Evolution in Sunday School Yesterday

[Jeff K.]

I agree that teaching is not an easy task. And yes there are boring teachers out there. I have sat through too many to honestly negate that view. I have long since come to the conclusion that if a lesson is boring, that maybe it behooves the membership to do something about it.

I don't mean getting rid of the teacher, a calling can be as much about learning as it is about teaching. But perhaps helping the teacher be a better teacher by bringing up important salient points. When I lived abroad, I attended a gospel doctrine class where the poor brother literally just read from the book. I complained to my wife about it and resolved to attend that class less. This did not help me, and it didn't help other people. After a bit of maturing and some gentle persuasion from my wife (sometimes not so gentle), I started attending, but asking more questions along the lines of the lesson. After a while that poor brother would actually look things up, discuss them and everyone else started asking questions. He barely had time to get the lesson out before the end of class.

It made me realize that I am as much responsible for the success or failure of the teacher as the teaher him/herself. And that is why I reject boredom since it follows a meme philosophy and not a more Christ centered one.

[Jeff K.]

Consig should be commended for doing what, in my experience, the vast majority of teachers in the Church fail to do -- put in serious thought and time preparing the lesson. I'll take him anyday over the teacher who's dry, pat and stale lesson follows the manual to a "t." Indeed, when comparing alleged "sins," I think Consig's alleged ego and propensity to ignore the manual pale in comparison to the all-too-common failure to adequately prepare.

"E" for effort then? But is that what we strive for? What if the effort harms rather than helps? Serious thought is good, but what if it is seriously wrong thought? What if someone is motivated in the wrong direction for the wrong reasons? Effort alone cannot build Zion, but effort in the right direction can?

I believe you present a false dichotomy when stating someone must follow the manual to a "T", since such a statement is subjective and not objective. If brings in important quotes in regard to how the implementation of gospel principles and how they change lives. I don't see that as boring when presented by a good teacher (frankly anything presented by an ill prepared teacher, no matter how important can be made boring). Some would call that "deviation" others would not.

Could the use of salacious (versus salient) material be more a reflection of poor preperation rather than deep thought? Its easy to kick out controversy, it is hard, as you say, to teach thoughtfully.

[David T]

Boredom is not a reason to leave the gospel, but it's a reason why people don't attend.

Teaching is not an easy task, and to many it doesn't come naturally. Sure, there's teacher prep and training. But I think the attitude that a lesson only needs to be good enough unfortunately prevails. Too many members think that fulfilling their calling simply means getting it done. We may understand that more is required, but when our callings have to compete with all our other responsibilities and interests, getting it done is often "good enough." So the home teacher feels that he has fulfilled his calling when, at the end of the month, he can report 100%. And the Sunday School teacher thinks he or she has done the calling if, on Sunday, a lesson is taught.

Consig should be commended for doing what, in my experience, the vast majority of teachers in the Church fail to do -- put in serious thought and time preparing the lesson. I'll take him anyday over the teacher who's dry, pat and stale lesson follows the manual to a "t." Indeed, when comparing alleged "sins," I think Consig's alleged ego and propensity to ignore the manual pale in comparison to the all-too-common failure to adequately prepare.

I also think members have an obligation to prepare for class, and if they're comfortable with it, to participate in the lesson. Along with the teachers, we are responsible for ensuring that the lesson is engaging and fruitful. But often it is simply not possible. Just last weekin EQ, an EQ counselor apologized that the scheduled teacher could not be there and then proceded to pass out copies of a GC talk. We then took turns reading from the talk. No discussion, no questions, no comments. Just reading. I could certainly see how the marginal member would consider that hour completely wasted and decide not to return the next week. I don't consider myself that marginal yet, and i thought it was a complete waste.

It seems that many think there are only two ways to teach:

1. Teaching the Approved and Assigned Doctrines in an unprepared and boring manner that doesn't affect anyone

2. Teaching Intellectual History of the Church that will stimulate and excite people about the Church

That's such a false dichotomy.

Quite frankly, based on what I've seen from Consig, I bet he could teach wonderful, powerful, and inspiring lessons on Faith, Repentance, Eternal Marriage, and Continuing Revelation, etc that focus on application of the Doctrines in the lives of his class, and that minimize the historical trappings as simply a framework for the Doctrines of Salvation - Lessons that are consistent with what the brethren have asked be emphasised in our Sunday School classes. He most likely has, in the past.

Right now, he's just choosing not to. His class members are certainly learning good things from him. My reservation and concern in this matter is that by straying from the Assignment and the pure unambiguous doctrines of the Gospel, certain class members may not be hearing the best things that may be needed in their personal lives more than he is aware.

[cinepro]

I agree that teaching is not an easy task. And yes there are boring teachers out there. I have sat through too many to honestly negate that view. I have long since come to the conclusion that if a lesson is boring, that maybe it behooves the membership to do something about it.

I agree.

Then again, I also have a Blackberry.

[toon]

I agree that your approach of not giving up is the correct approach. As members and class participants, we have an obligation and should not give up on a teacher. It's not our call to say who should or should not be teaching, and while I see no problem with raising concerns to the Bishop, we still beed respect his decision. But not every member has a spouse that will be the voice of reason and encourage continued attendance. All we need to do to see the problem is to count the number of members who mysteriously disappear (to socialize, attend to callings and other "important" tasks) during the Sunday School hour.

Boredom may be something that you have learned to deal with and overcome, but the reality is others are just as likely to react by either not attending or checking out (Blackberry).

[Jeff K.]

Yes, I keep a blackberry count in the back of my mind when I teach. If people start whipping those out and it isn't March, or some other key sports period, I can only assume I am not reaching the members.

[Jeff K.]

I note women don't use them nearly as much.

[David T]

Of course, more and more are using their phones to access the scriptures and manuals. It's been a rapidly expanding phenomenon with the teachers and members in the wards I frequent...

[Bsix]

It seems that many think there are only two ways to teach:

1. Teaching the Approved and Assigned Doctrines in an unprepared and boring manner that doesn't affect anyone

2. Teaching Intellectual History of the Church that will stimulate and excite people about the Church

That's such a false dichotomy.

Well spoken...and absolutely true. When supported by the Spirit and a motivated, skilled teacher the lessons from the Church manuals can be insiring, interesting, and motivating -- and they change the lives of the members for the better.

Quite frankly, based on what I've seen from Consig, I bet he could teach wonderful, powerful, and inspiring lessons on Faith, Repentance, Eternal Marriage, and Continuing Revelation, etc that focus on application of the Doctrines in the lives of his class, and that minimize the historical trappings as simply a framework for the Doctrines of Salvation - Lessons that are consistent with what the brethren have asked be emphasised in our Sunday School classes. He most likely has, in the past.

I agree. I bet that Consig is a wonderful teacher of both freelance lessons as well as when teaching from the approved materials.

Right now, he's just choosing not to. His class members are certainly learning good things from him. My reservation and concern in this matter is that by straying from the Assignment and the pure unambiguous doctrines of the Gospel, certain class members may not be hearing the best things that may be needed in their personal lives more than he is aware.

For me to endorse this statement would require me making a personal judgement of Consig. I'll just say that in a general sense, the opinion quoted above could apply to literally thousands of Sunday School teachers.

With all that said...Consig's Bishop and Sunday School President decide how he is doing and if his approach is acceptable. Ninnies like us can weigh in with our own opinions, but we are not the key-holding authorities who get to decide.

Great comments,

Six

[toon]

That's such a false dichotomy.

I'm not saying that there are only two ways to teach. I just don't think it appropriate to jump all over consig for going off the manual, especially since it appears he puts more time, effort and sincerity into his calling than many who stick to the approved curriculum. While I think the appropriateness of following the manual is an appropriate topic for this forum, I don't believe Consig's ego and intentions are.

I do think a case can be made that it's more difficult to teach an engaging and fresh lesson from the manual.

[Jeff K.]

Of course, more and more are using their phones to access the scriptures and manuals. It's been a rapidly expanding phenomenon with the teachers and members in the wards I frequent...

I have noticed that a great deal. Some even read the lesson ahead of time and punch in the sscriptures so they can reference with greater speed. But those are the obvious guys. I am still getting used to missionaries with cell phones (by the way they are beginning to send missionaries directly to the field sans MTC).

[Bsix]

"E" for effort then? But is that what we strive for? What if the effort harms rather than helps? Serious thought is good, but what if it is seriously wrong thought? What if someone is motivated in the wrong direction for the wrong reasons? Effort alone cannot build Zion, but effort in the right direction can?

I don't know Consig personally...but from what I see on this message board, I'd take the passion, talent, drive, and testimony of the Consigs of this Church over some of the less spiritually driven, motivated, and less capable teachers I see.

I think that as a starting point to getting to the sorts of lessons we want taught in church, it is much easier to guide a great teacher to stick to the foundational elements -- and excel teaching those -- than it is taking an unispired, unmotivated, or untalented teachers.

Six

[Jeff K.]

Again, passion and drive are one thing. I haven't seen his testimony here on the boards so that is a hard judgement for me to make. I have seen people's testimonies hurt by some of the things Consig says he has done. Passion and drive in the wrong direction can destroy the testimony of others.

[Luigi]

We then talked about the Book of Abraham; how certain fundamentalist Christians insist that the word "day" as used in the Genesis creation account must be a 24-hour day; how we define a day as the period of time it takes the earth to rotate once on its axis relative to the sun; how this is a bit odd as in Genesis the sun doesn't even get created until the fourth day, so how would the first three days be 24-hour periods without the sun?; then we got into Abraham 4 and 5.

I have heard it pointed out as well that the creation account in Abraham uses the term 'time' yet I think you have to also point out that the Abraham account of all the creation accounts is perhaps the strongest for a 24 hour 'day' or creation period from an LDS believers perspective as it states quite explicity with each time the following:

"from the evening until the morning they called night; and it came to pass, from the morning until the evening they called day; and it was the _____ time."

Such that it almost seems to go to great lengths to suggest the 'time' or 'day' is the same period of time you and I call 'day'.

[Jeff K.]

Depending on the speed of rotation, the earth has been both faster and slower in its rotation.

[Nemesis]

Again, passion and drive are one thing. I haven't seen his testimony here on the boards so that is a hard judgement for me to make. I have seen people's testimonies hurt by some of the things Consig says he has done. Passion and drive in the wrong direction can destroy the testimony of others.

D&C 104 and 121 Jeff. Use the ignore feature if you cannot conduct yourself in a proper manner.

Nemesis

[Jeff K.]

I was attempting to. I will note it in the future.

[thesometimesaint]

JeffK:

CFR that the earth has sped up within the last 4.5 bilion years.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/oldearth1.htm

[Black Moclips]

So says the person who hates the Mormon church. I seem to find myself in better company than Consig does these days. Not that it matters.

You can say it, declare it, assert it, or yell it Jeff, but it doesn't make it true. And no reasonable person reading my posts would come to that conclusion either. You label others as "haters" when they don't agree with you. Its predictable and pathetic, but hey, at least you are consistent.

[gtaggart]

Just a few quotes from an apostle and a prophet about gospel teachers and teaching (you can find Elder Oaks' talk here):

Third, a superior teacher of the gospel will teach from the prescribed course material, with greatest emphasis on teaching the doctrine and principles and covenants of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is commanded in modern revelation, where the Lord said:

[Bsix]

I am still curious as to which lesson Consig was basing his "evolution' lesson on. I'd be interested is seeing the degree to which evolution is actually covered in that particular lesson.

Six

[cinepro]

I am still curious as to which lesson Consig was basing his "evolution' lesson on. I'd be interested is seeing the degree to which evolution is actually covered in that particular lesson.

Six

Did you know you can search the entire Sunday School curriculum for all classes at the Church website?

Your search for "evolution" has returned 0 results in Sunday School.

[Jeff K.]

You can say it, declare it, assert it, or yell it Jeff, but it doesn't make it true. And no reasonable person reading my posts would come to that conclusion either. You label others as "haters" when they don't agree with you. Its predictable and pathetic, but hey, at least you are consistent.

Edited, better just to ignore the guy

[Jeff K.]

JeffK:

CFR that the earth has sped up within the last 4.5 bilion years.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/oldearth1.htm

There is a theory on the formation of the moon, by which the earth was struck by an almost Mars sized object, and that impact drove out sufficient debris to create the moon and "slow" the earths rotation.

The earths rotation however did not always exist. In its formation prior to being formed, it may not have rotated fully it may not have rotated at all if it began as more of a diffused dust cloud so light and darkness could not necessarily be divided into days and nights. The period as it developed may have been prior to the rotation effects or as it began to speed up. Naturaly this latter portion is speculation on my part. I cannot CFR a slower rotation period unless we include the period prior to a hard surface being created as a "day".

[Jeff K.]

Just a few quotes from an apostle and a prophet about gospel teachers and teaching (you can find Elder Oaks' talk here):

Quote

Third, a superior teacher of the gospel will teach from the prescribed course material, with greatest emphasis on teaching the doctrine and principles and covenants of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is commanded in modern revelation, where the Lord said: