Interesting changes for 3rd hour block in 2018

[Gray]

7 hours ago, Traela said:

Personally, I think the biggest problem with the SS program is that there are too many Teacher Improvement lessons.  The kids want doctrine!  But instead they get up to ten lessons (when combined with YW/YM) in a month on one topic.  

I understand the theory behind the structure.  But the implementation leaves something to be desired.

 

Ugh, I tried to teach a group of young kids a lesson about the importance of councils, because it was in the manual. It went over like a lead balloon.

Next three lessons:

"Meetings 101."

"Staring at your hands for beginners"

"Eternal, interminable meetings and you"

[hagoth7]

42 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

Willing. 

Would prefer to step to the side to let one more woman have a voice.

[RevTestament]

2 hours ago, hagoth7 said:

Would prefer to step to the side to let one more woman have a voice.

We've had a few Gospel Doctrine Class lady teachers. One started as a couple with her husband(prior bishop). They made the cutest team. She eventually took over for her husband. She was one of the best teachers I've had in a long time. She was humorous and engaging. Then our ward split. We recently lost one of our teachers I liked...they gave him a different calling. Don't defer to women just because you feel they need a chance. We need every good teacher the Church has to offer, and who will accept the call... women and men.

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

I was hoping they were finally going to drop the third hour.

I would be very sad if they did that.  It's my favorite hour of church!

[JLHPROF]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

Please explain to me the difference of teaching doctrine and teaching a topic.  I would have thought it was the same thing (topic is baptism, teach the doctrine on baptism).

I have sat through many a class on a gospel topic where any mention of actual doctrine is purely coincidental.

[mnn727]

Why not just start the Presidents manuals over again?

I am not for "open classes" without some definite guidelines/manuals. I've had "innovative" teachers teach speculation as doctrine before.

[probablyHagoth7]

22 hours ago, RevTestament said:

...Don't defer to women just because you feel they need a chance. We need every good teacher the Church has to offer, and who will accept the call... women and men.

...and young men/women, and children....if we hold millennial promises to have sway now.

I defer to them, not just because they might (or might not) feel *they need* a chance, but because *we need* to tune an ear to what's in their hearts. (At least I do.)

My preference: women and children first...or children and women first.

If needed, after being improved by what they offer, I'll gladly step forward to be among those who take up the rear.

Edited June 7, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[Traela]

On June 6, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Gray said:

Ugh, I tried to teach a group of young kids a lesson about the importance of councils, because it was in the manual. It went over like a lead balloon.

Next three lessons:

"Meetings 101."

"Staring at your hands for beginners"

"Eternal, interminable meetings and you"

Also,

"How do I teach about the importance of meetings?"

"How do I teach the correct way of running a meeting?

 

[JLHPROF]

15 hours ago, mnn727 said:

Why not just start the Presidents manuals over again?

I am not for "open classes" without some definite guidelines/manuals. I've had "innovative" teachers teach speculation as doctrine before.

Nobody has explained why this is a bad thing.
Speculation is often the catalyst for revelation.

A large chunk of the restored gospel came about because Joseph was speculating on scripture and the Lord clarified things for him.
I think we have an irrational fear of speculating about gospel topics.

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Nobody has explained why this is a bad thing.
Speculation is often the catalyst for revelation.

A large chunk of the restored gospel came about because Joseph was speculating on scripture and the Lord clarified things for him.
I think we have an irrational fear of speculating about gospel topics.

I think we have a healthy fear of speculation.  We've perpetuated some pretty awful teachings (such as reasons for the priesthood ban) that have caused a lot of damage, because of speculation.

Sure, the spirit can reveal doctrine to us personally when we speculate (or 'ponder') on gospel questions during our private study, but the spirit isn't going to be revealing new doctrine to the Pleasant View 1st ward Sunday school class.  That's not how God works.

[ksfisher]

15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I think we have an irrational fear of speculating about gospel topics.

I think what we have is bad experiences listening to teachers speculate about gospel topics.

[ksfisher]

16 hours ago, mnn727 said:

Why not just start the Presidents manuals over again?

 

Do you really thing they were that good?

[JLHPROF]

13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think we have a healthy fear of speculation.  We've perpetuated some pretty awful teachings (such as reasons for the priesthood ban) that have caused a lot of damage, because of speculation.

Sure, the spirit can reveal doctrine to us personally when we speculate (or 'ponder') on gospel questions during our private study, but the spirit isn't going to be revealing new doctrine to the Pleasant View 1st ward Sunday school class.  That's not how God works.

This is a misunderstanding of what I mean by speculation.  Of course all new doctrines will come through the appropriate channels.
But without speculation there are no questions to be asked.    Google defines speculation as "the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence".
Conjecture leads us to seek truth rather than be spoon fed already known truths.

Joseph Smith said that "“The best way to obtain truth and wisdom is not to ask from books, but to go to God in prayer, and obtain divine teaching.”
Almost every revelation he received came as the result of speculation on previous revelation and asking questions.

And even leaving the bugaboo word "speculation" as we traditionally know it aside, what we are really talking about is reasoning on the scriptures.  We are afraid to reason and call it speculation and prefer to let others do all the reasoning for us in correlated materials.
I am not afraid of a little speculation.  I can read scripture for myself and pray for myself and determine truth for myself.  Being open to a new idea just gives me more to think about.
 

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I think what we have is bad experiences listening to teachers speculate about gospel topics.

But what made the speculation a bad experience?  It's harmless discussion based on available evidences.  It's hypothesizing, a necessity to gain more knowledge.
Did a little friendly speculation cause some harm in your ward?
We do it on this board all the time, and as far as I know it has never caused anyone here to abandon the Church.  In fact, official Church statements (ie, correlated materials) seem to have caused more apostasy than any speculation.

[ksfisher]

11 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 

But what made the speculation a bad experience?  It's harmless discussion based on available evidences.  It's hypothesizing, a necessity to gain more knowledge.
Did a little friendly speculation cause some harm in your ward?
We do it on this board all the time, and as far as I know it has never caused anyone here to abandon the Church.  In fact, official Church statements (ie, correlated materials) seem to have caused more apostasy than any speculation.

A Sunday School teacher is an official representative of the church, for the class that they are teaching.  While in that official position the teacher has an obligation to teach the doctrines of the church, not what they think maybe might be .

 

Edited June 7, 2017 by ksfisher

[Scott Lloyd]

16 hours ago, mnn727 said:

Why not just start the Presidents manuals over again?

I am not for "open classes" without some definite guidelines/manuals. I've had "innovative" teachers teach speculation as doctrine before.

And that's sure to happen again without guidelines and manuals. There are way too many gospel hobbyists, and their pet theories abound.

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

But what made the speculation a bad experience?  It's harmless discussion based on available evidences.  It's hypothesizing, a necessity to gain more knowledge.
Did a little friendly speculation cause some harm in your ward?
We do it on this board all the time, and as far as I know it has never caused anyone here to abandon the Church. 

Neither this board nor anyone on it is representing the Church of Jesus Christ. In Church worship services, classes and other Church venues, attendees are entitled to the assurance that what is being served up to them is reasonably authoritative.

Quote

In fact, official Church statements (ie, correlated materials) seem to have caused more apostasy than any speculation.

I seriously question that. It strikes me as an instance of your beloved speculation.

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

A Sunday School teacher is an official representative for the church, for the class that they are teaching.  While in that official position the teacher has an obligation to teach the doctrines of the church, not what they think maybe might be true.

 

See, I would say that they have a responsibility to teach members to actually think about the gospel and create a desire for personal study, not memorize talking points.
I am not suggesting the teacher provide speculative answers as truth.  I am suggesting that if we look at the full teachings of the gospel and reason on them instead of spouting platitudes at each other some actual learning might take place.
 

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

There are way too many gospel hobbyists, and their pet theories abound.

Yeah.  I heard of this one kid, about 14.  He didn't think the available materials were sufficient.
So he actually studied for himself, got down on his knees, and WHOA, would you believe the theories he started teaching?
Crazy stuff about how the godhead was actually 3 separate people, that there wasn't just heaven and hell but multiple degrees and kingdoms, that marriage could last into the eternities despite what it says in the NT, and even that God still called people as prophets.

Such wild theories.  He should have just stuck to the correlated materials his local pastor provided.  He should have learned his catechism and creeds and kept his mouth shut about any "theories" he might have had.

[ksfisher]

12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

See, I would say that they have a responsibility to teach members to actually think about the gospel and create a desire for personal study, not memorize talking points.
I am not suggesting the teacher provide speculative answers as truth.  I am suggesting that if we look at the full teachings of the gospel and reason on them instead of spouting platitudes at each other some actual learning might take place.
 

The official teaching materials of the church provide a great deal of latitude and room for the Spirit to work.  They are more than just mere "talking points" and "spout[ed] platitudes," they have been approved by those whom we sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators. 

In my experience the main cause for poor gospel learning in church has been poor preparation by teachers, over reliance on reading directly from the manuals, and lack of preparation from the students.

Edited June 7, 2017 by ksfisher

[ksfisher]

4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Yeah.  I heard of this one kid, about 14.  He didn't think the available materials were sufficient.
So he actually studied for himself, got down on his knees, and WHOA, would you believe the theories he started teaching?
Crazy stuff about how the godhead was actually 3 separate people, that there wasn't just heaven and hell but multiple degrees and kingdoms, that marriage could last into the eternities despite what it says in the NT, and even that God still called people as prophets.

Such wild theories.  He should have just stuck to the correlated materials his local pastor provided.  He should have learned his catechism and creeds and kept his mouth shut about any "theories" he might have had.

Obviously the context of Joseph restoring the church and creating a structure for teaching the gospel, which at that point did not exist, is much different than today.  Teachers are still expected to seek after and teach by the Spirit.  However, we do have the teachings of Joseph Smith as well as all of the prophets and apostles who have come after him.  Joseph Smith did not have this wisdom and experience to lean on.  He also didn't have 15 million members spread out across the entire globe to teach.  There needs to be some organization of teaching to ensure that pure doctrine is being taught.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

This is a misunderstanding of what I mean by speculation.  Of course all new doctrines will come through the appropriate channels.
But without speculation there are no questions to be asked.    Google defines speculation as "the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence".
Conjecture leads us to seek truth rather than be spoon fed already known truths.

Joseph Smith said that "“The best way to obtain truth and wisdom is not to ask from books, but to go to God in prayer, and obtain divine teaching.”
Almost every revelation he received came as the result of speculation on previous revelation and asking questions.

And even leaving the bugaboo word "speculation" as we traditionally know it aside, what we are really talking about is reasoning on the scriptures.  We are afraid to reason and call it speculation and prefer to let others do all the reasoning for us in correlated materials.
I am not afraid of a little speculation.  I can read scripture for myself and pray for myself and determine truth for myself.  Being open to a new idea just gives me more to think about.

And that's all possible without having uncorrelated sunday school though, right?  

(to be clear, i'm not cheerleading for correlation so much as i'm stating that correlation does not keep people from speculating on gospel matters).

 

[hagoth7]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

...but the spirit isn't going to be revealing new doctrine to the Pleasant View 1st ward Sunday school class.  That's not how God works.

It is precisely how God works. And will likely continue to be so.  

Doesn't mean it will be officialTM doctrine, or that it will be recognized by others as being true.

Or that it will even be spoken out loud.

Could cite a conference talk or three on that, but don't imagine I really need to.

[JLHPROF]

13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

 i'm stating that correlation does not keep people from speculating on gospel matters).

 

Well, nothing stops that...not even the Church gets to tell us what to think about the gospel.

I don't know.  I guess I just long for a day when Sunday School didn't feel like Primary.  A day when the Priesthood quorum meetings were once again a School of the Prophets.
When we actually progressed beyond the most basic views of eternal principles.   We never will collectively under the current teaching structure.  Perhaps individually is all we have to hope for.

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

It is precisely how God works. And will likely continue to be so.  

Doesn't mean it will be officialTM doctrine, or that it will be recognized by others as being true.

Or that it will even be spoken out loud.

Could cite a conference talk or three on that, but don't imagine I really need to.

God doesn't reveal doctrine for his church through anyone but the prophet.  

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

We never will collectively under the current teaching structure.  Perhaps individually is all we have to hope for.

Probably, because not everyone is on the same page in their gospel journey.  Remember, not everyone was even invited to the school of the prophets.  It wasn't a 'visitors are welcome!' kind of environment.