Tacenda Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, JAHS said: Besides institute classes associated with colleges and universities for young adults ages 18 to 30, many local stakes offer study groups or adult religion classes which anyone can attend and get deeper into the doctrines and church history. It depends on what each stake decides as to whether they offer such a class or not. https://arc.byu.edu/ Forty Five years ago I took an institute class where we studied the so-called hidden subjects such as, blood atonement; polygamy, the temple endowment and masonry; Danites, Council of 50; Adam/God doctrine; Calling and election; blacks and the priesthood, etc. We didn't study LGBT issues because there weren't any gays back then ;-) Students picked a subject and wrote a research paper on it and presented it to the class for discussion. The class was especially of benefit to me because that's where I met my soon-to-be wife. :-) Well someone needs to let Stake Presidents know that these would be beneficial, especially if there is an epidemic of members leaving. And if they refuse to discuss these issues in our lessons on Sunday.
Tacenda Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, JAHS said: Besides institute classes associated with colleges and universities for young adults ages 18 to 30, many local stakes offer study groups or adult religion classes which anyone can attend and get deeper into the doctrines and church history. It depends on what each stake decides as to whether they offer such a class or not. https://arc.byu.edu/ Forty Five years ago I took an institute class where we studied the so-called hidden subjects such as, blood atonement; polygamy, the temple endowment and masonry; Danites, Council of 50; Adam/God doctrine; Calling and election; blacks and the priesthood, etc. We didn't study LGBT issues because there weren't any gays back then ;-) Students picked a subject and wrote a research paper on it and presented it to the class for discussion. The class was especially of benefit to me because that's where I met my soon-to-be wife. :-) Meeting your future wife there is awesome JAHS! I wonder if I had the same opportunities in my stake and just plain didn't care. ETA: How were you able to discuss so many of these hot button topics. Just seems so out there. When I look on the sight you provided the only classes offered are in Salt Lake and St. George. All the other counties offer no classes. And the topic is basically going over the BoM. I wish they had classes for controversial subjects as you have listed here. I just don't see that happening. Unless as you said, the students write research papers and present them. Pretty cool! Edited June 13, 2016 by Tacenda
Tacenda Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Jeanne said: I took an adult seminary class years ago..it was so great and I got to ask weird questions and everyone was patient with me. Seriously, this is what the older generation needs. Mine was on the Book of Mormon..but we discussed so many other things. How I wish I had a do over on that!. Too bad these adult classes so far, are only offered in Salt Lake and St. George currently. ETA: Just noticed that if one is interested they can request a class. Hmm... Edited June 13, 2016 by Tacenda
Jeanne Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 Just now, Tacenda said: Too bad these adult classes so far, are only offered in Salt Lake and St. George currently. We had a local seminary teacher offer the adult classes..it was great! This is when I really studied hard! How I wish that those essays and things I learned later was around because there is no doubt ..that all of us would have disecting everything. If some seminary teacher in your Stake could do this..it is awesome! There is no fear to ask questions there..we are all adults on different levels. 1
Rain Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 53 minutes ago, mapman said: I'm not sure. My impression is that the Sunday School manuals are more simplistic than seminary manuals, but I don't know the reasons why. Besides what JAS said, SS is once a week. Seminary is 5 days a week. There is more time. 39 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Good point, when are they going to advertise or even have adult church institute classes like they have in the past? That could be the place for some of us to let it all out. They do. My stake has one at the stake center. I've seen posters for it. Many of my friends attend classes at local institutes as a group. You can even take (at least a few years ago) BoM classes online through BYU free. Sometimes locally things might not be advertized. Sometimes we don't take the time to look. Other times there is so much advertized that some of it gets hidden - when I put Just Serve posters up in the stake buildings last year there were easily 25 or more posters up already for orher things.
Rain Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Too bad these adult classes so far, are only offered in Salt Lake and St. George currently. ETA: Just noticed that if one is interested they can request a class. Hmm... We are in Mesa. I also attended one in Memphis years ago. Edited June 13, 2016 by Rain
Kevin Christensen Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said: Harvest is not there and whatever little remained it was almost destroyed with self serving "Public Relations" philosophy which thought omitting unfavorable history would help to pull wool innocent & investigative eyes. This is why I did embark into an innocent collection of newspaper clipping & editorial collections & manuals of Church publications... Anyway, to me these collections are not important as they used to be but here & there I encounter them ever since I moved. I have some Church News from 1980 about my ward in Switzerland, I was looking at it....a 1980 Church News 15oTh anniversary issue and the middle page occupied the church chronology of history. It mentions 1857 Elder Parley Pratt's Murder but can you guess what was omitted? Omission of history was not the exception, it was a common practice. And Kevin, if you feel OK about this, it's fine because it is the only way you can stay a member in this Church....You have to feel good..... Your harvest may not be there. Mine is, abundantly so, and there are obvious differences in soil and nurture that account for differences. In very unavoidable and practical terms, all history involves omissions. The only issue is, who does it when and why and for what audience, and what does it have to do what I think? I've quoted Novick on history: Quote No, the principal problem is different, and it is laughably simple. It is the problem of selecting from [Page 121]among the zillions and zillions of bits of historical data out there the handful that we can fit in even the largest book, and the associated problem of how we arrange those bits that we choose. The criterion of selection and the way we arrange the bits we choose are not given out there in the historical record. Neutrality, value-freedom, and absence of preconceptions on the part of the historian would not result in a neutral account, it would result in no account at all, because any historian, precisely to the extent that she was neutral, without values, free of preconceptions, would be paralyzed, would not have the foggiest notion of how to go about choosing from the vast, unbelievably messy chaos of stuff out there.50 http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/image-is-everything-pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain/ Everytime either you or I write a sentence or paragraph or post, we chose both what to include and exclude. That is, we omit. All of us, constantly. I'm not bothered by a 1980 Church News essay not mentioning Mountain Meadows, if that's what your are getting at, because I already had bought my copy of Mountain Meadows Massacre from the Deseret Book across the street from Temple Square. And I've got the more recent book, the Ensign essays on the topic, a range of essays in BYU Studies and other places that all cast considerable light on the situation. I've also read quite a bit about Myers Briggs Personality Types, and know which types tend to thrive in an institutional setting and that a concentration of specific types creates both efficiency and blind spots. And I know about the Perry Scheme for Cognitive and Ethical Growth, and allow for church members at a range of positions. And I know about the Paradigms, and ideologies, and how most people learn from textbooks until graduate school, and I don't have unrealistic expectations of individuals in other circumstances. If I neither expect or demand too much, I'm less likely to be disappointed. I learned years ago that the membership of the church includes a range of individuals with a wide range of variation in interests and expertise, and that if I am interested in specialist knowledge, it's always been available in abundance. I have actually written a great deal on about why I stay a member which has nothing whatsoever to do with my preference for omitting history. The way that other individual members have done so, has nothing to do with my I believe. I could point out that you have omitted any reference to say, this stuff: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/author/kevinc/ Or this: http://publications.mi.byu.edu/people/kevin-christensen/ Or if you require scandals, even this: http://squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleChristensenRashomon.html Asking what is Real, is very very different than asking what is Perfect or Ideal. Just saying. Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA 1
Danzo Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: Good point, when are they going to advertise or even have adult church institute classes like they have in the past? That could be the place for some of us to let it all out. Every institute class I have ever been to has been for adults. Granted, I am not from Utah, do they even have Institute classes for minors? 1
consiglieri Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 2 hours ago, JAHS said: The Church does trust the adults to study these topics on their own time and get deeper into the details. I disagree on this point, JAHS. The worst thing that can happen for a Mormon's membership is to study topics on their own and get deeper into the details. Which is why so many who do so end up leaving the Church. (See: John Dehlin) What the Church wants is for members to find out as little as possible beyond the one-sided, white-washed, correlated curricula approved by SLC. This is why teaching outside the manuals is disapproved . . . even though we spend 3-hours every week. The goal is not to educate the members. The goal is to indoctrinate the members.
consiglieri Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: Well someone needs to let Stake Presidents know that these would be beneficial, especially if there is an epidemic of members leaving. And if they refuse to discuss these issues in our lessons on Sunday. The perennial problem the Church faces is that, though such classes would be of benefit to a small number of members, it would be disastrous to a larger number of members.
JAHS Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 25 minutes ago, consiglieri said: 2 hours ago, JAHS said: The Church does trust the adults to study these topics on their own time and get deeper into the details. I disagree on this point, JAHS. The worst thing that can happen for a Mormon's membership is to study topics on their own and get deeper into the details. Which is why so many who do so end up leaving the Church. (See: John Dehlin) What the Church wants is for members to find out as little as possible beyond the one-sided, white-washed, correlated curricula approved by SLC. This is why teaching outside the manuals is disapproved . . . even though we spend 3-hours every week. The goal is not to educate the members. The goal is to indoctrinate the members. It hasn't hurt me any. The church certainly does not monitor my internet activity or the books I read. What you say might be true for children and young members still developing their testimonies; but it is virtually impossible for the church to actually control it in any way. They may warn us about aniti-Mormon sites and literature but there are lots of what I would call church related friendly sites and literature that speak of the details without the anti-Mormon slant or bias. There are certain things they want all of us to learn in Sunday School on Sunday regarding the basic doctrines of the Church and they correlate that so everyone is learning the same things. But if what you say is true I should no longer be a member, yet here I am. 1
Atheist Mormon Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, JAHS said: It hasn't hurt me any. There are warning signs all over the place, on top of that documentary evidence is way overwhelming. This is not a slick Madoff operation which pulled the wool over investors face.....But if you are still insisting this is good for you it must be good for you, I have no doubt about it....
JAHS Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 13 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said: There are warning signs all over the place, on top of that documentary evidence is way overwhelming. This is not a slick Madoff operation which pulled the wool over investors face.....But if you are still insisting this is good for you it must be good for you, I have no doubt about it.... I have studied the other religions and there are none better that this (warts and all). 1
Kevin Christensen Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 2 hours ago, consiglieri said: I disagree on this point, JAHS. The worst thing that can happen for a Mormon's membership is to study topics on their own and get deeper into the details. Which is why so many who do so end up leaving the Church. (See: John Dehlin) What the Church wants is for members to find out as little as possible beyond the one-sided, white-washed, correlated curricula approved by SLC. This is why teaching outside the manuals is disapproved . . . even though we spend 3-hours every week. The goal is not to educate the members. The goal is to indoctrinate the members. This is a popular meme, and useful for propaganda. However, in my experience, it does not fit. There are anomalies like the conspicuous canonical charge to "seek out of the best books words of wisdom" and that enormous library at BYU stuffed with all sorts of interesting things. Let alone bookstores, the web, FAIRMormon, Dialogue, FARMS, BYU Studies, Interpreter, Square Two, the blogs,... and much much more. While I've had some individual members complain when my lessons go outside the manuals, I've also been called to teach on a number of occasions in order to provide more interesting lessons. Do only negative examples serve as paradigmatic, definitive, worth noticing and generalizing about he whole from? Does not that kind of selection demonstrate an obvious ideological slant, rather than pristine objectivity? Indoctrination is a preparatory institutional agenda, but not the only agenda in play in a diverse Mormon culture, which is much bigger than can be defined or controlled by a temporary committee writing a temporary book to please another temporary committee. I have my own agendas, as do all of the most productive scholars, whether church employees, outside professionals, or lay members with an interest. And I've never found a manual so bad that it could prevent me from reading another book. Seek and ye shall find... it actually works. Sit and expect to be fed everything you could ever want? When I was a child.. an infant, really... I got away with that before I could crawl on my own. But it doesn't strike me as a viable way to get through life. There is just too much interesting to seek out and explore. FWIW Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA 4
consiglieri Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 1 hour ago, JAHS said: The church certainly does not monitor my internet activity or the books I read. I think it was Scott Gordon, the President of FAIRMormon, who said on a recent podcast interview that the Church had asked his help in gathering information on internet activities of certain persons. Help Scott Gordon was happy to provide.
consiglieri Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 11 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said: Seek and ye shall find... it actually works. Sit and expect to be fed everything you could ever want? When I was a child.. an infant, really... I got away with that before I could crawl on my own. But it doesn't strike me as a viable way to get through life. There is just too much interesting to seek out and explore. I agree, Kevin. My issue is that the LDS Church has an established history of doing everything it can to prevent its members from learning anything other than the correlated curriculum. In other words, the reason I have been able to "seek out and explore" is because I went against Star Fleet's directives; not because I followed them.
JAHS Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 20 minutes ago, consiglieri said: I think it was Scott Gordon, the President of FAIRMormon, who said on a recent podcast interview that the Church had asked his help in gathering information on internet activities of certain persons. Help Scott Gordon was happy to provide. I very much doubt I am a "certain person".
jkwilliams Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 23 minutes ago, consiglieri said: I think it was Scott Gordon, the President of FAIRMormon, who said on a recent podcast interview that the Church had asked his help in gathering information on internet activities of certain persons. Help Scott Gordon was happy to provide. One of my closest friends works at the church office building. One afternoon he phoned me to tell me he had just gotten out of a meeting in which I was discussed, or more properly, my blog was discussed. He was as surprised as I was. He said the meeting had been about identifying online sites and blogs that could potentially harm the church. He said the usual suspects came up, but then one of the slides had a screen shot of my blog's home page. He said he just sat quietly because he wasn't about to admit he'd been my closest friend since we were 6 years old. I asked him what the conclusion was, and he said they didn't consider me much of a threat. Phew!
why me Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 On 10.6.2016 at 5:49 PM, Johnnie Cake said: I'm on record as applauding the new openness at the church history department with its Joseph Smith Papers Project. Much has changed since Arrington lost his job for wanting to do what the church has felt the need to do today. Arrington believed that the church should air its dirty laundry and let the chips fall where they may. The churches new more open policy is a vindication of his everts to do so...yet I don't hear any one apologizing for what they did to him? I think that it is interesting that the lds church is now open about its history. I know of no other church that is now spending so much time on their history. Imagine, if protestants would also do such things. Or the catholics. Or for that matter the muslims. But it is marvelous that the lds church is experiencing openness. And are letting the chips fall where they may. I find it all amazing when it comes to the lds church and its members.
stemelbow Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 2 hours ago, consiglieri said: I disagree on this point, JAHS. The worst thing that can happen for a Mormon's membership is to study topics on their own and get deeper into the details. Which is why so many who do so end up leaving the Church. (See: John Dehlin) Dehlin is just one person. How many people who do so leave the Church? How many that do so don't leave the Church? Maybe it's not the studying the details that is causing people to leave but when people do they feel like the Church is asking them to leave. What I mean is the details can be troublesome for sure, but if we all knew all details many of us wouldn't leave. And those that currently do might not at the rate they do now because they'd be in a more understanding and welcome environment. 2 hours ago, consiglieri said: What the Church wants is for members to find out as little as possible beyond the one-sided, white-washed, correlated curricula approved by SLC. This is why teaching outside the manuals is disapproved . . . even though we spend 3-hours every week. The goal is not to educate the members. The goal is to indoctrinate the members. I agree. We have a problem on our hands. I think the problem is less about the details of history, or doctrine and more about that which you mention here.
why me Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: One of my closest friends works at the church office building. One afternoon he phoned me to tell me he had just gotten out of a meeting in which I was discussed, or more properly, my blog was discussed. He was as surprised as I was. He said the meeting had been about identifying online sites and blogs that could potentially harm the church. He said the usual suspects came up, but then one of the slides had a screen shot of my blog's home page. He said he just sat quietly because he wasn't about to admit he'd been my closest friend since we were 6 years old. I asked him what the conclusion was, and he said they didn't consider me much of a threat. Phew! Does your blog harm the lds church and if so, why wouldn't they discuss it if it does? It is only natural. The church has many critical bloggers that are daily or weekly being critical of the lds church. For it small membership, the lds church has quite a lot of former ,members being critical of their former church. Such is the way it is. Edited June 13, 2016 by why me
jkwilliams Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 Just now, why me said: Does your blog harm the lds church and if so, why wouldn't they discuss it if it does? It is only natural. The church has many critical bloggers that are daily or weekly being critical of the lds church. For it small membership, the lds church has quite a lot of former ,members being critical of their former church. Apparently I've been judge "not harmful." I should probably try harder.
JAHS Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: One of my closest friends works at the church office building. One afternoon he phoned me to tell me he had just gotten out of a meeting in which I was discussed, or more properly, my blog was discussed. He was as surprised as I was. He said the meeting had been about identifying online sites and blogs that could potentially harm the church. He said the usual suspects came up, but then one of the slides had a screen shot of my blog's home page. He said he just sat quietly because he wasn't about to admit he'd been my closest friend since we were 6 years old. I asked him what the conclusion was, and he said they didn't consider me much of a threat. Phew! They identified them, so what are they going to do about those other websites?
jkwilliams Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, JAHS said: They identified them, so what are they going to do about those other websites? No idea.
stemelbow Posted June 13, 2016 Posted June 13, 2016 25 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: One of my closest friends works at the church office building. One afternoon he phoned me to tell me he had just gotten out of a meeting in which I was discussed, or more properly, my blog was discussed. He was as surprised as I was. He said the meeting had been about identifying online sites and blogs that could potentially harm the church. He said the usual suspects came up, but then one of the slides had a screen shot of my blog's home page. He said he just sat quietly because he wasn't about to admit he'd been my closest friend since we were 6 years old. I asked him what the conclusion was, and he said they didn't consider me much of a threat. Phew! Sounds like a waste of my tithing dollars to me. What does identifying websites do? The Church is better of ignoring them.
Recommended Posts