Interesting Statement From Gp Teacher

[bjw]

I was in the Gosepl Principles class on Sunday and we got out a few minutes early so I talked to the teacher for a few minutes. I told him that I would like to suggest to the church's curriculum department that they start a class on Apologetics to be taught during second hour at church. Already we have Gosepel Principles, Gosepel Doctrine, and Family History available for adults during second hour. What the teacher told me surprised me. He said that there was no way we would ever do that because we are commanded to not practice apologetics. He said that apologetics involve attacking other people's faiths and we LDS are commanded to be tolerant of other faiths and not attack them, so LDS are not permitted to engage in apologetics of any kind. I then tried telling him about FAIR, FARMS, and MADB and he said he had never heard of them.

We all know the flaws in these statements, but you would honestly think that a GP teacher would know better. Apologetics does not involve attacking other faiths but supporting your own with evidence. Anyway, I still think its a good idea though. An apologetics class could benefit all LDS.

[MorningStar]

The majority of people I have talked to about this don't know what apologetics are, so it's not unusual that the Gospel Principles teacher doesn't know. We are not supposed to "bash" with people or be contentious, but apologetics is defending the faith, not attacking others.

[the_jason]

To my knowledge, FARMS and MADB are not official church programs. Those associations can do what they wish, but that does not mean the church sponsors it or will ever incorporate it. It is not the desire of the church to provide evidence for doctrine. Either it's true or it's not. Either you believe it or you don't. We need to gain our own testimonies which are based on trials of faith, not on proof.

[bjw]

To my knowledge, FARMS and MADB are not official church programs. Those associations can do what they wish, but that does not mean the church sponsors it or will ever incorporate it. It is not the desire of the church to provide evidence for doctrine. Either it's true or it's not. Either you believe it or you don't. We need to gain our own testimonies which are based on trials of faith, not on proof.

To my knowledge FARMS is owned by the church and is part of BYU, FAIR/MADB are not. However, I wasn't suggesting that the church incorporate these but that they have a basic apologetics class for the purpose of learning why we believe what we believe and to provide answers in case someone asks. For instance, the doctrine of exaltation in the early church, other doctrines from the early church, mesoamerican studies, Nibley's Egyptian studies, etc. can be incorporated along with various defenses of different doctrines, church history, scriptures, answering investigators, etc. It may be a fairly informative class.

Also, the purpose of learning the apologetics would not be to build a testimony on them, especially since apologetics change constantly. The purpose would be to provide members that already have a strong testimony with answers to questions nonmembers may ask, to "strengthen" testimonies and faith, and keep members updated with the latest research. I think it would be a good class for those that wish to dig deeper and explore. With the church getting more and more publicity as of late I think the class would be a wonderful way to better equip members with what they need.

It is also a good way to fulfill this scripture: http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_pet/3/15#15

[Traveler]

I was in the Gosepl Principles class on Sunday and we got out a few minutes early so I talked to the teacher for a few minutes. I told him that I would like to suggest to the church's curriculum department that they start a class on Apologetics to be taught during second hour at church. Already we have Gosepel Principles, Gosepel Doctrine, and Family History available for adults during second hour. What the teacher told me surprised me. He said that there was no way we would ever do that because we are commanded to not practice apologetics. He said that apologetics involve attacking other people's faiths and we LDS are commanded to be tolerant of other faiths and not attack them, so LDS are not permitted to engage in apologetics of any kind. I then tried telling him about FAIR, FARMS, and MADB and he said he had never heard of them.

We all know the flaws in these statements, but you would honestly think that a GP teacher would know better. Apologetics does not involve attacking other faiths but supporting your own with evidence. Anyway, I still think its a good idea though. An apologetics class could benefit all LDS.

For the most part I agree with the GP teacher – our mission is to bring souls unto Christ and most people respond better to encouragement than they do criticism. With that said may I recommend a very good book on LDS apologetics and answers to the insane questions of over zealous critics? The book is the Gospel of St John found in the New Testament.

I though I would present a couple of examples of apologetics from the Gospel of John as it applies directly to LDS criticism. First, I would point you to John 8:48. At the time of Jesus there was no Christian religion so it would not make sense to claim that Jesus and those that believed his doctrine were not Christian. Instead the criticism was concerning who was Jewish. Rather than call Jesus a non-Jew (or non-Christian) or to say Jesus was not Jewish; he was instead called a “Samaritan” which for the time and place served the same purpose of propaganda as calling someone in today’s Christian society “Not Christian”.

The second one that I will highlight is from John chapter 10. I actually quoted this to a critic of LDS teaching and surprise, surprise – the answer I got was almost word for word the same answer given by the Pharisees. Let me walk you through this. Jesus is in the temple on Solomon’s porch. The teachings of Jesus have so upset many of the Pharisees that in verse 31 they start gathering stones with the intent of killing Jesus.

In verse 32, Jesus recognizes their anger and asks an interesting question. In essence he asks what he has done to create the anger to kill him. I want you all to pay close attention to the answer to this in verse 33. I will quote it exactly from the KJV: “For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself G-d.” Now if anyone has read any of the anti LDS material – how far did you get before you saw that argument?

The last point I would like to make in this post is that Jesus did not covert a single critic in his day. If fact, not only did he not convert any of them but his engaging with the anti’s resulted in his crucifixion. I do not say this to discourage those that testify of Christ but that you may recognize Jesus addressing the anti Christ of his day. That you may, by the type and shadow given in scripture, recognize the anti Christ or our era by their tactics and methods matched in ancient times.

The Traveler

[fish4kitty]

Good points Traveler. Now I'm going to have to read John again.

[bjw]

My suggestion for the class wasn't to address any criticism or any anti material, but to learn history, what we believe, and why we believe it, along with any line of defences/reasoning behind each belief. Criticisms of our church as well as any antimormon material would be beyond the scope of the course.

[Traveler]

My suggestion for the class wasn't to address any criticism or any anti material, but to learn history, what we believe, and why we believe it, along with any line of defences/reasoning behind each belief. Criticisms of our church as well as any antimormon material would be beyond the scope of the course.

This is a very interesting concept. The problem as I see it - you are talking about a course of study that would span many years and even decades. The history and why to religion, as an element of history, goes far beyond just the LDS faith. Some examples:

Why did Hitler call his movement the 3rd Reich? And what was the 1st and 2nd Reich?

Why did Robin Hood have 11 men which formed a “Priest – Hood” (Druid circle or quorum) and why was the first priest (making the number 12) called “Robin”.

What Christian doctrine was being opposed by the resources in the library of Alexandria that forced Theodosius to burn everything to the ground – beginning the “Dark Ages”?

Why did Charlemagne kill more Europeans than the Black Plague, making him one of the most successful mass murders of all time and yet he is honored as one of the greatest “Christians” of all time. And why is the city he founded – Frankfort – a divided city to this day.

Of the three great gifts of Allah to the Arabic people – What it the “gift tree” What is the color of it fruit – why is the fruit so critical to the Arabic peoples and where does this tree come from?

The Traveler

[ztodd]

So you'd like just a church history class - that might be reasonable - church history is actually taught in gospel doctrine though when it's the year for Doc & Covenants, so it might not be necessary. There are church history institute classes in places where institute classes are available.

But if you're looking to delve into subjects like reasons and defences for plural marriage and human deification, there's a reason we don't have classes for those things and we don't even bring those things up very often, even amongst ourselves. It's because those doctrines are not important for us to learn about right now. There are many other more important things we should be focusing on. The critics of the church make a big deal out of those things, but we don't. Not all truths are equally important at all times. The time may come in the future when those things become more important for us to learn about, but for now we really don't need to look beyond the mark (Jacob 4:14).

[bjw]

I think some of you are still misunderstanding me.

I think the ideal textbook for such a class would be "Hidden Treasures of Knowledge" by Stephen Morgan. It could easily be a 52 week class that would cover the 22 chapters of the book, allowing 2 weeks per chapter, maybe 3 weeks for the longer chapters, with the chapters redivided into lessons by the curriculum dept. Here's a good idea for a course that would be 10 units long and last a year that would utilize the Hidden Treasures book as a basis for organization.

Unit one would cover a history of the patriarchs and the patriarchal line as well as the history of the House of Israel and what we have that supports that history. Unit two would cover the remnants of the Adamic language in Hebrew, the Creation of man, and the Atonement. Unit three would cover Egyptian concepts like Abraham in Egypt and the early Egyptian temple rituals as well as the Book of Abraham. Unit four would cover temples in ancient times as well as modern and their characteristics. Unit five would cover ancient documents that support scripture, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and various apocraphal literature. Unit six would cover Jesus Christ and his teachings to the disciples both before and after the resurrection including temple ordinances revealed following the resurrection. Unit seven would cover the United States and its role in the gathering of Israel and end time prophecy. Unit eight would cover the Great Apostacy, Reformation, and Restoration of the church of Jesus Christ from the early church fathers to the reformers to modern day prophets. Unit nine would cover the Book of Mormon and evidences of its antiquity. Unit ten would be on the modern day LDS church from Joseph Smith to GBH.

Even though, as someone already pointed out, it covers quite a time period, when you have a book like Hidden Treasures that has it all already summed up, it would be quite easy to teach a course of apologetics over a one year period. They could make it open to endowed members that have been through the GP, GD, and FH classes already. I don't know, just an idea I have. I can dream, right?

[the_jason]

I think some of you are still misunderstanding me.

I think we understand you just fine. Most of us just disagree with you. The existing Sunday School classes provide ample information about the beliefs of the church. The classes themselves are not what gives someone a testimony. A testimony is gained after study, fasting, and prayer. Sunday School meets the study part of the equation. The other two are up to the individual. A class should not be solely responsible for a testimony or lack of.

[Guest AutumnBreez]

I think some of you are still misunderstanding me.

I think the ideal textbook for such a class would be "Hidden Treasures of Knowledge" by Stephen Morgan. It could easily be a 52 week class that would cover the 22 chapters of the book, allowing 2 weeks per chapter, maybe 3 weeks for the longer chapters, with the chapters redivided into lessons by the curriculum dept. Here's a good idea for a course that would be 10 units long and last a year that would utilize the Hidden Treasures book as a basis for organization.

Unit one would cover a history of the patriarchs and the patriarchal line as well as the history of the House of Israel and what we have that supports that history. Unit two would cover the remnants of the Adamic language in Hebrew, the Creation of man, and the Atonement. Unit three would cover Egyptian concepts like Abraham in Egypt and the early Egyptian temple rituals as well as the Book of Abraham. Unit four would cover temples in ancient times as well as modern and their characteristics. Unit five would cover ancient documents that support scripture, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and various apocraphal literature. Unit six would cover Jesus Christ and his teachings to the disciples both before and after the resurrection including temple ordinances revealed following the resurrection. Unit seven would cover the United States and its role in the gathering of Israel and end time prophecy. Unit eight would cover the Great Apostacy, Reformation, and Restoration of the church of Jesus Christ from the early church fathers to the reformers to modern day prophets. Unit nine would cover the Book of Mormon and evidences of its antiquity. Unit ten would be on the modern day LDS church from Joseph Smith to GBH.

Even though, as someone already pointed out, it covers quite a time period, when you have a book like Hidden Treasures that has it all already summed up, it would be quite easy to teach a course of apologetics over a one year period. They could make it open to endowed members that have been through the GP, GD, and FH classes already. I don't know, just an idea I have. I can dream, right?

If you feel strongly about it, I would think you would not object to having it in your home and if people are interested they will come. FIRST: I would suggest strongly that you pray about it, and ask the Bishop first before advertising to other members of the study dates and times- Ask the Bishop if this study would be acceptable and not impede Temple recommend- Prepare and set appt. with the bishop, have your info and resources (book, Farms page, etc.) about apologetics, etc.

[NeuroTypical]

The 3-fold mission of the church:

1- Perfect the Saints

2- Proclaim the Gospel

3- Redeem the Dead

Now, it seems like there's nothing at all offensive with the concept of an apologetics class - it seems to fall under #1 quite nicely. However, I don't think you'll ever see it happen during church on Sunday. There's much more to the church than just what goes on under our wardhouse roofs for 3 hours once a week. We also have the Church Educational System that does seminary and secondary education. There's BYU and all of it's sattelites and distance learning programs.

Sunday is reserved for the sacred. The sacrament, worship, reverence - that sort of thing. Learning why we can still keep our testimonies despite Joseph Smith's ownership of a Jupiter talisman doesn't really foster such a sacred attitude. But hey, if CES offers something, sign me up!

He said that there was no way we would ever do that because we are commanded to not practice apologetics.

Well, he seems to have an incomplete view of apologetics. As you mention, evaluating criticisms of our faith does not imply attacking someone else. Additionally, we have these scriptures:

D&C 71:5-11 Now, behold this is wisdom; whoso readeth, let him understand and receive also; For unto him that receiveth it shall be given more abundantly, even power. Wherefore, confound your enemies; call upon them to meet you both in public and in private; and inasmuch as ye are faithful their shame shall be made manifest. Wherefore, let them bring forth their strong reasons against the Lord. Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you—there is no weapon that is formed against you shall prosper; And if any man lift his voice against you he shall be confounded in mine own due time. Wherefore, keep my commandments; they are true and faithful. Even so. Amen.

1 Peter 3:15: But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

1 Thessalonians 5:21: Prove all things; hold fast to which is good.

Jude 1:3: Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."

We all know the flaws in these statements, but you would honestly think that a GP teacher would know better.

Well, you gotta give us GP teachers a break. Just because we read the lesson the day before the rest of you, doesn't mean we're scholars!

LM

[bjw]

I think we understand you just fine. Most of us just disagree with you. The existing Sunday School classes provide ample information about the beliefs of the church. The classes themselves are not what gives someone a testimony. A testimony is gained after study, fasting, and prayer. Sunday School meets the study part of the equation. The other two are up to the individual. A class should not be solely responsible for a testimony or lack of.

The purpose of the class would not be to provide something to base a testimony on or the basics of what the church teaches. I agree, nothing in a class can give someone a testimony of the gospel. That's why I suggested that the class only be open to endowed members that have been through GP, GD, and FH already. These people should have a good testimony and be able to move on to the apologetics class, simply learning "evidences" behind what they already know is true. I agree with you though that one danger of a class like this is that people could be taking it secretly hoping to gain a testimony because they lost theirs, only to be disappointed later. So, in that respect I guess I agree that it could become a potential drawback.

I notice at my ward that many people do not go to sunday school at all. Some just stay out in the halls and visit until 3rd hour (priesthood/rs). Many go outside or sit in the lobby chairs and talk. I ask a few why they usually don't go to sunday school and some say that they can't sit that long, they've heard the material over and over already, etc. This might be something that would pull people back in for 2nd hour. So, even with some of the drawbacks, it could help invigorate the sunday school program.

[bjw]

If you feel strongly about it, I would think you would not object to having it in your home and if people are interested they will come. FIRST: I would suggest strongly that you pray about it, and ask the Bishop first before advertising to other members of the study dates and times- Ask the Bishop if this study would be acceptable and not impede Temple recommend- Prepare and set appt. with the bishop, have your info and resources (book, Farms page, etc.) about apologetics, etc.

These are some good ideas. I was thinking of mailing the idea to SLC but the bishop might be a good person to give the idea too first. I don't know if I would be the most qualified to teach it, but the temple prep class was taught in the evenings at a member's home so I suppose this could be one idea.

Loudmouth Mormon,

Good scripture references and good points. Ya, I'll have to give you GP teachers a break.

[MorningStar]

Sounds interesting, Bjw. :) I know that we're told to focus on basic doctrines at church, but I think it would be really nice to do on the side for those interested. We have a couple study groups in my stake that are really great. I bet you would like them.

[bjw]

Sounds interesting, Bjw. :) I know that we're told to focus on basic doctrines at church, but I think it would be really nice to do on the side for those interested. We have a couple study groups in my stake that are really great. I bet you would like them.

That's cool that there are evening study groups in your stake. That's one thing that I think the protestant churches do right when they have Bible study groups. I think in the next few months I might try to submit a curriculum for review to the bishop and see what he thinks. You guys gave me a good idea, thanks.

[DrewM]

I was in the Gosepl Principles class on Sunday and we got out a few minutes early so I talked to the teacher for a few minutes. I told him that I would like to suggest to the church's curriculum department that they start a class on Apologetics to be taught during second hour at church. Already we have Gosepel Principles, Gosepel Doctrine, and Family History available for adults during second hour. What the teacher told me surprised me. He said that there was no way we would ever do that because we are commanded to not practice apologetics. He said that apologetics involve attacking other people's faiths and we LDS are commanded to be tolerant of other faiths and not attack them, so LDS are not permitted to engage in apologetics of any kind. I then tried telling him about FAIR, FARMS, and MADB and he said he had never heard of them.

We all know the flaws in these statements, but you would honestly think that a GP teacher would know better. Apologetics does not involve attacking other faiths but supporting your own with evidence. Anyway, I still think its a good idea though. An apologetics class could benefit all LDS.

Your gospel principles teacher is way off. Apologetics has reference to defense of one's belief, and not offense toward another's beliefs. Having said that, I don't know how useful an apologetics class would be during the second hour.

[LdsNana]

We all know the flaws in these statements, but you would honestly think that a GP teacher would know better. NO, I am not surprised by this reaction at all. Apologetics does not involve attacking other faiths but supporting your own with evidence. Anyway, I still think its a good idea though. An apologetics class could benefit all LDS.

BJW said:

" Apologetics does not involve attacking other faiths but supporting your own with evidence."

The only evidence that is necessary is truth. This comes to an individual according to the desires of their heart, to receive truth... and we all grow in the knowledge of truth, as we understand it and then apply it in our lives.

All throughout scripture, the Lord Himself, is very clear on what His Servants, the Elders of the Church, are to teach and to preach, in the Kingdom of God... and anything more is unacceptable to Him.

Faith, Repentance, Baptism for the remission of sins, and the Laying on of Hands to receive the Holy Ghost.

These are the first four principles and ordinances of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is the work of administering Salvation unto the children of God.

In the ordinance of Confirmation... the newly baptized member is instructed firmly to receive the Holy Ghost. This is a gift, that comes from God the Father, to all those who choose to follow His Son.

To receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost, for each child of God, is the single most important work that we have, so that we may return back to the Presence of God.

This can be a life-long process... and so, in order than we may continue on the path, which leads us to Him, we are given the ordinance of the Sacrament, so that we may - because of the Atonement and through repentance, retain a remission of our sins... this is an ongoing process and how we ultimately are able to know how, to sanctify ourselves. We must choose to move forward by receiving constantly, His Spirit.

The Holy Ghost, is the teacher and witness of ALL truth.

D&C 84:46

47 And every one that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit cometh unto God, even the Father.

To hearken, is to hear and DO... or in other WORD(s), Receive the Spirit.

IMHO, the Church is not the place for what you are suggesting, such as a class to address these various topics under discussion here. The Church is continually adding to its membership, and therefore it must continue to stay focused on What it is that the Lord commands be taught in His Church.

Faith in Jesus Christ, (His teachings of Him) which lead a person to desire to enter His Kingdom, thus repenting unto baptism and the remission of sins, to qualify to receive His Spirit.

Although many think that these principles and ordinances are baby food, when it comes to understanding and knowing God, to those who truly receive His Spirit, they are taught the repetitive nature of this process, as the return pattern which must be repeated continually.

This same pattern is found throughout the Gospel, and I believe the very Key to our Salvation and Exaltation.

Those individuals that have desire to know and understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ, so that they may live and teach it to others, will do so according to the spirit by which they are led.

For the majority of members in the Church, they are in constant need of these Key doctrines in all their variety, as taught in the Church currently.

What we do need more of, is that when we are given the privilege and sacred call to teach, in the Church... that we learn our material and teach it well... being sure to utilize each other in edification for all. When this is done properly, we can teach, discuss truth together and learn how, where and why these truths are so important for us to then go out and apply.

It is the training within the current structure that I believe needs much more emphasis, so that the Saints receive the principles and doctrines of the Gospel as they need and should be taught.

The training and materials is available. It is the Saints, that must take much more serious, those calls, which come of the Lord, and that we are given, to then magnify those calls, in every way possible. Training is critical. But seeking the Spirit in this endeavor is just as important.

I honestly believe that as we raise the bar, in teaching correctly and purely, the doctrines and principles of the Gospel, we will actually meet the desired needs that we all see. But this can and must be done, as currently structured. It is us and not the Church that lacks in bringing and giving what it is we are asking for... we must look to each other and expect more and pray for our teachers that they will be taught of the Spirit, for our benefits.

And, above all, we must not be critical of those called to teach, but give our full support while in these classes. The teachers are simply to facilitate the principle being taught and to do this by the spirit. The spirit that dwells in our classes throughout the church, is literally sustained by those in attendance, and this is actively done.

[ztodd]

Sounds interesting, Bjw. :) I know that we're told to focus on basic doctrines at church, but I think it would be really nice to do on the side for those interested. We have a couple study groups in my stake that are really great. I bet you would like them.

bjw, check out http://www.lds.org/institutes to see if you have institute classes in your area - it would be a great idea for an institute class.

[ztodd]

...

I notice at my ward that many people do not go to sunday school at all. Some just stay out in the halls and visit until 3rd hour (priesthood/rs). Many go outside or sit in the lobby chairs and talk. I ask a few why they usually don't go to sunday school and some say that they can't sit that long, they've heard the material over and over already, etc. This might be something that would pull people back in for 2nd hour. So, even with some of the drawbacks, it could help invigorate the sunday school program.

So they think they know everything already about faith, prayer, etc.? They think they can't learn anything new from anyone else in the gospel doctrine class? Actually, I can understand their feelings though. Sometimes it's hard to keep yourself involved in the lesson, especially if you feel that you don't fit well with the teacher's style. But... it is up to us to try to actively participate and learn new things by the Spirit.

I don't think introducing the apologetics class as part of the Sunday school curriculum is the solution to that problem. But maybe you could make some suggestions to the sunday school president on some ways to help bring people back in? Everyone needs to know how much they're needed.

[LdsNana]

bjw, check out http://www.lds.org/institutes to see if you have institute classes in your area - it would be a great idea for an institute class.

Check out the class list of courses that you can take over through CES. My seminary experience with CES, is that they would not take something like this on either... they strictly teach courses associated with the Standard Works, and about their content. They have a course plan that they want kept, especially for college level... these receive credits that they can apply in college. Youth seminary students must stay on course, as a few countries actually allow our missionaries in with this, considered as credentials to preach.

CES also teaches about the prophets, and only a few other, very lds mainstream principles. The reason you may go to one institute class and then another and find them completely different in how they are teaching, is simply because of the instructor. So you might have a teacher, who is teaching BoM... one will stay right on spot and follow what CES request that they teach, and the other instructor may have a passion for apologetics, and there could be a strong influence in that class as they teach the BoM.

When I taught the BoM just a few years ago, my students were sophomores in high school. And yet, I felt it important for them to be made aware of some of the more controversial issues that I personally was aware of and knew that they would come in contact... and so I interjected throughout my teaching, by identifying these points with them and then making sure they were educated with both sides of the controversy.

I just felt that this was responsible teaching, but I can tell you straight up... I had to walk on major eggshells, as other teachers, or parents, etc... when they are not comfortable with these issues themselves, are easily ready to go to the fear end of the spectrum, and feel that we should not be teaching that which is not important' to their 'salvation'. Now you can imagine how I felt? For that is exactly what I felt I was doing in preparing them right now, for what they most certainly would encounter. So I felt that what I was doing for them was arming them with correct information, that would protect them spiritually.

Funny how so many want to protect members of the church as if this stuff is not going on out in the world, and just hope that they are not affected by it. I also experienced the same and probably even more, when teaching D&C. As you can imagine? LOL Maybe our adults can escape, but no way will our youth slide through life and go unscathed by the opposition. So education is their best defense personally, as well as feeling confident when they are speaking with nonmembers and happen to be confronted with a falsehood, (or even truth unawares) they must know and understand the truth, thoroughly.

I was amazed at how many adult members had no clue regarding Mountain Meadows, when that came down a few months ago. Last year in D&C, we were given the instructions to not discuss this unless one of our students brought it up... how grateful I am that none of mine did, as I am confident that I would have offended many if I had been honest with my students. Although as a teacher, I was just sick about not discussing it, since the movie was in the future, I had seen the trailer... and I knew what they were headed for. When we know the truth, we must teach the truth... sugar coating for our members does not strengthen them. But I feel that most every controversial subject can be addressed... and if done properly, can actually build faith. And of course this is the measure by which we teach and discuss these things within the 'church' context.

Institute... perhaps you can find a well informed instructor, or you could teach a course yourself BJW. I am certain you would be a great teacher, that many would benefit from.

Those that feel the need on a personal level to be educated, are fortunate that there is an explosion of information to be had. But until someone has encountered a personal need to know more for whatever reason, ... they just don't get it. But this is usually not until either someone they are closely associated with is affected by this, and particularly they really wake-up when it is their own teenage child having anti- materials, etc... tossed their way, AND they are confused. That is when they feel a desperate need to fight this battle!

Go to CES Ed Weeks, etc... you can get some of what you are talking about, but even they must have their curriculum approved before hand... although I am confident that these are very loosely outlined, because of what actually is taught in some of those classes. LOL Perhaps this is why so many go to Ed Week... lol

[MorningStar]

That would be hard, Gvr. I plan on teaching those difficult subjects to my kids so they won't be caught off guard.

[bjw]

Check out the class list of courses that you can take over through CES. My seminary experience with CES, is that they would not take something like this on either... they strictly teach courses associated with the Standard Works, and about their content. They have a course plan that they want kept, especially for college level... these receive credits that they can apply in college. Youth seminary students must stay on course, as a few countries actually allow our missionaries in with this, considered as credentials to preach.

A couple comments here...

It would be nice if the CES offered something with material like this. However, I attended the nightime institute classes for a couple weeks at the local college in my area, and the class had very little substance and was mostly just the teacher reading a passage out of D&C and then breaking the class into groups to study it, which was mostly rowdy teenagers (16-20ish) that horsed around and talked about music, parties, etc. and very little about the material. However, I suppose you can't stereotype the whole CES based on these people. I met a MADB poster for a pizza party at an institute building in Sacramento (an hour from where I live) and they were much more down-to-earth and not "snobbish" like the ones in my area are.

Second, I have been barred from attending anymore CES classes or singles ward due to the false accusations leveled against me (about the girl) that were mentioned in the "Can I Petition to Switch Wards" thread.

Also, I don't see how the institute classes could be accepted for any kind of college credit since they said that you got credit just for attendance. I clearly remember the instructor saying that all you had to do was have less than 5 absences in a course and you would get full credit. I'm sure a course at BYU is much tougher in that you take exams and earn a grade. I asked the people I was there with if there were any homework or exams and they said no, it was only pass/fail based on getting fewer than 5 absences. The class I was there for was D&C by the way.

[bjw]

Check out the class list of courses that you can take over through CES. My seminary experience with CES, is that they would not take something like this on either... they strictly teach courses associated with the Standard Works, and about their content. They have a course plan that they want kept, especially for college level... these receive credits that they can apply in college. Youth seminary students must stay on course, as a few countries actually allow our missionaries in with this, considered as credentials to preach.

CES also teaches about the prophets, and only a few other, very lds mainstream principles. The reason you may go to one institute class and then another and find them completely different in how they are teaching, is simply because of the instructor. So you might have a teacher, who is teaching BoM... one will stay right on spot and follow what CES request that they teach, and the other instructor may have a passion for apologetics, and there could be a strong influence in that class as they teach the BoM.

When I taught the BoM just a few years ago, my students were sophomores in high school. And yet, I felt it important for them to be made aware of some of the more controversial issues that I personally was aware of and knew that they would come in contact... and so I interjected throughout my teaching, by identifying these points with them and then making sure they were educated with both sides of the controversy.

I just felt that this was responsible teaching, but I can tell you straight up... I had to walk on major eggshells, as other teachers, or parents, etc... when they are not comfortable with these issues themselves, are easily ready to go to the fear end of the spectrum, and feel that we should not be teaching that which is not important' to their 'salvation'. Now you can imagine how I felt? For that is exactly what I felt I was doing in preparing them right now, for what they most certainly would encounter. So I felt that what I was doing for them was arming them with correct information, that would protect them spiritually.

Funny how so many want to protect members of the church as if this stuff is not going on out in the world, and just hope that they are not affected by it. I also experienced the same and probably even more, when teaching D&C. As you can imagine? LOL Maybe our adults can escape, but no way will our youth slide through life and go unscathed by the opposition. So education is their best defense personally, as well as feeling confident when they are speaking with nonmembers and happen to be confronted with a falsehood, (or even truth unawares) they must know and understand the truth, thoroughly.

I was amazed at how many adult members had no clue regarding Mountain Meadows, when that came down a few months ago. Last year in D&C, we were given the instructions to not discuss this unless one of our students brought it up... how grateful I am that none of mine did, as I am confident that I would have offended many if I had been honest with my students. Although as a teacher, I was just sick about not discussing it, since the movie was in the future, I had seen the trailer... and I knew what they were headed for. When we know the truth, we must teach the truth... sugar coating for our members does not strengthen them. But I feel that most every controversial subject can be addressed... and if done properly, can actually build faith. And of course this is the measure by which we teach and discuss these things within the 'church' context.

Institute... perhaps you can find a well informed instructor, or you could teach a course yourself BJW. I am certain you would be a great teacher, that many would benefit from.

Those that feel the need on a personal level to be educated, are fortunate that there is an explosion of information to be had. But until someone has encountered a personal need to know more for whatever reason, ... they just don't get it. But this is usually not until either someone they are closely associated with is affected by this, and particularly they really wake-up when it is their own teenage child having anti- materials, etc... tossed their way, AND they are confused. That is when they feel a desperate need to fight this battle!

Go to CES Ed Weeks, etc... you can get some of what you are talking about, but even they must have their curriculum approved before hand... although I am confident that these are very loosely outlined, because of what actually is taught in some of those classes. LOL Perhaps this is why so many go to Ed Week... lol

Excellent post. I have to confess I only read the first paragraph when I wrote my last post.

You make some excellent points here. I remember the day I was at the CES was the day after the PBS special and several said the Mountain Meadows Massacre thing caught them off guard and they wondered why their parents or no one else told them about it. I remember the teacher just told them that it was a sad part of our church's history and it did happen, and he said that the church had not officially given the order for it.

Ya, I think the individual CES and church teachers could go a long way by putting all the cards on the table, so that when the material is encountered it will be much less of a shock. I think the church may lose a few members at first but in the long run it will keep people in when they encounter people like the street preachers on Temple Square.

After reading your post all the way through I think I may like to visit a few different CES buildings in some other areas and observe the classes. It sounds like some may have substance. I don't think the church should tell teachers to hold anything back since it will only hurt the students testimonies in the long run. Its just like the reason you tell your kids about sex and drugs so that they don't hear it from another source and perhaps get wrong information.