Sunday school answers


Traveler
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is a little insight to the mind and heart of the Traveler more than a condemnation of others.  As a youth I loved church and enjoyed the spirit of the saints (still do) – but I often found the pace of instruction very boring (too slow).   Often my thoughts were (and still are) somewhere else – not necessarily with worldly things – just other things.   My teachers; realizing I was somewhere else would often ask me a question to get me back inline.  I learned that if I answered – Jesus Christ – I answered correctly, at least as often as if I was intently listening and involved.

This is what I mean with what I call the Sunday school answer.  The answer at the surface is correct and 100% true – but does not reflect the understanding of the depth of the question often being asked.  Trying to go beyond the surface of Sunday school answers often creates ire and accusations of heresy.  Thinking often involves some speculation – and speculation by many is considered evil.  To be honest, often I enter discussions on this very forum (as well as in other places) not because I actually disagree but because I see some hope in expanding the thinking (especially pondering or ponderizing spiritual possibilities). 

Sometime I agree with what a person is saying but I want to push them a bit to explore and learn.  Sometimes I push the limits because I wonder if there is more and something I have missed or failed to consider.  I most appreciate those who have opinions and come to conclusions different than mine – and I love to explore why.  But I have found that most are not comfortable enough with their opinions and thoughts to have then challenged or explored in detail.  In so doing I create anger and resentment and often do not even realize it.  In my social circles my beloved wife is quick to reprove me – but she is never present on this forum. 

So I apologize.  This may seem like a hollow apology because I may be unaware of the actual offense.   Though I believe those of this forum to be capable of much better than the “Sunday school” answers – I do not intend to create anger by my challenges.  But I also believe that being shaken a little and even being a little upset is worth the journey that must be endlessly traveled on the pathway to truth and understanding.   

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm off to church right now, but great post Traveler. I can't wait to get home and respond with more time. I l-o-v-e learning and thoroughly enjoy all the variety and challenging questions/thoughts/perspectives shared here... this is in big part why I love coming here!

No apology needed on my end. In my mind, if we were all "yes men/women" it would not give us the opportunity to stretch and grow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Traveler said:

The answer at the surface is correct and 100% true – but does not reflect the understanding of the depth of the question often being asked.  Trying to go beyond the surface of Sunday school answers often creates ire and accusations of heresy.

Sometime I agree with what a person is saying but I want to push them a bit to explore and learn.  Sometimes I push the limits because I wonder if there is more and something I have missed or failed to consider.  I most appreciate those who have opinions and come to conclusions different than mine – and I love to explore why.  But I have found that most are not comfortable enough with their opinions and thoughts to have then challenged or explored in detail.

Traveler,

I can agree with you and I might even explain why some people react the way they do to you.

Personal anecdote: In seminary we were going over the "armor of God".  I asked for a more in depth understanding of the metaphor,"Why helm of slavtion?  Why girdle of truth?"  The other students just looked at me like I was an idiot.  "It's just a metaphor, Carb!  Don't you get it?"  Yes, I got it.  Better than they did.  I not only understood all they did, but I also had the notion that the metaphor went deeper.  Why those pieces with those specific principles?  Again they looked at me like I was an idiot.  The CES trained and paid instructor was not any more help.  (of course, this is the same instructor who thought the rapture was part of LDS theology, so...).

I found out years later that the answers to my questions (which satisfied my curiosity) were in the manual that the instructor apparently did not pay attention to.  This memory poked at me.

But if I can be afforded a judgment (and I hope you take this as constructive criticism) I believe the reason you get the reactions you do is that you do something a little differently.  First, you're not just asking an "I wonder".  You're stating it.  I've read all your posts since I started on this board.  And all of the speculative posts you've made seemed to have the tone that you're now declaring new doctrine.  Where's the humility?  Where's the recognition that this is speculative?

Where you're speculating, you need to have some basis for the speculation.  And many times, you don't seem to have such a basis.  Ask more questions and make fewer statements.  Then proceed with the discussion as others unfold it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Traveler: apology not accepted.  Because you have nothing to apologize for.

Your posts here are absolute gems: I love your wisdom, your insight, and your willingness to push beyond the surface.  Yes, at points you do speculate- speculation is not inherently bad at all, but encourages us to ponder things.  Speculation is only bad if 1) a persons try to push it off as doctrine when it's not (I've never seen you do this Traveler), or 2) if speculations are allowed to threaten/surpass was is for sure known (again, something I've never seen you do Traveler).  Again, your posts here are gems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said:

Because you have nothing to apologize for.

Oh yeah, Traveler, I meant to tell you the same the other day, but I was in a hurry to rush off somewhere . . . I can't think of anything you've ever said that offended me.  I disagree with you sometimes (not always) but offense? No.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't offended either.

Or if I was I soon forgot about it.  I'm seldom offended.  It takes a lot.  If I seem offended, I have to look at why, and frequently it can be that it's something true, something I need to work on.  So I take it to heart and work on it, rather than just take offense.

I appreciate my regular travels to Utah and the prodigious input the people give in classes there.  Really insightful and meaningful participation.  Less so here. 

But here more there seems to be too frequently some off the wall participation.

We have some Cambodian members here and they were inputting about reincarnation.  I had to clarify, so the official word on the church and members was, that, no, we don't believe in reincarnation.  I think.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, David13 said:

We have some Cambodian members here and they were inputting about reincarnation.  I had to clarify, so the official word on the church and members was, that, no, we don't believe in reincarnation.  I think.

dc

Hi David, are these last words a question on your part, "I think"? Are you asking if we do believe in reincarnation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May I make an observation – from my experience?  The only way to become acquainted with truth is to implement a two-step process.  Before I go into the details of what I would express as the “steps” I would first associate truth with intelligence.   This association is implied in the scientific expression of intelligence and in understanding the LDS religious notion of that which is spiritual.  The scientific definition of intelligence is the ability or power to learn and modify one’s behavior.  I believe the key element to understand is the concept of changing behavior.  That nothing is learned of any truth or any particle of truth unless behavior is changed.

The LDS religious notion of spirituality or spiritual or spirit; being that which is intelligence or the light of truth.  This I understand at least in part as the ability to determine behavior or one’s attributes based on the light of truth.

So what then is the two-step process?  The first step is what I call the “seek” or introduction process.  The second step is the application or behavioral change.  There is a danger or caveat – it is that behavior can or will be modified even if the “learning” is to something false or only partially true.  It is interesting that this method is exactly how the human brain work – or should I say modified.  For example – did you know that the thoughts you entertain actually modify your brain? 

The obligation to connect with truth depends entirely on the intelligence of the seeker.  A seeker can be assisted but only through their allowance.  This is part of my understanding of “Agency”. 

The bottom line is that there is no purpose in communicating with someone else to try to change or convince them of anything.  The process to learn must be initiated by the seeker.  We can assist someone else – but in essence we cannot prove or change anything.  Thus the point in conversing is to either learn ourselves or to qualify the other person’s intent to learn or allow us to assist them in learning.

A note here – I enjoy very much learning from others – mostly I learn by asking questions.  What some may consider fireworks or going the rounds – I find wonderful and fascinating for me and also an exciting opportunity to challenge anyone willing to listen of seek.

 I thought to add and edit and note from my first paragraph - it is not necessarly truth but learning that is associated with intelligence - I would like truth to be so simple but in reality truth can only be understood through learning but not all that is learned is truth.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's just to say that I think the proper point of view is that we do not believe in reincarnation.. I think to indicate that I do not think I speak for the church here. I did ask about it when it was brought up.  So I did have confirmation from someone in the church all their life.. 

But I can't speak for the church.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Sunday School answers, I agree with what has been said that I wish people would be willing to go deeper, ask more questions, just be more curious.

However, also regarding Sunday School answers:

I taught a 14 year old LDS Sunday School class a few years ago. When I asked the questions the lesson told me to, they would often give me the simple "Sunday School" answers. What often struck me, now as an older adult, was how profound those answers can be. I guess because I understand them better, simple as they may be.

"Simple" concepts like faith, charity, sacrifice, and all the other so-called basic principles. Wow, they are all amazing.

Perhaps I'm finally seeing a bit of the following in my older age:

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." - T. S. Eliot

Edited by tesuji
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tesuji said:

However, also regarding Sunday School answers:

[...]

"Simple" concepts like faith, charity, sacrifice, and all the other so-called basic principles. Wow, they are all amazing.

Agreed. The oft-disparaged "Sunday School answers" are very often the best and most profound.

6 hours ago, tesuji said:

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." - T. S. Eliot

Nice quotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Vort said:

Agreed. The oft-disparaged "Sunday School answers" are very often the best and most profound.

Nice quotation.

There is a quote - but I do not remember the source -- "What you do thunders so loudly in my ears; I can't hear a word you are saying."

Knowing what to say is not as profound as knowing what to do and doing it.  The joy of discovery of knowledge and truth is only temporary unless it becomes common habitual behavior.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Vort said:

Agreed. The oft-disparaged "Sunday School answers" are very often the best and most profound.

 

And that's why they're Sunday School.  Sunday School is not really for in-depth study when students are at different levels of knowledge.  Line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept is the way of the Lord.  Therefore, Sunday School is geared towards promoting FAITH more so than addressing confusion.  With faith, the student is empowered to address his own confusion... and that's where all the other non-Sunday-School legs of our organization comes in like, FHE, Home teaching, Visit teaching, individual study, Temple work, etc... they are geared towards individual teaching, line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept where the individual student currently stands in his faith.

So, when people say.. "Why didn't we hear about <insert some seedy church history here> in Sunday School?"... well, the simple answer is - Is it Faith promoting to the general membership?

The more appropriate question is - "Why didn't we hear about <> in FHE?" or some such.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

There is a quote - but I do not remember the source -- "What you do thunders so loudly in my ears; I can't hear a word you are saying."

Knowing what to say is not as profound as knowing what to do and doing it.  The joy of discovery of knowledge and truth is only temporary unless it becomes common habitual behavior.

 

The Traveler

I agree wholeheartedly.

But, at the same time... I know a lot about proper nutrition, proper exercise, etc... but I'm still fat.  Why is that, you ask?  Because the joy of discovery of knowledge and truth - which is not temporary, in my case - is a whole lot different than actually changing in the midst of of a myriad of worldly barriers and temptation.

So, in my case, I hold a lot of value to knowing what to say, which to me is quite profound, because it is leading towards actually doing it and getting there... which is even more profound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, zomarah said:

I can agree with this. However, the Church has discouraged groups of non-related people getting together for gospel study. Meaning that topics and question must be moved to FHE. However, in many cases, especially with young children involved, FHE usually becomes even more simplified than Sunday School. This leaves no place to address difficult/deeper/"seedy church history" subjects in a group setting.

Church encourages HT and VT... it has Teaching in its name.

You're not supposed to be holding FHE only when kids are little.  They grow up... their questions get deeper.  They even become adults with adult questions... line upon line, precept upon precept.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, zomarah said:

the Church has discouraged groups of non-related people getting together for gospel study. 

Hmm.  Maybe we should shut down LDS.net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, anatess2 said:

And that's why they're Sunday School.  Sunday School is not really for in-depth study when students are at different levels of knowledge.  Line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept is the way of the Lord.  Therefore, Sunday School is geared towards promoting FAITH ...

I really agree with this. 

Sunday School is part of the Sabbath worship. I think it's primarily to remind us of our covenants and provide an opportunity to feel the Holy Spirit, after a week of being "in the world." Sure, we study the four standard works of scripture - but the fact that we've been cycling through that for, what, 30 years now? - this indicates to me the primary purpose of Sunday School is not to become scholars in church doctrine. And as has been said, everyone is at different levels of intellectual understanding about things. And intellectual understanding is not the primary goal in this life - it's learning to submit to God and to serve others.

Edited by tesuji
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, zomarah said:

I can agree with this. However, the Church has discouraged groups of non-related people getting together for gospel study. Meaning that topics and question must be moved to FHE. However, in many cases, especially with young children involved, FHE usually becomes even more simplified than Sunday School. This leaves no place to address difficult/deeper/"seedy church history" subjects in a group setting.

This is my understanding - the church discourages private study groups. 

Gospel knowledge is gained primarily by personal study, personal pondering, and by personal faith. Greater spiritual knowledge comes from becoming more obedient, becoming more humble, becoming more pure in heart, and becoming more in tune with the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit is the source of spiritual truth, not the ideas of people sitting around in a group. The Spirit will reveal things to you, as you work for them and are ready to live the greater knowledge that you have humbly sought.

I'm all for study and learning. But we have the scriptures, and tons of other books. And we have the Spirit.

We don't need unofficial study groups.

(Anecdotally, the one such group I saw in the past resuled in many of the people in it going apostate.)

Edited by tesuji
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, tesuji said:

(Anecdotally, the one such group I saw in the past resuled in many of the people in it going apostate.)

...And this is the main concern that I have seen voiced over why study groups aren't the best idea.
Even study groups with the best of intentions that start out innocently need to take caution that they stay diligently focused on the "actual gospel" versus the gospel according to Bill or Jill. 

It is wonderfully refreshing to have many strong members and strong moderators here, so as to avoid the cautioned scenario from above playing out. It does/can play itself out as evidenced in even other supposed "lds" forums. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that the church discourages study groups.  However, I also think it is good to have relationships with others where new thoughts and ideas and be tried out and openly discussed. I have ski buddies and talking about things on the lift is uplifting in more ways than one.  I sometimes wonder if many a student of religious studies often expresses their ideas and understanding without any peer review or any willingness to have sanity checks.  I understand that the spirit is the prime director of truthful ideas - but there is something to be said about a quorum - the organization of the true and living church is that everyone in position of importance and authority - has consolers.

 

BTW - I sometimes post ideas here on the forum as a sanity check and when I get answers like "follow Jesus" without specifics as what following Jesus is - I wonder if the question at hand has been seriously contemplated.  For example – is it really that good of an idea to call someone of high religious importance a hypocrite?  Even if they are?

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/05/2016 at 11:44 AM, Traveler said:

This is a little insight to the mind and heart of the Traveler more than a condemnation of others.  As a youth I loved church and enjoyed the spirit of the saints (still do) – but I often found the pace of instruction very boring (too slow).   Often my thoughts were (and still are) somewhere else – not necessarily with worldly things – just other things.   My teachers; realizing I was somewhere else would often ask me a question to get me back inline.  I learned that if I answered – Jesus Christ – I answered correctly, at least as often as if I was intently listening and involved.

 

This is what I mean with what I call the Sunday school answer.  The answer at the surface is correct and 100% true – but does not reflect the understanding of the depth of the question often being asked.  Trying to go beyond the surface of Sunday school answers often creates ire and accusations of heresy.  Thinking often involves some speculation – and speculation by many is considered evil.  To be honest, often I enter discussions on this very forum (as well as in other places) not because I actually disagree but because I see some hope in expanding the thinking (especially pondering or ponderizing spiritual possibilities). 

 

Sometime I agree with what a person is saying but I want to push them a bit to explore and learn.  Sometimes I push the limits because I wonder if there is more and something I have missed or failed to consider.  I most appreciate those who have opinions and come to conclusions different than mine – and I love to explore why.  But I have found that most are not comfortable enough with their opinions and thoughts to have then challenged or explored in detail.  In so doing I create anger and resentment and often do not even realize it.  In my social circles my beloved wife is quick to reprove me – but she is never present on this forum. 

 

So I apologize.  This may seem like a hollow apology because I may be unaware of the actual offense.   Though I believe those of this forum to be capable of much better than the “Sunday school” answers – I do not intend to create anger by my challenges.  But I also believe that being shaken a little and even being a little upset is worth the journey that must be endlessly traveled on the pathway to truth and understanding.   

 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Edspringer said:
On 29/05/2016 at 11:44 AM, Traveler said:

This is a little insight to the mind and heart of the Traveler more than a condemnation of others.  As a youth I loved church and enjoyed the spirit of the saints (still do) – but I often found the pace of instruction very boring (too slow).   Often my thoughts were (and still are) somewhere else – not necessarily with worldly things – just other things.   My teachers; realizing I was somewhere else would often ask me a question to get me back inline.  I learned that if I answered – Jesus Christ – I answered correctly, at least as often as if I was intently listening and involved.

 

This is what I mean with what I call the Sunday school answer.  The answer at the surface is correct and 100% true – but does not reflect the understanding of the depth of the question often being asked.  Trying to go beyond the surface of Sunday school answers often creates ire and accusations of heresy.  Thinking often involves some speculation – and speculation by many is considered evil.  To be honest, often I enter discussions on this very forum (as well as in other places) not because I actually disagree but because I see some hope in expanding the thinking (especially pondering or ponderizing spiritual possibilities). 

 

Sometime I agree with what a person is saying but I want to push them a bit to explore and learn.  Sometimes I push the limits because I wonder if there is more and something I have missed or failed to consider.  I most appreciate those who have opinions and come to conclusions different than mine – and I love to explore why.  But I have found that most are not comfortable enough with their opinions and thoughts to have then challenged or explored in detail.  In so doing I create anger and resentment and often do not even realize it.  In my social circles my beloved wife is quick to reprove me – but she is never present on this forum. 

 

So I apologize.  This may seem like a hollow apology because I may be unaware of the actual offense.   Though I believe those of this forum to be capable of much better than the “Sunday school” answers – I do not intend to create anger by my challenges.  But I also believe that being shaken a little and even being a little upset is worth the journey that must be endlessly traveled on the pathway to truth and understanding.   

 

 

The Traveler

 

Great post, thanx

As Sunday School president in my ward, I have been trying to get my students "out of the box", so to speak. What I mean is that they barely read the scriptures (when they have them). They don't study them the way we all should do. These verses by Nephi explain what I've been feeling lately:

 

 

 1 And now, behold, my beloved brethren, I suppose that ye ponder somewhat in your hearts concerning that which ye should do after ye have entered in by the way. But, behold, why do ye ponder these things in your hearts?

 2 Do ye not remember that I said unto you that after ye had received the Holy Ghost ye could speak with thetongue of angels? And now, how could ye speak with the tongue of angels save it were by the Holy Ghost?

 3 Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore, they speak the words of Christ. Wherefore, I said unto you, feast upon the words of Christ; for behold, the words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do.

 4 Wherefore, now after I have spoken these words, if ye cannot understand them it will be because ye ask not, neither do ye knock; wherefore, ye are not brought into the light, but must perish in the dark.

 5 For behold, again I say unto you that if ye will enter in by the way, and receive the Holy Ghost, it will show unto you all things what ye should do.

 6 Behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and there will be no more doctrine given until after he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh. And when he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh, the things which he shall say unto you shall ye observe to do.

 7 And now I, Nephi, cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of theunbelief, and the wickedness, and the ignorance, and thestiffneckedness of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be.

 8 And now, my beloved brethren, I perceive that ye ponder still in your hearts; and it grieveth me that I must speak concerning this thing. For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray, ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray.

 9 But behold, I say unto you that ye must pray always, and not faint; that ye must not perform any thing unto the Lord save in the first place ye shall pray unto the Father in the name of Christ, that he will consecrate thy performance unto thee, that thy performance may be for the welfare of thy soul.

 

(2 Nephi 32)

So, what I have been noticing is that most of us don’t know how to ‘knock’. ‘ask’, ‘seek’. Then it is impossible to go further in a discussion in a Sunday school class. Students don’t study the scriptures properly and, therefore, don’t have their minds broaden by the Holy Ghost and receive revelation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

I understand that the church discourages study groups.  However, I also think it is good to have relationships with others where new thoughts and ideas and be tried out and openly discussed. I have ski buddies and talking about things on the lift is uplifting in more ways than one.  I sometimes wonder if many a student of religious studies often expresses their ideas and understanding without any peer review or any willingness to have sanity checks.  I understand that the spirit is the prime director of truthful ideas - but there is something to be said about a quorum - the organization of the true and living church is that everyone in position of importance and authority - has consolers.

 

BTW - I sometimes post ideas here on the forum as a sanity check and when I get answers like "follow Jesus" without specifics as what following Jesus is - I wonder if the question at hand has been seriously contemplated.  For example – is it really that good of an idea to call someone of high religious importance a hypocrite?  Even if they are?

 

The Traveler

One important point we all should consider when we talk about discussion in a Sunday School class is that we're all there to be edified by the Holy Ghost so our testimony of the gospel and our faith in Jesus Chirst can increase. Section 50 of D&C gives the pattern for such:

17 Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God.

19 And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

20 If it be some other way it is not of God.

21 Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth?

22 Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.

 

So, in a Sunday School class basis, we should be able to discuss the pure doctrine of Christ and the principles to enhance our understanding and knowledge, as well as rejoice together. Why? Because in doing so we will have the companionship of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth. Otherwise, it is not of God,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share