NOM

When the church says it, the thinking is done.

Paraphrasing that quote to match this thread, but I just think that members don't even think "What if the church misinterpreted these scriptures because it doesn't make sense, so I'll check it against other sources."

When I talking to my wife one of the last times about church stuff I mentioned Joseph seeing Elias and Elijah at the temple but they're the same person. She literally had NO idea why I'd say that... I explained that one is Hebrew, one Greek... and she just said "I hadn't heard that so I'm not sure."

I doubt she looked further and if she did I'd guarantee it was FAIR and that was the end of it because she's not about to open up to it, but the point is that in our late 30s she still doesn't know most of the scriptural issues but she's incredibly smart and anything but lazy with scriptures.

And again I might be misinterpreting the lazy/selective vibe here... I guess I just feel that the church knows what they need emphasized and craft their "study guides" and manuals to that... it makes it really easy to keep members away from looking elsewhere when you define everything for them.

I would hazard to say whatever book the church is studying that year they use small amounts of each book

3% of the Bible
15 % of the Book of Mormon
1% of the D&C
25% of the PofGP

There is so much in each book that does not pertain to current doctrine or contradicts it. It would be difficult to study any book cover to cover without some head scratching.

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:03 pm

I would hazard to say whatever book the church is studying that year they use small amounts of each book

3% of the Bible
15 % of the Book of Mormon
1% of the D&C
25% of the PofGP

There is so much in each book that does not pertain to current doctrine or contradicts it. It would be difficult to study any book cover to cover without some head scratching.

This is one aspect of some churches that I like. Some of them when they do a study of, say the New Testament, they will start at the beginning and go chapter and verse until they're done. Taking questions, giving explanations. I should think that many mormons would be hungry for something like this. But leadership isn't really interested in educating their membership in church. They're interested only in increasing the individuals commitment to the brethren and getting as much work and support out of the membership as possible.

Having a truly thorough understanding of scripture doesn't help "build the kingdom."

Palerider wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:57 pm

This is one aspect of some churches that I like. Some of them when they do a study of, say the New Testament, they will start at the beginning and go chapter and verse until they're done. Taking questions, giving explanations. I should think that many mormons would be hungry for something like this. But leadership isn't really interested in educating their membership in church. They're interested only in increasing the individuals commitment to the brethren and getting as much work and support out of the membership as possible.

Having a truly thorough understanding of scripture doesn't help "build the kingdom."

Milk Before Meat

I think you have two camps in Mormonism. The first are those who are not satisfied with the lessons and want more, the others are the people who are content with what they get. I think this is how the "milk before meat" doctrine is so insidious. it convinces many to be satisfied with table scraps and the rest it tells them that it is their fault for wanting more. It's when you realize that you will never get to the meat, your journey out starts. In Mormonism, it's not "The cake is a lie", it's "The meat is a lie."

Palerider wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:57 pm

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:03 pm

I would hazard to say whatever book the church is studying that year they use small amounts of each book

3% of the Bible
15 % of the Book of Mormon
1% of the D&C
25% of the PofGP

There is so much in each book that does not pertain to current doctrine or contradicts it. It would be difficult to study any book cover to cover without some head scratching.

This is one aspect of some churches that I like. Some of them when they do a study of, say the New Testament, they will start at the beginning and go chapter and verse until they're done. Taking questions, giving explanations. I should think that many mormons would be hungry for something like this. But leadership isn't really interested in educating their membership in church. They're interested only in increasing the individuals commitment to the brethren and getting as much work and support out of the membership as possible.

Having a truly thorough understanding of scripture doesn't help "build the kingdom."

I think the Church is trending towards this. I have a vague recollection that a few years ago (2015?) there was a small controversy at B.Y.U. Some new courses were introduced that emphasized topics (Faith, baptism, etc.) more than the particular (New Testament, Old Testament, BOM, D&C) books of scripture themselves. I seem to recall some professors felt the new classes would be less rigorous. http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?i ... type=CMSID

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmatic ... urriculum/



I haven't heard much since. Does anyone else remember this?

deacon blues wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:15 pm

Palerider wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:57 pm

1smartdodog wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:03 pm

I would hazard to say whatever book the church is studying that year they use small amounts of each book

3% of the Bible
15 % of the Book of Mormon
1% of the D&C
25% of the PofGP

There is so much in each book that does not pertain to current doctrine or contradicts it. It would be difficult to study any book cover to cover without some head scratching.

This is one aspect of some churches that I like. Some of them when they do a study of, say the New Testament, they will start at the beginning and go chapter and verse until they're done. Taking questions, giving explanations. I should think that many mormons would be hungry for something like this. But leadership isn't really interested in educating their membership in church. They're interested only in increasing the individuals commitment to the brethren and getting as much work and support out of the membership as possible.

Having a truly thorough understanding of scripture doesn't help "build the kingdom."

I think the Church is trending towards this. I have a vague recollection that a few years ago (2015?) there was a small controversy at B.Y.U. Some new courses were introduced that emphasized topics (Faith, baptism, etc.) more than the particular (New Testament, Old Testament, BOM, D&C) books of scripture themselves. I seem to recall some professors felt the new classes would be less rigorous. http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?i ... type=CMSID

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/enigmatic ... urriculum/



I haven't heard much since. Does anyone else remember this?

I don't remember it but it really points up the desertion of real and honest scripture study. Bill Hamblin is about as straight TBM as they come. It's interesting to see him call the brethren out so openly....at least back in 2014 when this occurred. Wonder if he got his hand slapped for that?

Just This Guy wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:51 pm

Palerider wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:57 pm

This is one aspect of some churches that I like. Some of them when they do a study of, say the New Testament, they will start at the beginning and go chapter and verse until they're done. Taking questions, giving explanations. I should think that many mormons would be hungry for something like this. But leadership isn't really interested in educating their membership in church. They're interested only in increasing the individuals commitment to the brethren and getting as much work and support out of the membership as possible.

Having a truly thorough understanding of scripture doesn't help "build the kingdom."

Milk Before Meat

I think you have two camps in Mormonism. The first are those who are not satisfied with the lessons and want more, the others are the people who are content with what they get. I think this is how the "milk before meat" doctrine is so insidious. it convinces many to be satisfied with table scraps and the rest it tells them that it is their fault for wanting more. It's when you realize that you will never get to the meat, your journey out starts. In Mormonism, it's not "The cake is a lie", it's "The meat is a lie."

Absolutely.

If a member wants "meat" in the LDS church they're never going to find it being part of the correlated lesson plans.

You have to go find it for yourself.