Soundcloud:
https://soundcloud.com/user-961318159/ward-preacher-ep-01
Youtube:
Showing posts with label #Sunday School. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #Sunday School. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 1, 2019
Ward Preacher Podcast - Episode 1, Did Christ intentionally set up his kingdom to fail?
Episode 1 of my podcast:
Soundcloud:
https://soundcloud.com/user-961318159/ward-preacher-ep-01
Youtube:
Soundcloud:
https://soundcloud.com/user-961318159/ward-preacher-ep-01
Youtube:
Tuesday, February 6, 2018
Eve did not lie to God
This year, LDS Gospel Doctrine classes are delving into one of my favorite places... the Old Testament. I absolutely love this often overlooked and frequently misunderstood portion of the holy scriptures.
One of the first lessons of the year is based on the fall of Adam and Eve. Many in our class plainly expressed that there are many things about this story that we do not know (which is true). We do not know the length of time that they lived in the Garden of Eden. We do not know the size of the garden. We do not know what the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil looked like.
Of course, there are some things that we do know... some of the most essential elements of the story. We know that Adam and Eve were naked, and that they were unaware of this fact (Genesis 2:25). We know that there was a tree with fruit that would somehow give knowledge to those who ate of it (Genesis 3:6). We know that Satan was present (Genesis 3:1, Moses 4:5-6). We know that the consequences of Adam and Eve partaking of the fruit involved being cast out of the Garden of Eden, and the introduction of death (Genesis 3:16-24).
There are things that many people infer in the story. We infer that Adam and Eve were married (Genesis 2:22-24, Mark 10:2-9). We infer that eating the fruit did bring wisdom to Adam and Eve. We infer that life was difficult after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden.
The most popular speculations that are made involve Eve.
Some people have suggested that had only Eve resisted the temptations of the devil, that all of humanity might have dwelt in the perpetual paradise originally created by God. They infer that Eve was the source of pain and toil. Many modern prophets have refuted this conclusion... and other sources of scripture show that the fall was a necessary step in God's plan of salvation for his children.
Other people, in the spirit of correcting the perceived injustices against our first mother Eve, have suggested that not only should Eve be held blameless, but that she was a mastermind who comprehended that God's plan would require them to gain wisdom, and to have children out of the Garden of Eden. They suggest that Eve was not tempted by Satan... but that she saw through his ruse into the deeper meaning of partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
This is also bunk.
Satan, who did not go through the process of birth and had memory of premortality, still "knew not the mind of God" (Moses 4:6). Yet we are supposed to think that Eve, who did not realize that she was unclothed, somehow knew everything perfectly?
I have heard impassioned voices in many wards try to infer that the innocence of our first parents did not mean they were ignorant of the workings of God's plan. It has been suggested that Eve searched for alternatives to taking of the fruit, thus proving her foresight. Of course, for members of the LDS church, this would not explain why Adam was ignorant of the reasoning behind sacrifice, or why they only expressed joy in their circumstances after the gospel was revealed to them (Moses 5).
Most importantly, Eve did not lie to God.
God asked for an explanation of Eve's actions, and received from her this simple statement:
"The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." (Genesis 3:13)
There was no "I partook to fulfill thy plan" or "I partook that mankind might be" or "I partook because there were no other solutions to give us knowledge and allow us to have children."
Here, Eve answered God honestly. She had been tempted to do something she did not understand, and she did it.
Adam gave a much more complex answer, because there was more complex reasoning behind his action:
"The woman thou gavest me, and commandest that she should remain with me, she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat." (Moses 4:18)
His course of action was motivated by a desire to stay with his wife. He had a choice between avoiding the fruit, or remaining with Eve, and, thanks to Eve, he chose the latter.
The consequences of the fall of Adam and Eve are profound, and persist even to the present day. It is central to the plan of God that we be born under the effects of a curse that bars us from the immediate presence of God, and allows us the freedom to choose for ourselves between good and evil. Eve certainly does not deserve blame... but she does not deserve credit either.
There was only one who knew all of the parties involved in Eden... only one who knew the consequences of every choice... only one who knew what Satan, and Adam, and Eve would do, before they even thought of doing it themselves. It was the one who planted the garden. It was the one who created the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It was the one who engineered the entire plan.
Only God knew.
Much as it is today... people have a tendency to give credit and lay blame where they are not due. Other people may do harm, but the effects of the most heinous acts are, at their very worst, temporary. Other people may do good, but at their very best, they are still flawed. We are not so much smarter than our first parents, and we have difficulty overcoming temptations, mistakes, and problems on our own... but the same one who planted the Garden of Eden also knows of us, and his Holy Son Jesus Christ, who broke the curses of sin and death for Adam and Eve, can crush the obstacles that bar us from fulfilling our divine destiny.
"...there is none good but one, that is, God..." (Matthew 19:17)
One of the first lessons of the year is based on the fall of Adam and Eve. Many in our class plainly expressed that there are many things about this story that we do not know (which is true). We do not know the length of time that they lived in the Garden of Eden. We do not know the size of the garden. We do not know what the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil looked like.
Of course, there are some things that we do know... some of the most essential elements of the story. We know that Adam and Eve were naked, and that they were unaware of this fact (Genesis 2:25). We know that there was a tree with fruit that would somehow give knowledge to those who ate of it (Genesis 3:6). We know that Satan was present (Genesis 3:1, Moses 4:5-6). We know that the consequences of Adam and Eve partaking of the fruit involved being cast out of the Garden of Eden, and the introduction of death (Genesis 3:16-24).
There are things that many people infer in the story. We infer that Adam and Eve were married (Genesis 2:22-24, Mark 10:2-9). We infer that eating the fruit did bring wisdom to Adam and Eve. We infer that life was difficult after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden.
The most popular speculations that are made involve Eve.
Some people have suggested that had only Eve resisted the temptations of the devil, that all of humanity might have dwelt in the perpetual paradise originally created by God. They infer that Eve was the source of pain and toil. Many modern prophets have refuted this conclusion... and other sources of scripture show that the fall was a necessary step in God's plan of salvation for his children.
Other people, in the spirit of correcting the perceived injustices against our first mother Eve, have suggested that not only should Eve be held blameless, but that she was a mastermind who comprehended that God's plan would require them to gain wisdom, and to have children out of the Garden of Eden. They suggest that Eve was not tempted by Satan... but that she saw through his ruse into the deeper meaning of partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
This is also bunk.
Satan, who did not go through the process of birth and had memory of premortality, still "knew not the mind of God" (Moses 4:6). Yet we are supposed to think that Eve, who did not realize that she was unclothed, somehow knew everything perfectly?
I have heard impassioned voices in many wards try to infer that the innocence of our first parents did not mean they were ignorant of the workings of God's plan. It has been suggested that Eve searched for alternatives to taking of the fruit, thus proving her foresight. Of course, for members of the LDS church, this would not explain why Adam was ignorant of the reasoning behind sacrifice, or why they only expressed joy in their circumstances after the gospel was revealed to them (Moses 5).
Most importantly, Eve did not lie to God.
God asked for an explanation of Eve's actions, and received from her this simple statement:
"The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." (Genesis 3:13)
There was no "I partook to fulfill thy plan" or "I partook that mankind might be" or "I partook because there were no other solutions to give us knowledge and allow us to have children."
Here, Eve answered God honestly. She had been tempted to do something she did not understand, and she did it.
Adam gave a much more complex answer, because there was more complex reasoning behind his action:
"The woman thou gavest me, and commandest that she should remain with me, she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat." (Moses 4:18)
His course of action was motivated by a desire to stay with his wife. He had a choice between avoiding the fruit, or remaining with Eve, and, thanks to Eve, he chose the latter.
The consequences of the fall of Adam and Eve are profound, and persist even to the present day. It is central to the plan of God that we be born under the effects of a curse that bars us from the immediate presence of God, and allows us the freedom to choose for ourselves between good and evil. Eve certainly does not deserve blame... but she does not deserve credit either.
There was only one who knew all of the parties involved in Eden... only one who knew the consequences of every choice... only one who knew what Satan, and Adam, and Eve would do, before they even thought of doing it themselves. It was the one who planted the garden. It was the one who created the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It was the one who engineered the entire plan.
Only God knew.
Much as it is today... people have a tendency to give credit and lay blame where they are not due. Other people may do harm, but the effects of the most heinous acts are, at their very worst, temporary. Other people may do good, but at their very best, they are still flawed. We are not so much smarter than our first parents, and we have difficulty overcoming temptations, mistakes, and problems on our own... but the same one who planted the Garden of Eden also knows of us, and his Holy Son Jesus Christ, who broke the curses of sin and death for Adam and Eve, can crush the obstacles that bar us from fulfilling our divine destiny.
"...there is none good but one, that is, God..." (Matthew 19:17)
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Better Questions, Great Discussions
In the August 2013 issue of the Ensign, the LDS magazine, there was an article titled "Great Questions, Great Discussions" by Jack Lyon.
Normally, I do not get really excited about how-to sorts of articles, but the quality of teaching is a subject for which I have passion. While some of the items that were discussed hit the nail on the head, others were disappointing or even incorrect.
From the article:
"“Who were the first two people on earth?” is an ineffective question because the answer is so obvious that no one wants to respond—or sees a need to.
“What is the most important principle of the gospel?” is also an ineffective question. No one knows the answer the teacher is looking for except the teacher, who is essentially saying, “Guess what I’m thinking.”"
While the first question is an excellent example of an ineffective question, I immediately had to take issue with the second example. "What is the most important principle of the gospel?" is not an ineffective question... the way that the teacher handled the question, or the intent behind it was ineffective.
It would be completely appropriate for a teacher to ask students what they feel is the most important principle of the gospel, as long as they understood that a case can be made for many different principles. It also becomes the responsibility of a teacher that uses these questions to ensure that discussion and the expression of opinion does not devolve into contention, and that student contributions should be valued as much as possible. A student that answers with "faith" can probably present a strong case for so answering. A good discussion on how vital faith is could ensue. On the other hand, a student that answers "repentance" can present a very strong case for how important repentance is. Neither one of the students needs to be wrong.
On the other hand, if a teacher is attempting to present a lesson of faith, they may want to restrict open ended questions to that subject. A question can be effective in some cases and ineffective in others.
The article uses faith as the assigned topic as it suggests the following:
"If you want the class to have a discussion about something specific like faith, consider saying something like this: “Today we’ll be talking about faith, the first principle of the gospel.” Then ask a question about faith that doesn’t have a specific answer:
1. “What part has faith played in your life?”
2. “Why do you think the Lord wants us to have faith?”
3. “What are some ways we can increase our faith?”"
Unfortunately, only one out of the three suggestions is actually a good question. Below is an analysis of each one.
1. "What part has faith played in your life?"
Asking what part faith has played in the lives of students is asking for one of the following:
- the student that loves to pontificate going on about their lives
- the student that begins weeping to the point that anything they say is unintelligible
- the student that gives a valid example, followed by three other students that give similar examples
- the student that uses redundant statements to make a thirty-second comment become a fifteen-minute ordeal
Personal experiences may be appropriate for a class... but if people making unprepared statements is superior to the material that the teacher is presenting after having prepared, the teacher needs to improve. When personal stories become the backbone of the lesson, there is little gospel teaching that occurs.
2. "Why do you think the Lord wants us to have faith?"
This is actually an excellent question. Encouraging thoughtful pondering about gospel topics is a fundamental responsibility of a gospel instructor. Naturally, if the instructor has a preconceived "right" answer in mind, then the question becomes ineffective.
3. "What are some ways we can increase our faith?"
This is a terrible question. Any question that can be answered by "read your scriptures, go to church, and pray" is a bad idea. What are the odds that a student will hear an answer to this like "prayer can increase faith" and then think to themselves "Wow! I had not previously considered that prayer might increase my faith. This answer has completely changed my outlook on life, and I will always ensure that I pray every day from now till the end of time..."? Not good.
Everyone attending a Gospel Doctrine class should have enough of an understanding of Gospel principles to know that reading scriptures, prayer, church attendance, and other "Sunday School" answers apply. This type of question is just like the first "bad" example the author gave at the beginning: “Who were the first two people on earth?” is an ineffective question because the answer is so obvious that no one wants to respond—or sees a need to."
The article goes on to talk about the importance of using the scriptures. This is spot-on:
"Although the manual should be used to prepare the lesson and is a great source of open-ended questions, the scriptures should remain the primary focus of our teaching and learning."
I would suggest this implies that the backbone of the lesson should never be personal experiences. They can be present, but they are not a substitute for canon.
The article then discusses staying focused:
"There is a challenge in having a lot of classroom discussion: it’s easy for the discussion to get off track. It’s important that you prepare your lesson well so that you know where you want it to go and so that you’re ready, if necessary, to bring the class back to the main topic of discussion. Usually all you need to provide is a little guidance: “That’s interesting, but I think we’re a little off track. Let’s get back to our discussion of faith now.”"
While getting focus back is important, the statement that is suggested seems like it could be offensive... (and I am not one to shy away from abrasive statements). Essentially it comes of as "what you said was irrelevant..."
Perhaps more effective would be to (as politely as possible) interrupt the student that is trailing off with a question that asks "so are you saying that..." and then say something that ties into your lesson. If they confirm it, you can immediately move on having regained control. If they indicate that was not their intention, ask them to explain (as politely as possible) how their comment relates to the subject. It is possible that the student was saying something relevant, and that they may not have realized that others were missing a connection that they saw.
Additionally... always remember to thank students for contributions.
Finally, the article went back to discussing personal stories. As I previously mentioned, there is a place for this, but it ought not be the core of any gospel doctrine lesson... The heart of every lesson ought to be the doctrine of Jesus Christ.
After teaching the Nephites about faith, penitence, humility, baptism, and the Holy Ghost, he declared the following:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them. Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the earth." (3 Nephi 11:39-41, emphasis added)
Ultimately, the goal of a teacher is not to talk about their mission, their family, or the missions and families of their students... it is to reiterate the importance of Christian principles that have the power to make bad men good, and good men better. Discussion about triviality or mediocre questions ought to give way to meaningful discussion about the power of Christ himself. Though there are many topics that can occupy time for 45 minutes, discussions that bring classes closer to Jesus will continue to be important to those involved when the 45 minutes have expired.
Normally, I do not get really excited about how-to sorts of articles, but the quality of teaching is a subject for which I have passion. While some of the items that were discussed hit the nail on the head, others were disappointing or even incorrect.
From the article:
"“Who were the first two people on earth?” is an ineffective question because the answer is so obvious that no one wants to respond—or sees a need to.
“What is the most important principle of the gospel?” is also an ineffective question. No one knows the answer the teacher is looking for except the teacher, who is essentially saying, “Guess what I’m thinking.”"
While the first question is an excellent example of an ineffective question, I immediately had to take issue with the second example. "What is the most important principle of the gospel?" is not an ineffective question... the way that the teacher handled the question, or the intent behind it was ineffective.
It would be completely appropriate for a teacher to ask students what they feel is the most important principle of the gospel, as long as they understood that a case can be made for many different principles. It also becomes the responsibility of a teacher that uses these questions to ensure that discussion and the expression of opinion does not devolve into contention, and that student contributions should be valued as much as possible. A student that answers with "faith" can probably present a strong case for so answering. A good discussion on how vital faith is could ensue. On the other hand, a student that answers "repentance" can present a very strong case for how important repentance is. Neither one of the students needs to be wrong.
On the other hand, if a teacher is attempting to present a lesson of faith, they may want to restrict open ended questions to that subject. A question can be effective in some cases and ineffective in others.
The article uses faith as the assigned topic as it suggests the following:
"If you want the class to have a discussion about something specific like faith, consider saying something like this: “Today we’ll be talking about faith, the first principle of the gospel.” Then ask a question about faith that doesn’t have a specific answer:
1. “What part has faith played in your life?”
2. “Why do you think the Lord wants us to have faith?”
3. “What are some ways we can increase our faith?”"
Unfortunately, only one out of the three suggestions is actually a good question. Below is an analysis of each one.
1. "What part has faith played in your life?"
Asking what part faith has played in the lives of students is asking for one of the following:
- the student that loves to pontificate going on about their lives
- the student that begins weeping to the point that anything they say is unintelligible
- the student that gives a valid example, followed by three other students that give similar examples
- the student that uses redundant statements to make a thirty-second comment become a fifteen-minute ordeal
Personal experiences may be appropriate for a class... but if people making unprepared statements is superior to the material that the teacher is presenting after having prepared, the teacher needs to improve. When personal stories become the backbone of the lesson, there is little gospel teaching that occurs.
2. "Why do you think the Lord wants us to have faith?"
This is actually an excellent question. Encouraging thoughtful pondering about gospel topics is a fundamental responsibility of a gospel instructor. Naturally, if the instructor has a preconceived "right" answer in mind, then the question becomes ineffective.
3. "What are some ways we can increase our faith?"
This is a terrible question. Any question that can be answered by "read your scriptures, go to church, and pray" is a bad idea. What are the odds that a student will hear an answer to this like "prayer can increase faith" and then think to themselves "Wow! I had not previously considered that prayer might increase my faith. This answer has completely changed my outlook on life, and I will always ensure that I pray every day from now till the end of time..."? Not good.
Everyone attending a Gospel Doctrine class should have enough of an understanding of Gospel principles to know that reading scriptures, prayer, church attendance, and other "Sunday School" answers apply. This type of question is just like the first "bad" example the author gave at the beginning: “Who were the first two people on earth?” is an ineffective question because the answer is so obvious that no one wants to respond—or sees a need to."
The article goes on to talk about the importance of using the scriptures. This is spot-on:
"Although the manual should be used to prepare the lesson and is a great source of open-ended questions, the scriptures should remain the primary focus of our teaching and learning."
I would suggest this implies that the backbone of the lesson should never be personal experiences. They can be present, but they are not a substitute for canon.
The article then discusses staying focused:
"There is a challenge in having a lot of classroom discussion: it’s easy for the discussion to get off track. It’s important that you prepare your lesson well so that you know where you want it to go and so that you’re ready, if necessary, to bring the class back to the main topic of discussion. Usually all you need to provide is a little guidance: “That’s interesting, but I think we’re a little off track. Let’s get back to our discussion of faith now.”"
While getting focus back is important, the statement that is suggested seems like it could be offensive... (and I am not one to shy away from abrasive statements). Essentially it comes of as "what you said was irrelevant..."
Perhaps more effective would be to (as politely as possible) interrupt the student that is trailing off with a question that asks "so are you saying that..." and then say something that ties into your lesson. If they confirm it, you can immediately move on having regained control. If they indicate that was not their intention, ask them to explain (as politely as possible) how their comment relates to the subject. It is possible that the student was saying something relevant, and that they may not have realized that others were missing a connection that they saw.
Additionally... always remember to thank students for contributions.
Finally, the article went back to discussing personal stories. As I previously mentioned, there is a place for this, but it ought not be the core of any gospel doctrine lesson... The heart of every lesson ought to be the doctrine of Jesus Christ.
After teaching the Nephites about faith, penitence, humility, baptism, and the Holy Ghost, he declared the following:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them. Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the earth." (3 Nephi 11:39-41, emphasis added)
Ultimately, the goal of a teacher is not to talk about their mission, their family, or the missions and families of their students... it is to reiterate the importance of Christian principles that have the power to make bad men good, and good men better. Discussion about triviality or mediocre questions ought to give way to meaningful discussion about the power of Christ himself. Though there are many topics that can occupy time for 45 minutes, discussions that bring classes closer to Jesus will continue to be important to those involved when the 45 minutes have expired.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)