Thematically studying the D&C

[Moliere]

From the lesson manual:

Explain that this course uses a thematic approach in studying the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history. The lessons are intended to help class members learn and apply what the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history teach about specific gospel themes. As a result of this year’s study, class members should have a greater desire to seek the blessings of the gospel.

Point out that because this year’s lessons are thematic, some sections of the Doctrine and Covenants are not included in the reading assignments. Nevertheless, class members should plan to read the entire Doctrine and Covenants during the year.

I imagine this has been the case every 4 years but I haven't really picked up on it until this year. I expect that is due to more awareness of the impact of correlation. Interesting that even with the D&C we can't just study the revelations as they are but we have to hunt and peck around certain things. I wonder what parts of the revelations are being left out.

[Pheidippides]

From the lesson manual:



I imagine this has been the case every 4 years but I haven't really picked up on it until this year. I expect that is due to more awareness of the impact of correlation. Interesting that even with the D&C we can't just study the revelations as they are but we have to hunt and peck around certain things. I wonder what parts of the revelations are being left out.

Yeah, I'm pretty much ignoring this and doing my own thing in my lessons. I'm sure everybody here is shocked.

[jay santos]

Being in primary, I haven't attended GD for a long time, but hasn't this always been the case for all four years, not just D&C? I know in the past I used to come to class hoping for a thorough treatment of Romans, for example, only to get a theme of grace. And if you've noticed, whenever we have a lesson or talk on grace, inevitably it's twisted to grace and works and ultimately becomes a discussion of why works are important. Ironic, isn't it?

[Moliere]

Being in primary, I haven't attended GD for a long time, but hasn't this always been the case for all four years, not just D&C? I know in the past I used to come to class hoping for a thorough treatment of Romans, for example, only to get a theme of grace. And if you've noticed, whenever we have a lesson or talk on grace, inevitably it's twisted to grace and works and ultimately becomes a discussion of why works are important. Ironic, isn't it?

It's always been the case, but I don't know if other lesson manuals specifically state it. It's almost like they aren't even hiding the fact this year.

[pellegrino]

It's always been the case, but I don't know if other lesson manuals specifically state it. It's almost like they aren't even hiding the fact this year.

I've heard gospel doctrine teachers praise this approach "so we don't just have a bunch of history lessons for sunday school."

[Jacob]

Being in primary, I haven't attended GD for a long time, but hasn't this always been the case for all four years, not just D&C? I know in the past I used to come to class hoping for a thorough treatment of Romans, for example, only to get a theme of grace. And if you've noticed, whenever we have a lesson or talk on grace, inevitably it's twisted to grace and works and ultimately becomes a discussion of why works are important. Ironic, isn't it?

Not the case. In the BOM you go from start to finish. Same thing in the OT, while you skip a lot of stuff because the course of study is only one year. Of course, in the NT they use the concordance, but otherwise go in chronological order.

However D&C has always--as far back as I can remember--avoided numerical order, and even chronological order to group similarly themed sections together (though sometimes it has probably been in more chronological order than others.

I hate the lesson manuals and have for years, but there are 138 section in the D&C and only 48 lessons in a year. The only way you are going to get through it in a year is to teach by theme, I think.

[Jacob]

It's always been the case, but I don't know if other lesson manuals specifically state it. It's almost like they aren't even hiding the fact this year.

That's because there is nothing to hide. It's been specifically stated in the past.

I've heard gospel doctrine teachers praise this approach "so we don't just have a bunch of history lessons for sunday school."

I've heard gospel doctrine teachers and students say that they enjoy the more historical lessons. There are all types I'm sure, but I'd be surprised if the larger portion wanted to avoid "history lessons" during D&C year, which used to be and is still sometimes referred to as "we are studying church history this year."

[Northwestcoug]

I assume sections 124 and 129 may be left off.

[Pheidippides]

I've heard gospel doctrine teachers praise this approach "so we don't just have a bunch of history lessons for sunday school."

Funny; my class members seem to love the history lesson part of it.

[Uncle Ted]

Funny; my class members seem to love the history lesson part of it.

Let me know when you get to D&C 132 and discuss how D&C 101:4 was removed. I might have to take a trip to Houston to sit in.

[scottie]

Let me know when you get to D&C 132 and discuss how D&C 101:4 was removed. I might have to take a trip to Houston to sit in.

Maybe it's common knowledge, but I had no idea about that verse until Googling it just now:

Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication and polygamy, we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife, and one woman but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/doctrine-and-covenants-1835#259

According to someone on Wikipedia, it was removed in 1876.