How would you answer this question?

[consiglieri]

Here is the set up for the question that I would like to know how you would answer . . .

Okay, so you are the Gospel Doctrine teacher; you have spent literally hours of prep time during the week preceding class in order to help your class understand the Creation account in terms of the ancient Hebrew cosmic view; you are going through the different days, explaining what is happening in those terms, and showing the structure of how the days relate to each other.

You have talked briefly about how Moses 1 serves as a good introduction to the first line of Genesis, by explaining that "In the beginning" does not mean "in the beginning" of the universe, but simply "in the beginning" of this world alone; you have mentioned how Old Testament scholars have a solid majority stating that whatever Genesis means here, it does NOT mean creation ex nihilo, which is important for LDS because we have scriptures committing us to that position in Section 93.

As you are moving through this material, a 50-something male student raises his hand and is called on, who then asks this question:

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[maklelan]

Here is the set up for the question that I would like to know how you would answer . . .

Okay, so you are the Gospel Doctrine teacher; you have spent literally hours of prep time during the week preceding class in order to help your class understand the Creation account in terms of the ancient Hebrew cosmic view; you are going through the different days, explaining what is happening in those terms, and showing the structure of how the days relate to each other.

You have talked briefly about how Moses 1 serves as a good introduction to the first line of Genesis, by explaining that "In the beginning" does not mean "in the beginning" of the universe, but simply "in the beginning" of this world alone; you have mentioned how Old Testament scholars have a solid majority stating that whatever Genesis means here, it does NOT mean creation ex nihilo, which is important for LDS because we have scriptures committing us to that position in Section 93.

As you are moving through this material, a 50-something male student raises his hand and is called on, who then asks this question:

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I would state that that should have been covered in Primary, although it wouldn't surprise me if that's the objective listed in the manual.

[Flyonthewall]

Not everyone is satisfied with a superficial understanding, there is more to be understood about the creation account...the entire lesson is about the creation, "God created the earth", no matter how slowly these words are uttered, won't fill the entire class time.

[Calm]

You have talked briefly about how Moses 1 serves as a good introduction to the first line of Genesis, by explaining that "In the beginning" does not mean "in the beginning" of the universe, but simply "in the beginning" of this world alone; you have mentioned how Old Testament scholars have a solid majority stating that whatever Genesis means here, it does NOT mean creation ex nihilo, which is important for LDS because we have scriptures committing us to that position in Section 93.

As you are moving through this material, a 50-something male student raises his hand and is called on, who then asks this question:

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

That understanding the eternal nature of matter and spirit helps us not only better understand the world around us, but our relationship with God and God's relationship with his creations.

[mnn727]

Answering as if I were Consiglieri "Yes, but then I over intellectualize everything, and besides, if that were the point of the lesson we'd be done in 2 minutes - then what would we do for the rest of the time?"

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Some times being called to teach a class is more for your benefit than that of your students.

[mfbukowski]

I would think that I was an ineffective teacher for not understanding the needs of my class.

Maybe I would even be tempted to follow the manual next time instead of wasting all that time on something that wasn't necessary, when I could have gotten my home teaching done early.

But that's just me.

[David T]

Our class was very simple, but good and uplifting. At one point, however, after reading the Moses 2 Creation account, someone raised their hands confused as what it meant when it said the firmament divided the waters from the waters. The teacher said she didn't know, and said she thought it meant the sky between the oceans and the clouds.

I raised my hand and answered that what was being given wasn't a scientific view of creation, but according to the symbols of the ancient worldview, and that to them, the firmament was literally viewed as a beam of sorts, the division between heaven and earth. I also mentioned that the Creation account is always best understood in the context of the temple, and that even that the creation acount in genesis seems to be more of a blueprint for the tabernacle than trying to explain the 'hows' of how the world came to be. The most important thing is that it establishes our relationship to our Creator.

After class, someone asked me for more info, and I drew a makeshift cosmology on the board. I sent those who requested more info links to the corresponding cosmology image on my blog to sort it out a little better.

I consider it a Proper Source. After all, it was published in the Church News

[Smith]

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

That does kind of wet one's battery doesn't it.

I would say to Brother X, that if all we needed were the basics then the Bible would probably only be a few pages long. But there is just a little bit more than that provided to us ultimately from God, so brother X, if that being the case isn't there the chance that He wants you to do a little more digging, to have a little more insight, to learn a little more?

[Kevin Christensen]

Here is the set up for the question that I would like to know how you would answer . . .

Okay, so you are the Gospel Doctrine teacher; you have spent literally hours of prep time during the week preceding class in order to help your class understand the Creation account in terms of the ancient Hebrew cosmic view; you are going through the different days, explaining what is happening in those terms, and showing the structure of how the days relate to each other.

You have talked briefly about how Moses 1 serves as a good introduction to the first line of Genesis, by explaining that "In the beginning" does not mean "in the beginning" of the universe, but simply "in the beginning" of this world alone; you have mentioned how Old Testament scholars have a solid majority stating that whatever Genesis means here, it does NOT mean creation ex nihilo, which is important for LDS because we have scriptures committing us to that position in Section 93.

As you are moving through this material, a 50-something male student raises his hand and is called on, who then asks this question:

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I'd respond that while it is important that we believe, it is also important that we increase our understanding. Hence, to the account in Genesis, we get the Moses account, the Abraham account, the Temple account, and many additional ancient accounts, along with ongoing scientific and scholarly discoveries. Do we say to God, why all this complicated information? Being LDS is an invitation to further light and knowledge.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[hordak]

Answering as if I were Consiglieri "Yes, but then I over intellectualize everything, and besides, if that were the point of the lesson we'd be done in 2 minutes - then what would we do for the rest of the time?"

"Good point Brother so and so, Would you like to be the first to pick a word for hangman".

(Everyone knows additional time is to be filled with hangman)

[Ceeboo]

Did I hear someone mention hangman, I LOVE that game !!!!

Here we go

Clue- Perhaps the most knowledgable member on the board. ( Other than LDS folks )

_ _ _ _ _ _ ?????

[bluebell]

Why not just remind him that though we know we are meant to have milk before meat such does imply that eventually we do have to move on to the meat part.

Then you coudl say something like- "The really important stuff that we each need to know most of us learned as sunbeams, but like the parables in the bible, there are layers of spiritual knowledge availabe for us to dig through, even after we understand the main points. Just knowing the important stuff doesn't mean we are done learning about the Gospel."

Or you could be totally snarky and quote him the BOM-

"6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible.... Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word?... 10 Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written."

The sentiment behind the question from the man and these words in Nephi seem to be the same.

[charity]

I would guess that the average IQ of people on this board is higher than the average IQ of a Gospel Doctrine class. However, IQ does not euqal worth of souls. And when we get to think we are pretty much hot stuff because we want to use the lesson as only a springboard to more intellectually stimulating concepts, we are sliding over into the pride side of the continuum.

An important part of any preparation for a class, and I have taught Gospel Doctrine a lot of years in diferent wards, is to prayerfully prepare with your specific class in mind.

And any suggestion to put the brother down in class, even if you think it is funny, is condescending and wrong.

[SearchDog]

I'd respond that while it is important that we believe, it is also important that we increase our understanding. Hence, to the account in Genesis, we get the Moses account, the Abraham account, the Temple account, and many additional ancient accounts, along with ongoing scientific and scholarly discoveries. Do we say to God, why all this complicated information? Being LDS is an invitation to further light and knowledge.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

I vote for this one. It does not belittle the questioner and answers the question with the proper spirit highlighting the will of the Father for Christ's saints.

[Senator]

I would guess that the average IQ of people on this board is higher than the average IQ of a Gospel Doctrine class.

Awww.....I feel another (_____)Mormons vs. (______)Mormons in the works.

[Sevenbak]

"Bro. X, Gospel Essentials is taught next hour... Now who stole my chalk?"

[BCSpace]

"I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench into everything, but don't you think you are overly intellectualizing all of this? I mean, isn't the only important thing that we believe that God created the world?"

How would you answer this question?

I wouldn't have over intellectualized the lesson in the first place. I totally sympathize with the desire to talk/debate about deeper and/or controversial things in Church on Sunday. I believe the Church ought to designate Gospel Doctrine class as such a venue and everyone who can't abide it should attend Gospel Essentials. But the fact of the matter is that the Church hasn't done this.

[consiglieri]

I would think that I was an ineffective teacher for not understanding the needs of my class.

Maybe I would even be tempted to follow the manual next time instead of wasting all that time on something that wasn't necessary, when I could have gotten my home teaching done early.

Would you similarly think you were an ineffective teacher if you allowed the needs of the one to outweigh the needs of the many?

Are you advocating that I spend no time preparing for my class? Why do you think the material I covered a "waste" and not "necessary"?

A number of people thanked me afterward for the lesson and mentioned how it helped them understand the Creation account better than they ever had before. Was it a "waste of time" for them?

Why do you think teaching people in their homes should take priority over teaching people at Church?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

After class, someone asked me for more info, and I drew a makeshift cosmology on the board. I sent those who requested more info links to the corresponding cosmology image on my blog to sort it out a little better.

Nice work.

You may be interested to know that I printed off and distributed a copy of one of those diagrams to help the class see what was going on in the Creation.

Thanks for the link!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

Being LDS is an invitation to further light and knowledge.

I opened class with the observation that Mormons have more Creation accounts than anybody else (four to one), and that we should therefore probably know it better than anybody else.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

Clue- Perhaps the most knowledgable member on the board. ( Other than LDS folks )

_ _ _ _ _ _ ?????

I'd like to buy two vowels, an "E" and an "O."

Wait a second, I think I want to guess it right now!

(Good to see you, Ceeboo! I thought you were outta here!)

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[consiglieri]

And any suggestion to put the brother down in class, even if you think it is funny, is condescending and wrong.

Is it wrong if I don't really do it but am sorely tempted?

[consiglieri]

I believe the Church ought to designate Gospel Doctrine class as such a venue and everyone who can't abide it should attend Gospel Essentials. But the fact of the matter is that the Church hasn't done this.

Some see the world as it is and ask why.

I see the world as it should be and ask why not?

[Ceeboo]

I'd like to buy two vowels, an "E" and an "O."

Wait a second, I think I want to guess it right now!

(Good to see you, Ceeboo! I thought you were outta here!)

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Always great to see your contributions!!!

Was outta here until I got SEVERAL hundred personal E- mails from Saints ( Got yours too, thanks for all the kind words and yes I will send you the info you wanted on Catholocism ) who REALLY wanted me to stick around.

Oh wait, that's not completely accurate. What I meant to say is that my " possible move " was delayed so ya'll are stuck with me for a while longer.

Peace,

Ceeboo