Joseph Smith lessons

[WillowTheWhisp]

I would like to suggest that you read Elder Packer's direction on the subject of teaching with the spirit at the WorldWide Leadership Training meeting in February last year.

Teaching by the Spirit

Elder Perry: President, how do you get the Spirit in the classroom from the teacher to the students in such a way that it will be a meaningful experience to them?

President Packer: First, they have to know that you love them, that you want to teach them. Then you have to communicate on their level. We can't float around above them—even in the gospel—about subjects that they cannot connect with. That isn't what the Lord did. The Lord walked with them and talked with them in everyday life, and His teachings were on that level always.

If you have something to teach, they really want to learn. Teenagers even—teenagers especially—want to learn. They have a thirst for it.

A lot of teachers think they have to be prepared to the very sentence. Yes and no. That preparation includes having the presentation loose enough to involve the students and having them ask questions and bringing them into it. You have to leave a little room for inspiration.

We have a memory prompter in the Holy Ghost. If we have a challenge of something to teach, and we think about who we are and what we do, there's always some little experience we've had or someplace we've been or something we've seen that we can bring into the lesson. And the scriptures are part of all of that. They aren't just a book you read now and again to figure out the rules and regulations of the Church.

Quite a bit of teaching that is done in the Church is done so rigidly, it's lecture. We don't respond to lectures too well in classrooms. We do in sacrament meeting and at conferences, but teaching can be two-way so that you can ask questions. You can sponsor questions easily in a class.

Suppose you were teaching the Martyrdom of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Here you are a Church history teacher, and you've studied it all, and you know it was on June 27, 1844, at 5:00 p.m. in the Carthage Jail when the Prophet was shot. If you ask them what time of day and where and so on the Prophet was shot, none of them will know. You didn't know before you read the manual. But you can say, "What brought him to that? What do you think brought him to that?" The minute you say, "What do you think?" they have something to say. They can contribute; even the students that are the most backward will have something to say. So there's a way to handle questions and to monitor and manage the class. Respond to questions. Feel free to ask questions in a class.

You can't give away something you haven't got anymore than you can come back from someplace you haven't been. So you have got to have the Spirit.

Surely if our leaders are telling us to involve the students in class and not to lecture them then we should be listening to our leaders and doing as they counsell us, not deciding that we know better because we feel we have a talent for being something we have not been asked to be.

[skalenfehl]

I'm curious how sisters in Relief Society approach these books. How are lessons typically taught in RS? I am picturing something akin to the movie "The RM" where the mother goes through all this trouble to make the perfect display for show.

[WillowTheWhisp]

I'm a Relief Society teacher but I don't teach from the lesson manual. I teach the 4th Sunday from conference talks. However, the lessons we do have from the manual are taught by two different sisters and although they have different approach to each other neither of them read directly from the manual in the class. Sometimes small sections are read, usually by a class member at the request of the teacher. We are asked to study the lesson in advance at home so that we come to the class knowing what it is about. Questions are thrown out to the class and class members often have questions for the teacher, which are also answered by other members of the class. People throw in bits about subjects which have had an impact in their own lives or with people they know - lots of personal experience comes into it.

Yes we do sometimes have fancy visual aids and displays but I don't think we're quite as bad as depicted in the RM

When I was doing the lesson based on Elder Oaks talk about Good, better and best I brought the old jar with a tennis ball, pingpong balls and rice as a visual aid. Some had seen it several times but new members had never seen it before and one of the younger members vaguely remembered me doing it in Primary once but even she struggled and laughed as she tried to fit the tennis ball in on top of the rice. The fact that some of the rice ended up on the floor actually proved a perfect illustration of what Elder Oaks had been saying about sometimes letting go of the good in favour of the better or best.

I usually approach my lesson preparation by first reading it, then reading any relevant scriptures,then praying for inspiration as to how to adapt it to the sisters in the class. Sometimes I provide take-away hand outs, sometimes I don't.

The Saviour didn't just lecture people. He taught by using parables. He taught by using examples of things in their everyday lives.

[skalenfehl]

That's cool. That's about how the Elders do it too...except in my last ward one of the instructors always went the extra mile. He'd print out scriptures and pass them out so we could take turns reading them aloud, bring a visual aid or two, plus some posters and sometimes treats. It was funny and cool at the same time, like back in the days of Sunday School or primary. I also teach the conference talks from the Ensign magazine in my new ward. I really enjoy it.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Yes I sometimes get people to read scriptures too but our Stake RS Pres said we should get them to read direct from their scriptures which helps them to find where things are located even if it does take a bit longer sometimes so I stopped doing the printed bits of paper.

I don't know if you find the same but I get a lot more out of teaching those conference talk lessons than I do from just listening to the talks. It surprises me how much I miss when I just listen to them.

[skalenfehl]

Yes, it causes you to actually dissect and study out the talks, find references and related materials, etc. as opposed to just reading it at leisure. I've been an Elder's Quorum instructor in many wards in the last 15 years and I must say that teaching from the conference talks has been extra enjoyable.

[THIRDpersonviewer]

I would like to suggest that you read Elder Packer's direction on the subject of teaching with the spirit at the WorldWide Leadership Training meeting in February last year.

Surely if our leaders are telling us to involve the students in class and not to lecture them then we should be listening to our leaders and doing as they counsell us, not deciding that we know better because we feel we have a talent for being something we have not been asked to be.

We can bring the spirit into a class with purer doctrine. The closer to doctrine, the greater the spirit. Other apostles have said that we are responsible for bringing the Spirit into the meeting as students, not the teacher which is what Elder Packer was making a point at(who is also responsible). The Spirit works both ways. The teacher must have it and the students must have it. Everybody is responsible. Also the teacher has authority to lead the lesson as he is impressed by the spirit. If the desire to spread the true gospel of Jesus Christ is there, then we will do what the Spirit directs, which missionaries know will not be the same for each lesson. It doesn't matter how it's done, just that it is done. Elder Packer is giving advice on how to improve the spirit in lessons because oftentimes it is usually only the teacher who comes in with the spirit of learning, so he must siphon that onto everyone else.

[Hemidakota]

Have you ever noticed when giving a talk, feeling the Holy Spirit several times for confirmation to one or several members in the audience, one needs to sleep afterwards?

[skalenfehl]

Have you ever noticed when giving a talk, feeling the Holy Spirit several times for confirmation to one or several members in the audience, one needs to sleep afterwards?

I must feel the Spirit all the time because I'm constantly drowsy in church.

[Snow]

I would donate money to see that.

Where is my Paul Potts picture?

Elphaba

Los Angeles is such a dump... but the concert was great.

My wife and I don't the two little girls (teens). We didn't tell them where, just to dress nicely. The concert was in the Wiltern, a very old, large and interesting theater from the 1930's art-deco days.

http://www.lakertickets.com/Wiltern.jpg

http://www.tndwest.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Wiltern.jpg

The girls didn't know what they were there for until the were in the lobby and looked at a sign - then they went nuts with excitement.

The French love Jerry Lewis,

The German love David Hasselhoff.

Americans, apparently, love Paul Potts.

The crowd was thrilled to be there. Potts could have sneezed and they would have cheered. The concert was wonderful, he was humble and a good time was had by all.

Unfortunately, no photos signed by Paul, sorry.

Thanks for the best utube link/catch of all time.

[Snow]

We should teach as the Spirit directs. But we need to ensure that we are in touch with the Spirit. There is a reason we are given the manuals and direction we are given for Church lessons. The majority of members are converts, and are not ready for the deep end of the pool. They need to focus on the doctrine, even if it is meaty doctrine, to prepare them for exaltation. If this is your idea of esoteric, then good.

Doctrine is not speculation, BTW. But it can be deep, as long as it is based solidly upon the teachings of the living prophets and scriptures.

For too many years, we looked beyond the mark when it came to teaching lessons. We were filling our minds with all kinds of interesting speculations, but the members were not being converted to the doctrines that would actually change them inside. The doctrines are powerful and there is some great depth to them. President Packer has consistently taught us to "teach the doctrines of the kingdom", knowing that these are the things that change people.

For example, with the John the Baptist lesson, we were able to discuss the keys of the Aaronic priesthood and how they apply to us today. We also were able to discuss how we can personally receive revelation, just as Joseph and Oliver did (seeking knowledge through study, and then seeking answers to new questions). Aren't those two concepts and doctrines of greater power and meat than how to understand Adam-God or whether the Beast represents Europe or Damian? If this is the type of esoteric knowledge you seek, then by all means, teach it.

But don't be like the seminary teacher of the 70s, who only wanted to talk about the signs of the 2nd Coming, to the extent that he ignored teaching about the atonement and other issues of much greater value. After all, there is much esoteric information about the atonement that most members do not understand. It would be a shame to lose our exaltation focusing on Nibley's evidences of the Book of Mormon (as much as I enjoy studying his books) at the expense of spiritual doctrine. And Nibley would agree.

There's nothing wrong with the lesson book but when followed directly it goes towards the lowest and slowest common denominator - either teacher or student.

I did the Priesthood lesson of a few weeks ago about the Book of Mormon. I looked at the manual to make sure what the lesson was about and then I made the most interesting lesson I could think of about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon without looking at the manual a second time.

... the events leading up to, tales of a necromancer who sought to steal the plates, Joseph borrowing a horse and wagon (without permission) to retrieve the plates from the Hill Cummorah, how the plates were really translated... mostly with the seer or peep stone - Joseph's face in a hat shutting out the light, the poetic beauty of the text, the Hebraic literary forms, etc, etc

After a normal lesson in our ward, people go home and have forgotten about the lesson 10 minutes after leaving the room. After that particular lesson, people spent 10 minutes extra while their families waited for them, asking questions, wanting resources, asking my opinion about this or that facet of the restoration.... that is, their interest and even passion was piqued and they left wanting more. Some perhaps will be motivated to further study and interest.

If I had the talent to rely more on the manual and generate the same enthusiasm, I might or probably would. As it is, I do it this (above) way. Sometimes I will spend the first 30 minutes talking about something that is or seems completely unrelated to the gospel - for example metallurgy. Granted, it's hard to see how metal is a fit topic for Priesthood, but guys like steel. Then for the last five minutes, I make a unique and obscure tie in to the gospel principle indicated by the lesson. We may not cover as much gospel ground, the those that attend walk away with one solid insight they may not have had before and that they may well remember while the regular "manual" lessons fade into memory's oblivion.

[kona0197]

I'm just glad to be covering the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. We need to. Getting to know him, his views, and the history of the Church is very important.

-a-train

Especially for me so I can point out where I think he might have it wrong.

(Just my opinion. I question everything.)

[Elphaba]

The girls didn't know what they were there for until the were in the lobby and looked at a sign - then they went nuts with excitement.

Thanks for the biggest smile I've made in days. I am thrilled they loved it.

Elphaba

[WillowTheWhisp]

There's nothing wrong with the lesson book but when followed directly it goes towards the lowest and slowest common denominator - either teacher or student.

I did the Priesthood lesson of a few weeks ago about the Book of Mormon. I looked at the manual to make sure what the lesson was about and then I made the most interesting lesson I could think of about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon without looking at the manual a second time.

... the events leading up to, tales of a necromancer who sought to steal the plates, Joseph borrowing a horse and wagon (without permission) to retrieve the plates from the Hill Cummorah, how the plates were really translated... mostly with the seer or peep stone - Joseph's face in a hat shutting out the light, the poetic beauty of the text, the Hebraic literary forms, etc, etc

After a normal lesson in our ward, people go home and have forgotten about the lesson 10 minutes after leaving the room. After that particular lesson, people spent 10 minutes extra while their families waited for them, asking questions, wanting resources, asking my opinion about this or that facet of the restoration.... that is, their interest and even passion was piqued and they left wanting more. Some perhaps will be motivated to further study and interest.

If I had the talent to rely more on the manual and generate the same enthusiasm, I might or probably would. As it is, I do it this (above) way. Sometimes I will spend the first 30 minutes talking about something that is or seems completely unrelated to the gospel - for example metallurgy. Granted, it's hard to see how metal is a fit topic for Priesthood, but guys like steel. Then for the last five minutes, I make a unique and obscure tie in to the gospel principle indicated by the lesson. We may not cover as much gospel ground, the those that attend walk away with one solid insight they may not have had before and that they may well remember while the regular "manual" lessons fade into memory's oblivion.

Perhaps 'the lowest common denominator' needed something from that lesson which your lesson did not give them. I find it quite disturbing that you taught things which were not in the lesson manual.In our Stake we have been specifically instructed against doing that. You spend 30 minutes talking about metallurgy???? I really am shocked that this is acceptable in your Ward. You admit that you do not cover as much gospel ground in a lesson which should be gospel based because you prefer to spend the time discussing something obscure and your lessons even overrun because of this? Does your Bishop participate in your classes? Have you had Stake representatives in your classes? What is their opinion of your lessons? People spend time after the lessons asking your opinion on obscure topics? This just all sounds so very, very wrong. It's not at all the way we have been told to teach those classes.

How do those 'lowest common denominators' in your class feel about the lessons? Do they come away spiritually uplifted or feeling totally inadequate?

[rameumptom]

While discussing issues surrounding the text of the lesson is not necessarily bad, for instance, your background of the obtaining of the plates, there is a greater need for members to have the doctrine.

While I could easily wow the members with stuff from the Dead Sea Scrolls or other ancient stuff, I refrain from it almost completely, because I want them to learn the doctrines and how those doctrines should apply in their lives. I do, however, try to teach the doctrines on a level that will pique their interest. For example, when teaching Word of Wisdom, I spend little time on the basics that everyone knows. I do spend time on concepts such as "weakest of the saints", the intended promises for the obedient, and how we can personally adapt our own lives to spiritually live the Word of Wisdom. Or on Tithing, I refrain from saying "1 dime out of 10" and instead will discuss the spiritual impact on our lives, and how properly living the law of tithes, both spiritually and temporally, can open the atonement of Christ to our lives.

[Snow]

Perhaps 'the lowest common denominator' needed something from that lesson which your lesson did not give them.

And perhaps President Monson will retire and sell Amyway part-time. I try not to worry to much about unlikely hypotheticals

I find it quite disturbing that you taught things which were not in the lesson manual.

Would you have me deny the promptings of the Holy Ghost?

In our Stake we have been specifically instructed against doing that.

Perhaps your Stake cannot be trusted to rely upon the Spirit.

You spend 30 minutes talking about metallurgy???? I really am shocked that this is acceptable in your Ward.

I'd bet that most people can't remember any particular penetrating and salient point of most Priesthood/RS lessons 1 week after the lesson let alone later. People remember the metallurgy lesson which was geared entirely towards causing a deep reflection upon and appreciation for the concepts of the "refiner's fire"(Mal 2:17-3:6) and “the image of God engraven upon [our] countenances” (Alma 5:19).

Sure, I could just ask someone to read the verses and ask a few questions and it would be the same-o, same-o. Instead I talk about mining, and ore processing, metal properties... stuff that guys like. It's unusual for a Priesthood lesson, and because people are naturally inquisitive, and the material is interesting, they pay attention. I try and structure it so that the material builds upon itself so that it leading up towards something. When people are fully engaged, but anxious because no mention of the gospel is yet made, their neural transmitters are in a pretty high gear, I introduce the lead-in transition, silver refining. Then soon as I bring in Malachi, eyes light up and the connection is made.

I bear my testimony which at this point is heavy-ladden with spirtuality and my deep and abiding love for the gospel, I connect Malachi to Alma and seal the deal.

You admit that you do not cover as much gospel ground in a lesson which should be gospel based because you prefer to spend the time discussing something obscure and your lessons even overrun because of this?

It all depends. Some lessons are scripture through and through and some hit the gospel from some obtuse angel.

Does your Bishop participate in your classes? Have you had Stake representatives in your classes? What is their opinion of your lessons? People spend time after the lessons asking your opinion on obscure topics?

Absolutely. All sorts of people attend. The first time I gave the Book of Mormon lesson, other quorums in the ward heard I was going to give it and came into EQ and joined us. The High Council has sat in as have others.

People don't ask my opinion so much on the obscure topics; those obscure topics are merely vehicles to getting people engaged in the lesson for that the gospel points have a lasting punch. People ask for more information or insight, to the extent I have any, on gospel principles.

When I teach lessons or talk in Sacrament Mtg, I have learned to bring copies of the lesson or talk because half a dozen people ask for copies.

This just all sounds so very, very wrong. It's not at all the way we have been told to teach those classes. :

No offense but perhaps you've noticed that I am not particularly bothered by other peoples opinions.

How do those 'lowest common denominators' in your class feel about the lessons? Do they come away spiritually uplifted or feeling totally inadequate?

I'm not Dr. Phil, I don't know how they feel. I only know how they look and what they say and that's why I teach the way I do.

[skalenfehl]

I can understand your use of metallurgy to portray the symbolism for your lesson topic. I've done the same thing when I've taught lessons. I've used my line of work as examples of symbolism when I've shared my testimony as well (foundations, houses, wise man, etc).

[WillowTheWhisp]

I use brief snippets like that too but I wouldn't spend a whole 30 minutes talking about something which isn't in the lesson manual. Those manuals have been carefully prepared by our leaders over a number of years and contain the things which they say we should be teaching. I would consider it very presumptious of me to assume that I know better than apostles and prophets who have stated that we should teach from the manuals and from the scriptures.

Perhaps your Stake cannot be trusted to rely upon the Spirit.

I don't believe the Holy Spirit would direct us to be disobedient to our leaders. What our Stake can be relied upon is to obey instructions from those in authority.

I'd bet that most people can't remember any particular penetrating and salient point of most Priesthood/RS lessons 1 week after the lesson let alone later. People remember the metallurgy lesson which was geared entirely towards causing a deep reflection upon and appreciation for the concepts of the "refiner's fire"(Mal 2:17-3:6) and “the image of God engraven upon [our] countenances” (Alma 5:19).

Sure, I could just ask someone to read the verses and ask a few questions and it would be the same-o, same-o. Instead I talk about mining, and ore processing, metal properties... stuff that guys like. It's unusual for a Priesthood lesson, and because people are naturally inquisitive, and the material is interesting, they pay attention. I try and structure it so that the material builds upon itself so that it leading up towards something. When people are fully engaged, but anxious because no mention of the gospel is yet made, their neural transmitters are in a pretty high gear, I introduce the lead-in transition, silver refining. Then soon as I bring in Malachi, eyes light up and the connection is made.

I bear my testimony which at this point is heavy-ladden with spirtuality and my deep and abiding love for the gospel, I connect Malachi to Alma and seal the deal.

When I teach lessons or talk in Sacrament Mtg, I have learned to bring copies of the lesson or talk because half a dozen people ask for copies.

It sounds very prideful and more like a performance that you are giving rather than ensuring that the members understand the basic teachings which we are supposed to give. I don't doubt that you are very entertaining but we have asked not to entertain but to inform.

No offense but perhaps you've noticed that I am not particularly bothered by other peoples opinions.

Do you care about what the Lord thinks?

I'm not Dr. Phil, I don't know how they feel. I only know how they look and what they say and that's why I teach the way I do.

We have new members in our classes. Deep doctrine would go over their heads. Those who enjoy getting into other things and going off on tangents may very well enjoy the sort of lessons you give which are not from the manual but why do you think our leaders spent so much time preparing these manuals if it didn't matter whether you teach from them or not? It's those new members we are supposed to be reaching with this stuff, those who do not have the ability yet to digest more.

I don't doubt that you are a great orator and a great performer who knows a lot of interesting stuff and keeps his class well entertained but that isn't what we have been asked to do. Do you go to the leadership training meetings? Do you approach them with the attitude that you know better than the General Authorities? Or do you simply feel that you do not need to go because you are such a good teacher anyway?

I love discussing deep doctrine and going off on fascinating tangents amongst friends but when I teach a class I try to keep it to what I have been instructed to do and if that means gearing it to the 'lowest common denominator' then that is what I do. Thankfully the sisters in our RS all contribute to the lessons and discuss the topics and bring a great deal of spiritual input to the lessons - and the newer members grow in understanding and confidence in the Gospel because they don't end up feeling like it is way above their heads.

[THIRDpersonviewer]

The GREATEST teacher. BAR NONE. Is the Spirit, and the connection between the individual and the Spirit. Where there is no learner, there is no Spirit.

[WillowTheWhisp]

So are you also saying that we should dismiss the content of the lesson manual in favour of some other loosely connected topic because we feel led to do so by the Spirit? Why would the Spirit lead us to disobey our leaders?

[Hemidakota]

It is more of a prospective of using both - Lesson and guidance by the HG.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Thank you Hemidakota. I'm sure a lot of good lessons which are based on the manual are also led and guided by the Spirit in the direction which is needed for the members of the class. I know I always pray for guidance when I teach the lessons based on the Conference talks. It's just the idea of going way off from what's in the lesson manual which I just cannot equate with what we have been instructed to do by General Authorities.

[THIRDpersonviewer]

I wasn't making a point for my argument or snow's or yours. I was stating a doctrinal truth. It stands on its own.

I agree with hemidakota. I also agree with what he said way back earlier, about laying aside a prepared talk or lesson and giving something completely different under complete direction of the Spirit. In both cases we follow the spirit and direction of the leaders. We prepare with the manual and get up and give a lesson based on what the spirit indicates as it comes along. It will usually be what was prepared, but it may alter at times. It is a walk of faith.

The Spirit is not directing against what the leaders said, but what the student needs to hear. Using the Spirit to prepare, and listening to it during the administering of the message. Part of the preparation is what we desire in our hearts. We will receive our reward for teaching. The scripture about proud men, they have their reward when they are seen of men.(very bad paraphrase, but I think you understand the point)

The true gospel teachers are the ones that 1.get up, 2.give a lesson as directed by the Spirit, 3.sit down, 4.go on with life, and don't boast it. They accept compliments as "expressions of gratitude." Then you don't think about them and move on.

You think about your own faith-promoting experience, to learn from and to teach others, but not to gain personal or vain-glory.

Give 15 or 20 minute talk in Sacrament Meeting with no notes and you come to a realization of how much you rely on the Lord. There takes a lot of preparation. It's like the 8 or 9 year old that has the gift of the Holy Ghost and thinks that he can get up there and just speak and a talk comes. It takes some proper preparation and proper desire.

It goes back to preparing with the manual and following what the Spirit dictates in the meeting.

[rameumptom]

I believe the Brethren who developed the manuals are guided by the Spirit in developing the manuals. Given that, we should consider strongly about using them properly AND guided by the Spirit in our own lives.

I'm a high priest group leader, and I ensure that the discussions teach, stimulate and enrich them, but are focused on doctrine.

[WillowTheWhisp]

That's how I feel we are told it should be.

Many years ago I had a busy Sunday - I was teaching the Gospel Essentials class, the Relief Society lesson and giving a Sacrament talk. I had studied and prepared all three and made notes. When I got to the chapel I realised I did not have the notes for my Sacrament talk and did not have time to go back and get them. We lived several miles from the chapel. I had to rely on the Spirit for that talk and when I stood up my mind went completely blank. I had no idea what I was talking about but I gave a talk which the Holy Ghost obviously knew was needed. Afterwards some people came to me to thank me for the talk which had answered their prayers. One member had tears in his eyes. Now I know that talk didn't come from me, but I hadn't set out to do anything spectacular. If anything I'd been in a bit of a panic when I realised I hadn't got my notes.