I learned in church today

[Goatnapper'96]

The culture got where it is little by little, it won't change quickly, rather, line upon line......

Oh Wuap, I feel so close to you!

[Moliere]

By the way do any of you listen to Jared Anderson's Sunday school podcast? I have never listened but I have heard good things.

I've listened to a couple on my bus rides into work. They are good and worthwhile. They'd be very helpful if I were teaching GD.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Aliens don’t exist because they wouldn’t look like they’re commonly depicted (big heads, big eyes) since all things were created by God in His fashion and likeness. So since these creatures don’t look like us, who look like God, they clearly aren’t one of His creations and therefore, don’t exist. On a related note, my list of things that apparently don’t exist has grown exponentially.

Yesterday we had ward conference and Sunday school was taught by a member of the stake presidency. Aside from the above random comment, the lesson was a good one. The stake official focus his remarks around a Boyd K. Packer talk (I know, bear with me.) from 2000.

This was the first General Conference held in the new conference center. If you remember, there was an incredible amount of excitement surrounding the architecture, the engineering feats, the size, the surrounding plaza and pretty much everything about the development. President Hinckley opens the conference with a testimony and a prayer that “I hope that enthusiasm will continue and that we shall have a full house at every conference in the future.”

The choir then celebrated in song, like they do, pastels flying, I’m sure. Then President Packer steps up to the microphone and what’s the first thing he says? “Do you think it possible for those of us who are called upon to speak to draw attention away from this wonderful building long enough to focus on the purpose for which it was built?”

What a curmudgeon. Anyway, that had little to do with the lesson but was something that I was reminded of.

The stake presidency member referenced Pres. Packer’s talk called “The Cloven Tongues of Fire” that starts with a story about a man who, after much seeking, finds the perfect pearl. In his excitement, he has the finest craftsman make a beautiful box to display the pearl. The man eventually becomes discouraged by the fact that those who came to admire, admired the box, not the pearl.

So the lesson attempted to draw the picture that the “church” can be categorized by principles, programs, and policies. Gospel principles are the pearl and everything else is just a box. The teacher then went on to quote a member of the 70 who had visited our stake a couple of years ago, “The purpose of the church is to enhance the private spirituality of its members.” It is us as members that tend to complicate things and get distracted and overwhelmed, but if we can always just focus on the pearl then we can enjoy the simplicity of the gospel.

What should have been an encouraging lesson on what could have been a pretty progressive discussion just ended up leaving me feeling frustrated. Is it me that chooses to make my church experience all complicated and time consuming with meetings and correlations and missionary splits? Is it me that shovels the guilt when I excuse myself from any of these obligations so that I can spend more time with my wife and kids?

This point was further driven home by the high councilman during the priesthood lesson on how we need to do a better job at removing the wants from our lives (going to the gym every day, watching tv, sports activities) so that we have more time for the needs (church activities, temple attendance, family time). The whole thing just left me feeling exhausted.

[DrumNFeather]

Okay, here's my issue.

If I say so myself, I have magnified the hell out of this calling. I spend hours each week researching, fact checking, framing discussion, playing with stories. I do this because I want to talk about real history and real problems in a way that pushes people but doesn't alarm, that informs but doesn't panic. I am trying to save my friends my last 10 years of pain. I have little hope for me, but I want to give it to others. I present the information, let people decide for themselves, but try to give it a spiritual context. Brodie is in my lessons but in the background; Bushman is in the forefront. So to speak.

SU would almost certainly disapprove. LA Ute would approve, except for the part where he thinks I am a hypocrite because I play the apologist role.

The response has been overwhelming. My class is standing room only. I get all sorts of midweek emails and such asking what I think about x or y. People will ask me on the sly if I am teaching a given week so they can know whether they should come or not.

I am also a beneficiary of this. It keeps me engaged and fulfilled and active.

I am pretty sure that the HC made a full report back to the stake. And my fear is that the stake will put pressure on the bishop to reign me in. Not out of character. And that will destroy everything - I can't teach from a horrible manual, so I won't. Couple that with the TR incident the with my wife the other day and a couple of other things and I'm a bit paranoid perhaps.

I can teach a shitty lesson out of the shitty manual without any trouble. But for any fulfillment of me or my class I need to care. I worry.

I think the question I would have (and let me just say that I agree with the sentiment that has been expressed regarding your methods...you might as well make it interesting and informative) is how do you avoid this becoming a self fulfilling prophecy?

[Pheidippides]

I think the question I would have (and let me just say that I agree with the sentiment that has been expressed regarding your methods...you might as well make it interesting and informative) is how do you avoid this becoming a self fulfilling prophecy?

Mostly by venting to my imaginary friends in a semi-anonymous fashion and ignoring the nasty high councilman. If I can project confidence in my own methods, I'm that much more difficult to counter, and eating people alive as I was tempted to do does help this. (It's also not very nice).

[Portland Ute]

This point was further driven home by the high councilman during the priesthood lesson on how we need to do a better job at removing the wants from our lives (going to the gym every day, watching tv, sports activities) so that we have more time for the needs (church activities, temple attendance, family time). The whole thing just left me feeling exhausted.

Did he really use that as an example? What a load of horse shit.

The gym? To take care of our bodies? The earthly sanctuaries of our souls? The gifts that God gave us, asserted to have been created in HIS image? The bodies that we are instructed to respect an take care of in scripture and counsel?

Sure, going to the gym is disposable, but eat as much meat as you like grow into obesity so long as you don't drink coffee or have an occasional beer or wine.

[smokymountainrain]

Our SP told us to hit the gym more often in the last Stake Conference.

[DU Ute]

Our SP told us to hit the gym more often in the last Stake Conference.

Well, just look at you.

[smokymountainrain]

Well, just look at you.

It's hard to miss me. In fact, I think he was looking right at me (second row, soft pews in the adult session, bitches) when he said it.

[thesaint258]

Not sure about livestreaming, but didn't Pellegrino share his prep and thoughts in the past? I'm not on his level but I'd be happy to do something like that if there's interest.

(Side note: the props did work out well on Sunday. I gave three members Japanese books, then gave one nothing, the second a Japanese-Japanese dictionary, and the third a Santa hat and a couple of stones, then asked them all who could get me the best translation the fastest. Then we talked about my experiences translating professionally and how that was nothing like what we are dealing with here, the point being that the BOM was miraculous if you believe the narrative so why should a seer stone in a hat make any difference?)

I wouldn't expect anything on the level of what Pellegrino did--I think that's too much to ask of someone on an internet message board. I'd just to hear a bit more about what you're discussing in classes. For instance, your use of props on Sunday was a great idea. Even though I don't participate in the foyer much (mostly because I'm just letting LA Ute take the hits), I do enjoy the discussion, especially since the lessons and comments in my ward tend to stay on a more superficial level.

[Jacob]

I reject this line of thinking outright. "We can't talk about the truth because, what if......."

Present the truth, little by little, without malice, and the culture will change. I'm guessing nikuman isn't dickering over points of doctrine, but rather over the way people interpret the doctrine and make the history fit a narrative that makes conversion and retention easier.

The culture got where it is little by little, it won't change quickly, rather, line upon line......

I also reject that line of thinking. I hope you didn't get that from my post.

[Paperback Writer]

Not sure about livestreaming, but didn't Pellegrino share his prep and thoughts in the past? I'm not on his level but I'd be happy to do something like that if there's interest.

(Side note: the props did work out well on Sunday. I gave three members Japanese books, then gave one nothing, the second a Japanese-Japanese dictionary, and the third a Santa hat and a couple of stones, then asked them all who could get me the best translation the fastest. Then we talked about my experiences translating professionally and how that was nothing like what we are dealing with here, the point being that the BOM was miraculous if you believe the narrative so why should a seer stone in a hat make any difference?)

I'm disappointed to read that you didn't fashion your own urim and thummim as an additional prop. That would have been awesome.

My GD teacher had a pretty good lesson focused on receiving personal revelation. But it was hard for me to ignore the church approved picture he used of Joseph translating with Oliver writing across from him and the gold plates sitting out in the open on the table in between them. That would seem to fit door #1: translating with nothing. When we all know (or should) that Joseph needed an instrument of some kind: either a urim and thummim or hat with seer stone.

[Pheidippides]

I'm disappointed to read that you didn't fashion your own urim and thummim as an additional prop. That would have been awesome.

My GD teacher had a pretty good lesson focused on receiving personal revelation. But it was hard for me to ignore the church approved picture he used of Joseph translating with Oliver writing across from him and the gold plates sitting out in the open on the table in between them. That would seem to fit door #1: translating with nothing. When we all know (or should) that Joseph needed an instrument of some kind: either a urim and thummim or hat with seer stone.

Lol. We read several passages from Emma, David Whitmer and others (most of which were in the talk Ted linked - seriously, who needs google with him around?). No doubt about how it happened.

[wuapinmon]

I also reject that line of thinking. I hope you didn't get that from my post.

I find it difficult to not interpret that from what you wrote:

How will you prevent your friends from going down the path you went down by giving them the information that led you down that path? Are you merely trying to provide a gentle landing, and if so, I can see how that could cause concern to an ecclesiastical leader. I can see how you would like to help people learn what you learned without losing faith, but how is that possible if it is already too late for you? If you believe yourself too far gone, then I can't understand how your motivation can be to keep people faithful WITH the truth, rather than merely providing them the truth as you see it. (I shouldn't say "merely" in that last sentence because you and I both think that a truthful, or fair, representation of the fact is of utmost importance.

[Jacob]

I find it difficult to not interpret that from what you wrote:

I really don't see the relation. I questioned his (and my) bias in that bolded portion. I question our ability to present the truth in a SS class free from our bias, or with a pure motivation of keeping people faithful rather than the more crude motivation of merely providing the truth, as we see it. I never said we ought to hide the truth. I only speak truth.