- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Our teacher read from the essay. She’s on fire. The only critical thing she didn’t bring up (but talked around a bit) is the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar.
She closed by focusing on the beauty and goodness she finds in the Book of Moses and the Book of Abraham. It reminded me strongly of the approach the Givenses take – up to and including the passible God who weeps with us. This is where we need to go as a people.
That’s awesome! Last month my sunday school teacher mentioned Joseph Smith’s hobby of treasure digging. It was very quick, she mentioned it as one of the reasons that Emma’s parents may have not wanted her to marry Joseph, but I was shocked and really happy to hear something from the essays in class! I’m glad that it’s happening in other wards! It is wonderful to hear about both of these examples. Truly good to read. Could you tell by comments or chatter if people found it interesting? Inspiring? Controversial? Normal? Heber13 wrote:
Could you tell by comments or chatter if people found it interesting? Inspiring? Controversial? Normal?
The only thing I could tell for sure is that some of the class doesn’t like the catalyst theory. There was no explicit support for it from anyone, and a couple of members reiterated other theories. Any other conclusions would be pure guesswork.
I might have missed some conversations by going up front afterward to tell her how much I liked the lesson.
I’m not sure I believe the catalyst theory, either. But I definitely don’t believe it was “translated” from that papyrus nor any other parts of it that may now be “lost.” Catalyst theory makes a lot of sense to me. Especially if I think Joseph is making it up enhanced with some spiritual inspiration…then…there needs to be something to guide the thoughts or get the revelations going.
It makes more sense than a blank canvas theory or revelation in a vacuum theory.
And I can’t find enough faith to think God was writing on the stone tablets with his finger.
I just think it is pretty cool the essays were being talked about openly in church. I mean…it comes from LDS.org…so who can refute the material. Right? People may not find it all warm and fuzzy…but hey…it is there.
Hopefully people can find ways to have the discussion.
I wonder if the bishop was contacted by anyone, or if complaints about “speculative material” was thrown to the bishop’s office about that teacher?
Heber13 wrote:
I wonder if the bishop was contacted by anyone, or if complaints about “speculative material” was thrown to the bishop’s office about that teacher?
It’s possible, but we’ll never know. I’m confident this is approved by the bishopric, though, because she’s married to one of the counselors.
The catalyst theory doesn’t do it for me either. Then again, Joseph Smith being the author of the BoM doesn’t prevent me from learning from the book.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.