Sunday School podcasts

[laronius]

Is it just me or does it seem like every Sunday School class revolves around what Come Follow Me podcasts have to say about the scriptures? I know they can be helpful in personal study but I rarely ever hear a teacher say anymore "While I was studying the scriptures this week, here is what I learned...". It's kind of getting on my nerves.

Edited August 7, 2023 by laronius

[zil2]

Thankfully, I don't think I've heard this in my Sunday School class - if I have, it's been rare.  Personally, I wish the people doing those podcasts / YT channels / etc. would stop.  The point of CFM is for people to learn from the Holy Ghost.  If they have a podcast to turn to, they're not turning to the Holy Ghost.  People think that some stranger's brilliant insight is more impressive than the Holy Ghost telling them [whatever simple thing], but they're wrong.  Even feeling the Holy Ghost testify of the truthfulness of something presented in a podcast is not as important as learning to hear the Holy Ghost during your personal, private or family scripture study.  The podcast may be easier or more interesting, it may feel like you learned something, but it's not as important as learning to learn from the Holy Ghost. /rant

[mikbone]

Been driving me crazy.  Last week I gave the 5th Sunday lesson. The Bishop asked that I give a talk on, back to the basics.

I told a story about me stopping on the side of the highway in Georgia in the 90's and experiencing a ripe peach.  Best peach I ever had (BY FAR), I ended up buying 10-12 and I finished about half-a-dozen while on a drive to an appointment.  I had to change my shirt and tie because I had dripped juice all over them.  The aroma and taste were unforgettable.  Yet on other occasions I have purchased peaches from the local grocery store wherein I had hoped for a Georgia Peach, and what I got was a lame, scent free, woody 'fruit' that could not ripen on the counter and was only good for ammunition.  There is also the option of George Peach Cobbler Oreo TM cookies.  I also threw in the possibility of a pleasing defect free plastic fruit.  

I then compared those peaches to material that we study.  Years ago I stumbled on a concept of Levels of Evidence which was a guide to explain how to decipher if a medical study was reliable or not.  Anyway I applied that concept to Gospel material and this is what I came up with.

Level of Evidence

Level I: Scripture (the Standard Works), and Modern-Day Revelation as recorded in the Liahona from the most recent General Conference talks.

Level II: Official Proclamations, Statements, and Doctrinal Expositions from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, prior General Conference talks, and the Church Hymnal

Level III: Church Manuals written and published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

Level IV: Commentary by General Authorities not published by the Church, e.g. Mormon Doctrine

Level V: Commentary by non-general authority members in good standing

Level VI: Research and commentary by scholars / non-LDS members

Level VII: Online discussion groups like LDSBlogs.org - Mormon Archipelago: Gateway to the Bloggernacle

Level VIII: Research or commentary by apostate or disillusioned members

 

I then asked the class to compare the peaches to the Gospel Material.  Why would you eat a woody peach when you could have a ripe Georgia peach?  Would anyone try to eat a plastic peach?  The nutritional value of a Georgia Peach Cobbler Oreo TM is probably negative...

 

The scriptures and Liahona are free.  I dont have to buy a book or go onto YouTube to watch a podcast.  Also, which materials do you find in the Temple?!

Then one of the members stated that they loved listening to podcast and appreciated the material presented.

I asked, why would you want to eat pre-digested food? There was a pause.

 

I shared my testimony that nothing can compare to the raw information that is avaliable within the scriptures.  When we let others spoon feed us information, we lose the chance of discovery and inspiration of the Holy Ghost.  

Edited August 7, 2023 by mikbone

[laronius]

10 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Been driving me crazy.  Last week I gave the 5th Sunday lesson. The Bishop asked that I give a talk on, back to the basics.

I told a story about me stopping on the side of the highway in Georgia in the 90's and experiencing a ripe peach.  Best peach I ever had (BY FAR), I ended up buying 10-12 and I finished about half-a-dozen while on a drive to an appointment.  I had to change my shirt and tie because I had dripped juice all over them.  The aroma and taste were unforgettable.  Yet on other occasions I have purchased peaches from the local grocery store wherein I had hoped for a Georgia Peach, and what I got was a lame, scent free, woody 'fruit' that could not ripen on the counter and was only good for ammunition.  There is also the option of George Peach Cobbler Oreo TM cookies.  I also threw in the possibility of a pleasing defect free plastic fruit.  

I then compared those peaches to material that we study.  Years ago I stumbled on a concept of Levels of Evidence which was a guide to explain how to decipher if a medical study was reliable or not.  Anyway I applied that concept to Gospel material and this is what I came up with.

Level of Evidence

Level I: Scripture (the Standard Works), and Modern-Day Revelation as recorded in the Liahona from the most recent General Conference talks.

Level II: Official Proclamations, Statements, and Doctrinal Expositions from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, prior General Conference talks, and the Church Hymnal

Level III: Church Manuals written and published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

Level IV: Commentary by General Authorities not published by the Church, e.g. Mormon Doctrine

Level V: Commentary by non-general authority members in good standing

Level VI: Research and commentary by scholars / non-LDS members

Level VII: Online discussion groups like LDSBlogs.org - Mormon Archipelago: Gateway to the Bloggernacle

Level VIII: Research or commentary by apostate or disillusioned members

 

I then asked the class to compare the peaches to the Gospel Material.  Why would you eat a woody peach when you could have a ripe Georgia peach?  Would anyone try to eat a plastic peach?  The nutritional value of a Georgia Peach Cobbler Oreo TM is probably negative...

 

The scriptures and Liahona are free.  I dont have to buy a book or go onto YouTube to watch a podcast.  Also, which materials do you find in the Temple?!

Then one of the members stated that they loved listening to podcast and appreciated the material presented.

I asked, why would you want to eat pre-digested food? There was a pause.

 

I shared my testimony that nothing can compare to the raw information that is avaliable within the scriptures.  When we let others spoon feed us information, we lose the chance of discovery and inspiration of the Holy Ghost.  

You classify ThirdHour discussions as only level VII???? That's only one level above apostates. 😂 Maybe theirs truth to that.

Today in Sunday School the teacher, who normally does a decent job, did not read one verse of scripture during the entire class. But did he reference a podcast? Yep. 

[zil2]

I do think active discussions (online or otherwise) can be useful, but nothing can replace the scriptures and personal revelation from the Holy Ghost.

31 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I asked, why would you want to eat pre-digested food?

Excellent analogy.

[Carborendum]

We haven't had that in our ward since its inception.  We had some good instructors and some bad.  But they were all from the personal preparation of the instructors.  Two times, I invoked something. 

• I heard one podcast that my wife recommended.  He used a sociology term I'd never heard.  But it was exactly what I was looking for.
• I shared an insight with my wife that I thought was amazing.  She told me that she had just heard that from this same podcast.

When I teach, I study a LOT for each lesson.  I consult a variety of sources.  And I pray about them.  I normally don't listen to gospel related podcasts.  But I may catch wind of some points, ideas, references, data, historical background that I had not been aware.  And if they help understand what we're reading, then I'm all for considering that in the interpretation of scriptures.

[mikbone]

I think that the best way to teach is to have a broad knowledge base from reading / experiencing many sources.  But then spending a majority of resources with the scriptures / recent conference talks.  And allowing the Holy Ghost to guide.

It would be optimal if we all had great teachers…  Unfortunately this does not always happen.

[Traveler]

Perhaps I am the odd one out in this thread discussion.  What I dislike the most in a Church lesson (Gospel Doctrine, Priesthood, Relief Society or 5th Sunday of the month discussion) is when a “teacher” cuts off class contributions with a comment that we must move along to cover the material.

Some of the best class discussion I have been involved in have occurred when the “teacher”, for whatever reason, did not show up resulting in an unprepared discussion.  Another good example of a great teacher – I believe is like my wife, who prepares material from the lesson, scripture quotes, general authority quotes, videos provided by the Church and Tabernacle choir recording but is unable to get to even 20% of what she has prepared.

I believe that all a teacher ought to present for a lesson can be summed up in one question – “What touched you during your family and personal study of this lesson”.   When this part of the discussion has completed, or near completion, anything else the teacher adds to the lesson is filler and hardly consequential – certainly not to be considered something to be complained about by (perhaps unprepared) class members.   What individuals include in their personal study and is witnessed to by the Holy Ghost – ought to be included in discussions.  But unfortunately, many come to church unprepared to contribute – which I believe is okay and an opportunity for them to receive witnesses which the spirit will give understanding to them.

Sorry, I am a little less compassionate towards those that come with nothing prepared – that go home complaining about what those that made effort to prepare something, provided.

 

The Traveler

[laronius]

57 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Perhaps I am the odd one out in this thread discussion.  What I dislike the most in a Church lesson (Gospel Doctrine, Priesthood, Relief Society or 5th Sunday of the month discussion) is when a “teacher” cuts off class contributions with a comment that we must move along to cover the material.

Some of the best class discussion I have been involved in have occurred when the “teacher”, for whatever reason, did not show up resulting in an unprepared discussion.  Another good example of a great teacher – I believe is like my wife, who prepares material from the lesson, scripture quotes, general authority quotes, videos provided by the Church and Tabernacle choir recording but is unable to get to even 20% of what she has prepared.

I believe that all a teacher ought to present for a lesson can be summed up in one question – “What touched you during your family and personal study of this lesson”.   When this part of the discussion has completed, or near completion, anything else the teacher adds to the lesson is filler and hardly consequential – certainly not to be considered something to be complained about by (perhaps unprepared) class members.   What individuals include in their personal study and is witnessed to by the Holy Ghost – ought to be included in discussions.  But unfortunately, many come to church unprepared to contribute – which I believe is okay and an opportunity for them to receive witnesses which the spirit will give understanding to them.

Sorry, I am a little less compassionate towards those that come with nothing prepared – that go home complaining about what those that made effort to prepare something, provided.

 

The Traveler

I totally agree. I would much rather have a good deep meaningful discussion on one or two verses/topics then try to cover everything. The Spirit should always dictate where the lesson goes.

[Carborendum]

56 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I believe that all a teacher ought to present for a lesson can be summed up in one question – “What touched you during your family and personal study of this lesson”.

I agree in principle.  But in application, I have found that asking the same question every week gets people zoned out.

We can make up for this if the instructor provides a question like, "Can you imagine being <description of situation of the week>.  Wouldn't we tend to feel <specific to the lesson>?" 

During a lesson a couple months ago, I was teaching about the Garden of Gethsemane.  I pointed to the angel giving Jesus strength.  It is so easy to overlook because there is barely any mention and no identification of the angel, or description of what exactly he did.  So, I gave the following:

Quote

Bruce R. McConkie said that "we suppose it was Mighty Michael, who foremost fell that man might be."  (some discussion) 

Can you imagine what happened in that meeting?  Who would have liked to have been a fly on the wall at that meeting?

 

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

During a lesson a couple months ago, I was teaching about the Garden of Gethsemane.  I pointed to the angel giving Jesus strength.  It is so easy to overlook because there is barely any mention and no identification of the angel, or description of what exactly he did.  So, I gave the following:

Cleon Skousen and Tad Callister also think that it may have been Michael.

I agree.  I also think I may know what Michael said that strengthened Jesus.  And it wasn’t a pep talk.

[Carborendum]

18 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I also think I may know what Michael said that strengthened Jesus.  And it wasn’t a pep talk.

I proffered the idea that of any mortal man who would even have a clue as to the significance of what was about to happen. Bookends.  Adam fell.  Christ lives/redeems.

They could have just sat there embracing each other thinking, "So, we've come full circle."  Both having a knowing/understanding look in their eyes.

Just before Adam leaves, he holds his gaze and says, "You've got this!"

Edited August 7, 2023 by Carborendum

[mikbone]

15 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I proffered the idea that of any mortal man who would even have a clue as to the significance of what was about to happen. Bookends.  Adam fell.  Christ lives/redeems.

They could have just sat there embracing each other thinking, "So, we've come full circle."  Both having a knowing/understanding look in their eyes.

Just before Adam leaves, he holds his gaze and says, "You've got this!"

Unfortunately in my ward we didn’t even get to talk about the garden.  Because every Sunday School we cover 2 weeks of CFM and our teacher had only prepared for the first weeks lesson 😢

Unfortunately because Michael was still a disembodied spirit he could not physically comfort Jesus but oh how his heart must have ached to do so. 

[zil2]

6 hours ago, Traveler said:

Perhaps I am the odd one out in this thread discussion. 

Nothing you said seems to contradict the point of this thread, which is: rely on your personal study and the Holy Ghost, not on what some podcast said.  Seems to me your thoughts are in line with what the rest of us think.

I would slightly alter this, though:

6 hours ago, Traveler said:

“What touched you during your family and personal study of this lesson”

According to Brother Camargo, first counselor in the SS General Presidency, the question should be "What did the Holy Ghost teach you during your study?" (per a multi-stake training, and he said this was from the SS General President - Mark L. Pace).  Because we can all have personal insight and warm fuzzies, but what we need is the Holy Ghost.   @Carborendum is probably right, though, that we need to find multiple ways to phrase the question - though I just end my lessons by reminding the sisters of what the next lesson is, inviting them to prepare, to ask in prayer another question Brother Camargo said we should: "What does God want me to learn from this?", and to come prepared to share (if appropriate / desired) what the Holy Ghost taught them.

(In other words, he counseled us to be very careful to include the Holy Ghost and consideration of what God wants each person to learn, and that seems like wise counsel to me.)

[mirkwood]

I've been known to start lessons by informing the class that there will be participation.  I ask questions to get people participating and that I will not answer any question that I ask.  I also tell them I am far more comfortable staring at them waiting then they are staring at me waiting.  Chuckles follow (some of them nervous) and we have a great discussion.

[Traveler]

One of the most profound lessons, for me, came several years ago in a High Priest group meeting.  The teacher, a personal friend and a profound and well-studied scholar of Gospel topics began the lesson with the question, “Why did you come to priesthood today?

I had learned that with this teacher it is often better to listen than to say anything.  The class seemed to understand this.  To break the silence, the teacher asked a former mission president and current member of the Stake Presidency to respond why he came.  This great member thought for a while and then said, “I came to be inspired and uplifted”.  I was thinking that was a good answer.   The teacher then asked, “Then, if you are not inspired and uplifted you are not going to come anymore?”

I was glad I had not responded.  The teacher then turned to another person in the class.  This was also an outstanding and brilliant guy.  He had an MD and two additional PHD’s. (one in nuclear physics).  However, this great guy had serious problems and had been excommunicated, spent several years wandering in religious wilderness but recently began his journey back into a renewal of blessings.  The same question was asked, “Why did you come to priesthood today?”   This man with deep emotions and with some tears responded, “Because I made a promise to G-d that I would come.”

As some may have already guessed – the lesson was about our covenants with G-d.  This teacher had removed all the usual discussions on the topic of covenants and brought me to a greater depth in understanding what a covenant with G-d means.  Both to me and to G-d.   The spirit also taught me that sometimes those we may think are unworthy can speak things of the spirit in ways others may not – everybody can contribute something to the whole (See also Moroni Chapter 10).

 

I think we are entering a new era in the Church.  An era in which we ought to worry less about what teachers, speakers and leader have prepared and worry more about what we are preparing.

 

The Traveler

[Carborendum]

13 hours ago, mirkwood said:

I've been known to start lessons by informing the class that there will be participation.  I ask questions to get people participating and that I will not answer any question that I ask.  I also tell them I am far more comfortable staring at them waiting then they are staring at me waiting.  Chuckles follow (some of them nervous) and we have a great discussion.

I'm glad you're in a ward where that actually works.  I've been in wards where that would work, and others where it would not.  

In my current ward, it would be a conversation between me and three or four individuals (all of whom have another calling that takes them out of the class 2 out of 3 times that I'd teach).  Without those three (and there have been some times when all three are gone) it would be a very quiet class if all I did was ask a generic question like "What do you feel the Spirit is telling you about this passage?" 

Literally, we'd sit there the entire hour in silence.  Then the next session, and month after month, we would continue to dwindle in class attendance.  No one would have a purpose in being there.  If all you do is sit in silence for the hour, what's the point?

In my experience, questions can be fundamentally the same while the phrasing and framing of the questions should be changed up for variety and for context.  Most people understand the importance of the generic question.  But the way the human mind works is that it needs some nudging to apply that question to a specific situation. And generic questions don't have as much power to do that as a situation specific question that is formulated to be similar to the generic question.

[zil2]

I have found that being excited about the material and happy to be leading the discussion - and letting that be seen - is one of the best ways to engage a class.  (Being guided by the Spirit is, of course, always the highest priority and first requirement.)  I also sometimes break out the dry erase markers and have folks spit out answers while I'm writing them on the board, with my back to them much of the time, encouraging them to keep 'em coming - this tends to build and once people say something, the energy tends to keep going and we can get into deeper questions.

Pre-class encouragement, questions to consider, and similar things (including individual assignments, though I've never needed to resort to those) can also help.

If I were in your place @Carborendum, I'd try every technique in the book - rearranging the chairs, breaking into small groups and having one member of the group report what the group concluded; taking turns reading a passage (just to get them used to speaking in class), a variety of questions.  Trying to develop relationships (where appropriate) with class members, etc.  I think I would even try the sit in silence for an hour, but with specific passages selected for us to read silently and perhaps an invitation to share something that the Spirit emphasizes as they read - even to share it just with me, quietly, and then I'll share it with the class.

I think I would also spend a lot of time on my knees for each individual not participating, asking God what, if anything, I should do to help them.  (Fact is, for a percentage - which should be less than half - leaving them alone may be the right thing, but I can't believe that's the case for the majority.)  Regardless, you have my sympathy.

[Traveler]

21 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm glad you're in a ward where that actually works.  I've been in wards where that would work, and others where it would not.  

In my current ward, it would be a conversation between me and three or four individuals (all of whom have another calling that takes them out of the class 2 out of 3 times that I'd teach).  Without those three (and there have been some times when all three are gone) it would be a very quiet class if all I did was ask a generic question like "What do you feel the Spirit is telling you about this passage?" 

Literally, we'd sit there the entire hour in silence.  Then the next session, and month after month, we would continue to dwindle in class attendance.  No one would have a purpose in being there.  If all you do is sit in silence for the hour, what's the point?

In my experience, questions can be fundamentally the same while the phrasing and framing of the questions should be changed up for variety and for context.  Most people understand the importance of the generic question.  But the way the human mind works is that it needs some nudging to apply that question to a specific situation. And generic questions don't have as much power to do that as a situation specific question that is formulated to be similar to the generic question.

Have you attempted to ask class members before class to prepare a response?  I have had mixed results (mostly good) but one fellow did not show up - I talked to him later and he was fearful.  Strange, I never figured out why he had no problem talking with me?  but was fearful in class - even to offer a prayer.

I realize that wards and individuals are different, but I have to believe there are possibilities for creative individuals like yourself that think outside the box.

 

The Traveler

[Carborendum]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

Have you attempted to ask class members before class to prepare a response?

I have not. But the couple who teaches the other week has done that.  And it is a very quiet class.  The few responses we do get... I can't fathom their mindset.  They sort of answer the question, but it has nothing to do with the passage that we're discussing.

EXAMPLE: 

• The teacher's manual says "You could ask class members to review Acts 22:1–21 or 26:1–29. What do we learn from Paul’s example about bearing testimony?"
• The instructors had us read a few verses.  Then asked "What do we learn from Paul's example about bearing testimony?
• One person who had prepared something gave his testimony... Let's just say that it didn't really answer the question.  And I felt like I was in a testimony meeting hearing someone giving a travel log.

Edited August 8, 2023 by Carborendum

[zil2]

In that training I was in by Brother Camargo, one person mentioned that maybe those who aren't using CFM at home really don't know what to do or how to do it, and to help them, the class could do a pretended home study of the lesson.  This could go any number of ways, but perhaps it might help - on the assumption that those who aren't participating also aren't studying at home...

Dunno what to tell you, Carb.  Sounds frustrating.

[mirkwood]

I never asked "generic" questions.  Maybe we would all sit in silence if I was teaching in your ward.  I dunno.

[Carborendum]

18 minutes ago, zil2 said:

In that training I was in by Brother Camargo, one person mentioned that maybe those who aren't using CFM at home really don't know what to do or how to do it, and to help them, the class could do a pretended home study of the lesson.  This could go any number of ways, but perhaps it might help - on the assumption that those who aren't participating also aren't studying at home...

Dunno what to tell you, Carb.  Sounds frustrating.

Actually, I'm not frustrated, myself. But I'm thinking it is very frustrating for many who have a simple straight-forward model for how to teach a lesson.  Even when that model is based on correct principles, the application must be modified to fit the class behavior and preparedness for the class to receive it.

Adam offered sacrifices without knowing why.  The Lord didn't simply allow him to continue in ignorance.  And he didn't wait for Adam to ask.  The angel told him exactly what it was about.

Again, I absolutely admit that the instructions given in the manuals are very good instructions that are based on correct principles.  But not all classes will respond to this method.  There needs to be sufficient flexibility to allow for different types of people.

[RAB]

I, too, tire of hearing what someone said on a Podcast. I feel like they are often adding more to the scriptures than they should. One example was Moses and the Flying serpent. Someone learned in a podcast that those on the outskirts of camp who were bitten probably needed assistance to get to where the staff was in the center of camp. In my mind, that undercuts the meaning of that event.  The meaning is that all we have to do is look to Christ, repent, and live. We don't need someone else to carry us to Him (Bishops may have a place in the repentance process, and we can reach out to bring prodigal sons back, but I don't believe that is what this story is about). We have no idea whether Moses walked around camp with the staff, so that all people could just look up and live.  There may have been no travel required at all.  Just look and live. I think that is what God wants us to know. Look to Him and live. Don't avoid trying because you assume it will not work. Test Him, try Him, and see if He doesn't know how to give good gifts to His children.

Podcasts have to come up with something interesting to say, but one should beware that the interesting thing they say may actually be detracting from the point of the gospel message.

 

[Vort]

Re: Small group discussions:

I personally have rarely found them effective. In principle, they sound great, but in practice, I have found them unsatisfying. I think it works better either to have small classes or to have instruction tailored to large classes. Breaking into small groups seems like having your cake and eating it, too, and in my experience it works just about as well.