher's manual for Gospel Doctrine, you will also see a line by line teaching of the scriptures. Unfortunately there isn't enough time allotted in Sunday school class to go through the whole lesson so it does get shortened and parts are skipped. We are actually expected to have already read the scripture chapters that are to be discussed each week in class. The same goes with Seminary and Institute classes, which are separate classes that go more into detailed scripture study than Gospel Doctrine. All students are expected to have read the scripture chapters before these classes as well. If we actually did our part as students of Gospel Doctrine, Seminary, or Institute classes we would end up reading the scriptures through line by line, and then going back and studying them in greater detail during class time, instead of just expecting a teacher or a preacher to do all the work for us. I'm quite certain there would be a lot less complaining going on about how boring classes are because they teach the same old basics, if we came prepared with our own sets of questions based off of what we personally studied before hand.

The same could be said of the church manuals that are taught out of, in priesthood and Relief Society classes as well. If we actually studied the chapters before hand, we would come to class armed with better questions and comments that would foster a more thorough study of what is being taught. The Holy Spirit would guide the lessons better as well because we would already be more in tune to what is being taught before it even starts to get taught.

Just my two cents worth anyway.

Reading the scriptures and the lessons in the Gospel Doctrine manual will not provide info like I have given above. This is why I am suggesting the possibility of another class. We have another simplified class for investigators and new members called Gospel Essentials. Why not have another class for advanced scripture study for those who want it? As you said there is not enough time in the Gospel Doctrine class to go into this type of detail. I think some people just don't want this kind of detail. It is boring to them. Some people like myself find it crucial, and devour it. In any event, even if there is not an additional class, perhaps you can see why it would be a great tool for home use as an online commentary, where people can access as their time allows for FHE, daily scripture reading, etc. If the church is serious about encouraging the learning process at home, this is certainly a way to do it, it seems to me - this online commentary. It would also be available for investigators, etc. I just think it would be a great tool. That would also keep out the "pet teachings" of class instructors or the one-viewpoint tendency of some class instructors of other sects, while encouraging membership to pray about these things. I don't know if that scares the leadership or something, but I think it would allow the membership to progress in their understanding of the scriptures, and promote the great founding principle of this church that we welcome the truth from whatsoever source it may come.

As for our classes being somehow better than other sects as you seem to suggest by allowing questions, etc, let me give you one of my experiences from Gospel Doctrine. The lesson was on Moses and the issue of dispensations was addressed. I believe the teacher said that Moses was the head of a dispensation and reintroduced the priesthood (from the manual). I raised my hand and said something like "actually, I believe Moses received the priesthood from Jethro his father-in-law." The teacher responded in a very negative fashion, and said something to the extent "if you believe that...." Well it just so happens that in our D&C we are told that Moses received the priesthood from Jethro. So, we see the attitude I think that the manual is always right and is not to be challenged. I ended up going to a second Gospel Doctrine class after that. I think this is the danger that is engendered from "teaching only from the manual." I can see how other people might get discouraged from participating or raising questions from this type of perceived reaction. A home setting and online commentary avoids this kind of thing while still allowing errors to be pointed out with online submissions.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...