For Those Looking For Meat, How Would You Recognise It?

[Tacenda]

Unfortunately, I have to agree.  We had a rogue Gospel Doctrine teacher who was really excellent and only used the topics of the manual lesson as his guide, he got released.  Our current teacher pushes the envelope, but not quite as hard -- I fear his days are limited as well.  In my experience, there is nothing more deadly boring and pointless as an instructor who slavishly sticks to the manuals lesson plans.  Not sure I understand who comes up with the questions that the manuals pose -- but really people.

I know that some have taken their Gospel Doctrine out of the class and into their homes for discussion with a group of people.  And the church has come out against groups like these.  Could this board be something akin to it?   

 

Just saying!  No one but my husband knows of my involvement on boards like this.  Mainly this one, I rarely comment on NOM or Staylds anymore.  But it's weird, I'm afraid of anyone knowing I converse here.  It's not wrong per se, but just feels like no one I know personally would ever do this.  But that's off topic. 

[Stone holm]

I know that some have taken their Gospel Doctrine out of the class and into their homes for discussion with a group of people.  And the church has come out against groups like these.  Could this board be something akin to it?   

 

Just saying!  No one but my husband knows of my involvement on boards like this.  Mainly this one, I rarely comment on NOM or Staylds anymore.  But it's weird, I'm afraid of anyone knowing I converse here.  It's not wrong per se, but just feels like no one I know personally would ever do this.  But that's off topic. 

 

The only person who has spoken out against private discussion groups in our Ward has been a former Stake Relief Society President, but they are not encouraged.  We have adult education classes, but they are tightly monitored.  There is I think one such group, but they keep it fairly quiet.  There is at least one other member of our Ward on this board -- I think possibly more.

[Scott Lloyd]

I agree. And, I might add, If there is ever anything that doesn't quite make sense, there is no avenue at church to explore it. I learn more about doctrine on these boards than I do in church mostly.

If you are looking to "these boards" for your understanding of doctrine, I fear you may be building your house on a sandy foundation.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

The only person who has spoken out against private discussion groups in our Ward has been a former Stake Relief Society President, but they are not encouraged.  We have adult education classes, but they are tightly monitored.  There is I think one such group, but they keep it fairly quiet.  There is at least one other member of our Ward on this board -- I think possibly more.

My recollection is that past warnings from the Church about study groups were motivated out of concern that such ventures were too often becoming the springboard for the formation of schismatic and apostate groups.

 

And it has been a long time -- a couple of decades or more -- since I have seen such warnings issued.

[Scott Lloyd]

Correlation exists to make sure that no one goes off the rails, to further orthodoxy, and to concentrate power. It is, because the Church is true, relatively benign. My only complaint is that in its quest to avoid controversy, not irritate political allies, and make the gospel accessible to those who are either intellectually challenged or lazy, it has created manuals that are filled with warm and fuzzy lessons, platitudes, sanitized history, and silly questions.

Again, if you have problems with that, it's the Brethren with whom you have a quarrel, not some shadowy bogeyman called "Correlation."

[Stone holm]

Again, if you have problems with that, it's the Brethren with whom you have a quarrel, not some shadowy bogeyman called "Correlation."

 

Possibly, I have less confidence that the Prophet spends that much time editing manuals, but I have no way to document that belief.  Given the depth of the majority of Conference talks, I would concede that this might be the case -- although it is curious that Elder Packer would have his Conference talks edited after given at Conference, which makes me wonder...

[Scott Lloyd]

Possibly, I have less confidence that the Prophet spends that much time editing manuals, but I have no way to document that belief. 

I have had the experience of being called into my editor's office to be part of a conference phone call as the current First Presidency were discussing the wording in an editorial I had written for that week's publication.

 

If they are that hands-on with weekly editorials, it does not seem incredible at all to me that they would give close attention to lesson manuals.

 

Given the depth of the majority of Conference talks, I would concede that this might be the case --

 

There always has to be that zinger, right, Stone holm?

 

... although it is curious that Elder Packer would have his Conference talks edited after given at Conference, which makes me wonder...

 

I have anecdotal information that some of the Brethren typically write multiple drafts -- 20 or more, in some cases -- of conference talks before they are satisfied with the finished product.

 

I was at a meeting once where Elder Russell M. Nelson said that each Pioneer Day (July 24) he begins working on his conference talk for that October, and he re-works it again and again.

 

If they put that much effort into revision before the fact, it doesn't strike me as strange that one or more of them would avail themselves of the opportunity to edit their talks right up to the moment of written publication.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

http://mormonmatters.org/2013/12/24/207-teaching-the-old-testament-to-latter-day-saints/

 

Great podcast that speaks about Gospel Doctrine class and how much we dare say that contradicts Mormonism in scripture or that we leave out in our manuals that is rich in scripture. Do we dare speak up about it in class.  For instance how Boyd K. Packer likens the scriptures in Ezekiel and the sticks of Judah and Joseph to the Bible and the BoM.  But there is far more to that scripture than that.  It's ok if we liken it to this but not ok to leave out so much.  And how we don't mention that Deborah was a prophetess, and had revelation.  Just that she was a good friend or support.  Something along those lines.  

 

I c/p the intro to the podcast here........

 

   One of the most difficult but important things we can do as Mormons who are alerted to the complexities of cultural differences and sacred writings is to learn how to share in church settings insights we’ve gleaned from our studies. We have a dual challenge: (1) to try to be as faithful as possible to the scriptural text and the context in which it was written and the people who lived in those places and times, while (2) still honoring in some way the Christian and LDS overlays that have become deeply ingrained in ours and others’ faith journeys and worldviews—framings and understandings that can only generally handle grafting in a few new pieces at a time.

In this episode, panelists Jana Riess, Philip Barlow, and Carrie Miles join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon for an exploration of the Old Testament, paying particular attention to this delicate dance of faithfulness to both text and communities. What important framings might we offer as teachers or class members that can help open the discussion beyond just literal readings or approaches that assume that ancient Israelite rituals, temples, and practices were really just like ours of today, that these ancient peoples were essentially “proto-Mormons,” hardly different at all from us in their doctrines of God and sense of what things mean? What riches does the Old Testament possess that would be wonderful to convey even if they might complicate current LDS assumptions?

This is a rich discussion that might take a couple of listenings to really mine. Please do listen and share your ideas and comments in the section below!

[ERayR]

It is really good with a good BBQ sauce.

[Rob Osborn]

I know that some have taken their Gospel Doctrine out of the class and into their homes for discussion with a group of people.  And the church has come out against groups like these.  Could this board be something akin to it?   

 

Just saying!  No one but my husband knows of my involvement on boards like this.  Mainly this one, I rarely comment on NOM or Staylds anymore.  But it's weird, I'm afraid of anyone knowing I converse here.  It's not wrong per se, but just feels like no one I know personally would ever do this.  But that's off topic.

Quite interesting. Im not shy about telling people I post on various blogs, foruns, etc, on the web. I use my real name anyone can google, etc. There is no harm in these forums. Church leaders even have come out in support of boards like these where gospel doctrines can be further explored and people can voice.

[Ahab]

It is really good with a good BBQ sauce.

Everything is good with a good BBQ sauce.   You can also just eat the BBQ sauce and it would still be really good.

[Rob Osborn]

If you are looking to "these boards" for your understanding of doctrine, I fear you may be building your house on a sandy foundation.

Not at all. One can and should learn the basic core doctrines at church. The problem is however that you cannot really explore the meat of the gospel at church. Between not enough time, strict instructions ob what you can teach, etc it leaves little if any exploration into truly understanding gispel topics. No one wants to discuss the real true and deep doctrines at church. I have gone in the past to both the bishop and stake presidency on gospel subjects and was hoping for some clarification. Both sent me in the direction of "go home and pray about it". These were very basic questions that no one at church could answer. I went surfibg the www and after many years of discussion I finally came to what I believe to be profound answers and still cant get clarification from church. I have since given up for now on the matter. The church doctrine is pretty sandy shakey ground at the higher level of understanding

[Ahab]

Not at all. One can and should learn the basic core doctrines at church. The problem is however that you cannot really explore the meat of the gospel at church. Between not enough time, strict instructions ob what you can teach, etc it leaves little if any exploration into truly understanding gispel topics. No one wants to discuss the real true and deep doctrines at church. I have gone in the past to both the bishop and stake presidency on gospel subjects and was hoping for some clarification. Both sent me in the direction of "go home and pray about it". These were very basic questions that no one at church could answer. I went surfibg the www and after many years of discussion I finally came to what I believe to be profound answers and still cant get clarification from church. I have since given up for now on the matter. The church doctrine is pretty sandy shakey ground at the higher level of understanding

You should be getting your understanding of doctrine from God.

 

You know what it means to build on the Rock, don't you?

[Stone holm]

Not at all. One can and should learn the basic core doctrines at church. The problem is however that you cannot really explore the meat of the gospel at church. Between not enough time, strict instructions ob what you can teach, etc it leaves little if any exploration into truly understanding gispel topics. No one wants to discuss the real true and deep doctrines at church. I have gone in the past to both the bishop and stake presidency on gospel subjects and was hoping for some clarification. Both sent me in the direction of "go home and pray about it". These were very basic questions that no one at church could answer. I went surfibg the www and after many years of discussion I finally came to what I believe to be profound answers and still cant get clarification from church. I have since given up for now on the matter. The church doctrine is pretty sandy shakey ground at the higher level of understanding

Been there done that. Standard cop out is go home and pray about it, that by the way doesn't stop at the Stake President level. In some cases even at the higher level the honest answer is "don't have a clue." What unsettles me is that members cannot even think beyond the platitudinous level about things as basic and fundamental as what is the Atonement really about.

[ERayR]

Not at all. One can and should learn the basic core doctrines at church. The problem is however that you cannot really explore the meat of the gospel at church. Between not enough time, strict instructions ob what you can teach, etc it leaves little if any exploration into truly understanding gispel topics. No one wants to discuss the real true and deep doctrines at church. I have gone in the past to both the bishop and stake presidency on gospel subjects and was hoping for some clarification. Both sent me in the direction of "go home and pray about it". These were very basic questions that no one at church could answer. I went surfibg the www and after many years of discussion I finally came to what I believe to be profound answers and still cant get clarification from church. I have since given up for now on the matter. The church doctrine is pretty sandy shakey ground at the higher level of understanding

 

At the "higher level" of understanding it should be a lot of personal revelation.

Edited December 28, 2013 by ERayR

[Rob Osborn]

You should be getting your understanding of doctrine from God.

 

You know what it means to build on the Rock, don't you?

And I feel that for the most part the doctrine as taught from the manual at church enables one to begin to build a foundation. Problem is however that the foundation in many areas of basic gospel knowledge is built upon sandy shaky ground that has a lot of holes and missing pieces in it because the very basic meanins in scripture have been taken out of context or applied to an incorrect set of definitions. I did a simple study of basic wording in the plan of salvation and came to find that many of our modern definitions for the words have become distorted and in some cases absolutely redefined differently than dictionaries. It makes it thus difficult to discern and build upon a rock when what you are building is the wrong set of blueprints. I give a few examples- Take these few words and notice how they are used in the LDS context

Salvation

Damnation

Saved

Damned

Born again

Eternal life

Spiritual death

All of those words or terms in LDS circles have different meanings from mainstream Christianity. But why? Did Joseph Smith use them differently? No. So then why the change?

[Rob Osborn]

At the "higher level" of understanding it should be a lot of personal revelation.

And then the next step is to teach it to others.

[ERayR]

And then the next step is to teach it to others.

 

Personal revelation is just that, personal revelation.  Not for general dissemination through Church channels.

[Rob Osborn]

Personal revelation is just that, personal revelation.  Not for general dissemination through Church channels.

Depends on what or how you define "personal revelation".

[Scott Lloyd]

Depends on what or how you define "personal revelation".

How do you define it?

[Rob Osborn]

How do you define it?

Personal revelation mostly deals with revelation one receives for his or her own family. On matters of doctrine we may receive personal revelation on how to understand certain aspects of the gospel- new insights and perhaps ways to teach those new insights to others. A lot of times these issues may be considered a "mystery" because we do not understand it. As we come to understand it better through personal revelation or even through studying it out we can begin to unlock those mysteries and expound upon it to others. God doesn't glory in mystery. He wishes all of us to know all that He knows. As we study out the gospel and pray about it we may receive the truth of "all things" upon which we may share with others as the Spirit directs. It thus becomes our duty to expound upon the scriptures and the doctrine of God in all things.

[CV75]

Personal revelation mostly deals with revelation one receives for his or her own family. On matters of doctrine we may receive personal revelation on how to understand certain aspects of the gospel- new insights and perhaps ways to teach those new insights to others. A lot of times these issues may be considered a "mystery" because we do not understand it. As we come to understand it better through personal revelation or even through studying it out we can begin to unlock those mysteries and expound upon it to others. God doesn't glory in mystery. He wishes all of us to know all that He knows. As we study out the gospel and pray about it we may receive the truth of "all things" upon which we may share with others as the Spirit directs. It thus becomes our duty to expound upon the scriptures and the doctrine of God in all things.

RE bolded part:

 

That needs to be balanced with this: Alma 12:9, “It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.”

 

The “many who know the mysteries” are the prophets that are given the keys to impart the word (not just anyone who discovers a satisfactory answer according to his own wisdom). The prophets are not reaching personal revelation but the revelations the Lord gives them to impart to the rest of us, as has been done since the beginning (see Alma 12:29). These mysteries are not revealed to the saints directly from God, but they are revealed to us through those with the priesthood keys to do so. And those who receive in faith and obedience will receive the greater portion, and then the mysteries (Alma 12:10). Typically we might think of these things as the temple rites and what we learn from them. But whatever personal revelation a saint receives, in any form, in connection with the mysteries are meant for him alone. It is not his duty to expound them; that falls under the purview of the prophets (and if you do a word search of "expound all things" in the D&C, you will see that even in that there is a narrow context, at least scripturally, for doing this). If he shares or expounds them it is most certainly not as the Spirit directs.

 

We are not supposed to share personal revelation of the mysteries; the righteous wouldn't even presume to do so (Mathew 25:9). We can rightly bear witness of what has been confirmed by the Holy Spirit of the portion we have received from the prophets, and even share research, opinions, insights, etc. but we cannot rightly take it upon ourselves to teach or expound upon our personal take on the mysteries for the salvation of others without having the keys to call upon men in the name of the Son (Alma 12:33).

[Rob Osborn]

RE bolded part:

 

That needs to be balanced with this: Alma 12:9, “It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.”

 

The “many who know the mysteries” are the prophets that are given the keys to impart the word (not just anyone who discovers a satisfactory answer according to his own wisdom). The prophets are not reaching personal revelation but the revelations the Lord gives them to impart to the rest of us, as has been done since the beginning (see Alma 12:29). These mysteries are not revealed to the saints directly from God, but they are revealed to us through those with the priesthood keys to do so. And those who receive in faith and obedience will receive the greater portion, and then the mysteries (Alma 12:10). Typically we might think of these things as the temple rites and what we learn from them. But whatever personal revelation a saint receives, in any form, in connection with the mysteries are meant for him alone. It is not his duty to expound them; that falls under the purview of the prophets (and if you do a word search of "expound all things" in the D&C, you will see that even in that there is a narrow context, at least scripturally, for doing this). If he shares or expounds them it is most certainly not as the Spirit directs.

 

We are not supposed to share personal revelation of the mysteries; the righteous wouldn't even presume to do so (Mathew 25:9). We can rightly bear witness of what has been confirmed by the Holy Spirit of the portion we have received from the prophets, and even share research, opinions, insights, etc. but we cannot rightly take it upon ourselves to teach or expound upon our personal take on the mysteries for the salvation of others without having the keys to call upon men in the name of the Son (Alma 12:33).

So, were only going to teach only those things exactly as laid out in the manuals heh? That makes no sense at all. God gives out his mysteries to the kingdom to all and it is up to us to expound upon those things in discussion until we gain a more perfect knowledge. How many times in a class setting at church do you hear someone begin an answer by saying "it is my opinion" or- "it is my personal belief" and then go on to give their insight on the matter. This is how the unraveling of the mysteries happens in the class setting. Look at these verses-

Alma 26:22

22 Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance.

[CV75]

So, were only going to teach only those things exactly as laid out in the manuals heh? That makes no sense at all. God gives out his mysteries to the kingdom to all and it is up to us to expound upon those things in discussion until we gain a more perfect knowledge. How many times in a class setting at church do you hear someone begin an answer by saying "it is my opinion" or- "it is my personal belief" and then go on to give their insight on the matter. This is how the unraveling of the mysteries happens in the class setting. Look at these verses-

Alma 26:22

22 Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance.

It still needs to be balanced with the principles I laid out.

 

As you quoted in your post, Alma says "even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance." Alma was given the proper authority to teach, and the correct portion and mysteries to teach. Note that he is consistent in teaching about faith and good works in relation to this responsibility, as when we was reaching about those ordained to declare the word of God, the high priests he calls "angels" and "just and holy men (Alma 13, picking up the theme from Alma 12)."

 

It is also impotant to note that he was also saying, "unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God ...given to reveal things which never have been revealed ...given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance." He says "such", not "all", and not "anyone."

 

Now if you want to apply the principle of "expounding the scriptures" by one who is set apart to teach within the scope of a classroom setting, yes, the manual has lots of documentaion on how to accomplish that properly under the direction of those with the priesthood keys to do so. To operate outside of that goes along with my original post, hence the call for balance between excitement about expounding the mysteries, the authority to do so, and the role of the Spirit in teaching and learning in a group setting (which is nicely put forth in D&C 50:13-24 and 88:121-123).

[ERayR]

Personal revelation mostly deals with revelation one receives for his or her own family. On matters of doctrine we may receive personal revelation on how to understand certain aspects of the gospel- new insights and perhaps ways to teach those new insights to others. A lot of times these issues may be considered a "mystery" because we do not understand it. As we come to understand it better through personal revelation or even through studying it out we can begin to unlock those mysteries and expound upon it to others. God doesn't glory in mystery. He wishes all of us to know all that He knows. As we study out the gospel and pray about it we may receive the truth of "all things" upon which we may share with others as the Spirit directs. It thus becomes our duty to expound upon the scriptures and the doctrine of God in all things.

 

When someone starts to criticize past or present leaders then begin to expound their own "revelation" as to correct doctrine I get a really bad feeling.