- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Can you argue with the idea that education improves people’s ability/capacity to serve? I think that would be a tough argument to make. I use my education and work experience (which I consider part of my education) all the time at church, not because I’m “forced” to but because I want to. I didn’t get an education just for a career, I did it to improve my life, it has, and it continues to, and I continue to learn. And of course you see where I was going when asking for the reference – in context it’s likely that GBH was also affirming the education helps us to be more self reliant, etc. It’s no secret education generally equals higher income. So, I suppose you could argue that he really meant more income equals more tithing because that would stand to reason – but I don’t believe he did and it also means more comfort for us and that we won’t be relying on government or church welfare or the generosity of others to make ends meet. (For the record, I did not attend BYU, my degrees are from state colleges.) DarkJedi wrote:
Having a child who just received a degree from the College of Life Sciences I have to say that if this was one time the case, it is no longer. He came home his first semester at BYU with a testimony of evolution. Evolution is freely and openly discussed and accepted by the Life Science faculty, several of whom I have met. Even the Bean Museum now has an evolution display section. And FWIW, the Church has no official stance on evolution.
They
HADan official stance… which has changed drastically over time. The whole week or two at the beginning of BYU life-science courses wasn’t discounting evolution. It was meant to reinforce that the current stance of the Church is “we don’t know”, but that the whole story of Adam and Eve, the creation, etc, etc really did happen, and no true science will contradict it. More or less, they were doubling down on core doctrines, in the face of formerdoctrines being proven wrong. Of course, those former doctrines they have regulated down to “personal opinion”, but I digress. My point is, they emphasize on getting in Church doctrine in the majority of their classes, and use all “learning” to reinforce Church doctrine. If evolution is true (or any other scientific theory), it confirms the truthfulness of the Church, or so we are taught. But personally, I have a hard time trusting any instructor who would be fired, if he were to say anything that goes against the status-quo.
I do think that the church seeks to help the church through helping the members. I do not really see a problem with this as long as the member can apply boundaries. 1) After returning home from my mission (2002) I went to the LDS employment office in the Las Vegas area. Prior to putting my resume into their database I went to a meeting where my career plans were discussed. I was already enrolled at UNLV in the college of Hotel Administration and planned to make hotel management my career. I was encouraged to take a look at careers that will be more likey to garantee weekends off or careers that I might retire early and serve missions for the church. It seemed odd to me that my career planning should be so focused on the church’s needs. However, I suppose from their perspective that helping me to serve dutifully in the church until the end is also in my own eternal best interest.
2) I know that our local SDA church has a financial planner on retainer whose services are free to any member. This to me seems like a wonderful idea. Who couldn’t benefit from having a financial planner. Everything from setting up a budget and getting out of debt – to investment portfolios and estate inherances. I do understand that the financial planner might encourage leaving some property to the church when you die but I did not get the impression that it was required.
3) I absolutely love the Perpetual Education Fund. I know several individuals that have been very blessed by these funds. In the US, there are many good funding options for higher education. In some other countries, being born in poverty can mean that higher education is not an option. I understand that this program is primarily/exclusively for return missionaries. I can see the reasoning for this. Return missionaries have already given of their time in the service of the church. As a demographic they will be more likely to stay active and they will be more likely to repay the loan. They are also likely the future leadership of the church and it makes sense to help them become relatively financially stable.
To reiterate, I do think that the church seeks to help the church through helping the members. I do not really see a problem with this as long as the member can apply boundaries. I recall a participant here at StayLDS that (if I recall correctly) dropped out of their educational program because their calling was too time consuming and something had to go. I feel that to be an almost worst case scenario of what can go wrong if an individual does not set boundaries and the church organization imposes too much, too early on this same individual. The LDS church will most often seek to gain from their investment in you through leadership callings that can be time intensive. As long as the member can say “no” to callings that they do not feel they are ready for then I do not really see a down side to receiving help from the church.
DarkJedi wrote:
Can you argue with the idea that education improves people’s ability/capacity to serve? Ithink that would be a tough argument to make. I use my education and work experience (which I consider part of my education) all the time at church, not because I’m “forced” to but because I want to. I didn’t get an education just for a career, I did it to improve my life, it has, and it continues to, and I continue to learn. And of course you see where I was going when asking for the reference – in context it’s likely that GBH was also affirming the education helps us to be more self reliant, etc. It’s no secret education generally equals higher income. So, I suppose you could argue that he really meant more income equals more tithing because that would stand to reason – but I don’t believe he did and it also means more comfort for us and that we won’t be relying on government or church welfare or the generosity of others to make ends meet. (For the record, I did not attend BYU, my degrees are from state colleges.)
Can’t argue against that at all — it’s true. I applied what I know from business and leadership constantly when I was a leader.
But when serving better in the church is put forward as the only reason for why the prophet/church likes education, I have a problem with that. If given in a list of benefits to both the member, and the organization, I think it’s a great statement.
I was partly in a period I think when I was having trouble with the church’s lack of support for me personally, with everything they demanded of me, and the obviously church-centric approach to leading us a volunteers — treating us almost like employees. To see the prophet get up there and say he likes education, not beceause of the benefits to members, to their prosperity, to their personal effectiveness, but simply because it helps the church — didn’t sit well with me.
dande48 wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:
Having a child who just received a degree from the College of Life Sciences I have to say that if this was one time the case, it is no longer. He came home his first semester at BYU with a testimony of evolution. Evolution is freely and openly discussed and accepted by the Life Science faculty, several of whom I have met. Even the Bean Museum now has an evolution display section. And FWIW, the Church has no official stance on evolution.
They
HADan official stance… which has changed drastically over time. The whole week or two at the beginning of BYU life-science courses wasn’t discounting evolution. It was meant to reinforce that the current stance of the Church is “we don’t know”, but that the whole story of Adam and Eve, the creation, etc, etc really did happen, and no true science will contradict it. More or less, they were doubling down on core doctrines, in the face of formerdoctrines being proven wrong. Of course, those former doctrines they have regulated down to “personal opinion”, but I digress. My point is, they emphasize on getting in Church doctrine in the majority of their classes, and use all “learning” to reinforce Church doctrine. If evolution is true (or any other scientific theory), it confirms the truthfulness of the Church, or so we are taught. But personally, I have a hard time trusting any instructor who would be fired, if he were to say anything that goes against the status-quo.
You’re talking in past tense here, Dande. I know we like to look at the honor code and talk about how outdated and unfair it can be (and I agree with both of those sentiments), but day-to-day class and campus life at BYU has changed a lot, even over the time when my oldest started (Fall 10 years ago) and now. Even the religion professors can say things like we can say from the pulpit* and a little more without repercussion. I have no doubt what you are saying
wastrue, it is much less often the case now. The Bean Museum thing is no small deal:
https://news.byu.edu/news/new-bean-museum-exhibit-explores-evolution ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://news.byu.edu/news/new-bean-museum-exhibit-explores-evolution Finally, people applying for admission to BYU know they’re applying to a church school. It’s no secret that prayers are said in some classes, religion classes are required, church attendance is required, etc. BYU is not alone as a religious school in these things. Other religious schools (ones I am familiar with include Baylor, George Fox, Liberty, and a couple small Catholic institutions) also have such requirements and even honor code-like restrictions. Nobody (except some parents/families) is forcing people to go to BYU and if you really don’t want to go the way out is pretty easy (at least two young people in my own ward have been gutsy enough to do what they needed to do to get “kicked out” – one chose the academic route, dang those classes are hard).
(*For those not familiar, I say quite a bit of the same kinds of things I say here over the pulpit, and know others who do as well, with the full knowledge and blessing of the SP. Just last week after a talk my SP put his arm around me and whispered sweet nothings. It’s much more how you say what you say than what you say.)
Quote:But when serving better in the church is put forward as the only reason for why the prophet/church likes education, I have a problem with that.
But you and I both know very well that wasn’t his only reason SD – unless you can prove otherwise.
I suppose it would be somewhat strange if an organization did something that didn’t benefit its continued existence either directly or indirectly. I suppose there can be some exceptions but as a general rule that is what organizations do. Roy wrote:
I suppose it would be somewhat strange if an organization did something that didn’t benefit its continued existence either directly or indirectly. I suppose there can be some exceptions but as a general rule that is what organizations do.
It’s “survival of the fittest”. But I still wish they would, and greatly respect any organization that make an effort to reach out and “do good” without any thought of their own reciprocal benefit. And it still makes me very hesitant to praise any organzation for doing something which is ultimately self-serving.
Tying back in with the OP, I have a hard time seeing it as “Best Value” from my own personal experience. Your milage may vary. But I think the ranking came from very specific numerics, that didn’t consider a lot of factors. I think using very similar metrics, Forbes could declare the LDS Church “Best Value Religion in the Word”. I’m still hestitant to recommend it.
I found the quote that SD was talking about. It’s in words of a prophet under “The Lord wants you to be educated” second paragraph https://www.lds.org/study/new-era/2007/09/words-of-the-prophet-seek-learning?lang=eng “Inaddition, your education will strengthen your service in the Church”
dande48 wrote:Tying back in with the OP, I have a hard time seeing it as “Best Value” from my own personal experience. Your milage may vary. But I think the ranking came from very specific numerics, that didn’t consider a lot of factors. I think using very similar metrics, Forbes could declare the LDS Church “Best Value Religion in the Word”. I’m still hestitant to recommend it.
I wouldn’t recommend BYU either even though I’ve never been there. Having heard some of my friends and family talk about their experiences there, to me the bad outweighs the good.
Sorry, SD, but you were dead wrong about what GBH said. I read the entire thing. He listed multiple reasons education is important, and he said church service was an additional reason. He also emphasized that “girls” be educated, as well, in any area they want. The talk makes my earlier point: Education is stressed as being a core part of being a child of God and being like God – and, in addition, leaders believe it will strengthen members in the Church. By comparison, they believe lack of education (ignorance) is bad.
I found this article, written by Boyd K Packer, called “The Mantle is Far, Far Greater than the Intellect”Quote:In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary.
Quote:“There are plenty of scholars in the world determined to find all secular truth. There are so few of us, relatively speaking, striving to convey the spiritual truths, who are protecting the Church. We cannot safely be neutral.”
Quote:“Those who have carefully purged their work of any religious faith in the name of academic freedom or so-called honesty ought not expect to be accommodated in their researches or to be paid by the Church to do it.”
thegreythinker wrote:
I wouldn’t recommend BYU either even though I’ve never been there. Having heard some of my friends and family talk about their experiences there, to me the bad outweighs the good.
And I think that’s a personal decision we all need to make about any university (or job). BYU is not for everybody. Neither is Harvard. Neither is Utah Valley University. Whether or not a university is a “best value” is only one consideration. Forbes isn’t saying anything about what college life is like at BYU because that’s not their concern. What they are saying is that it’s a good price for the education one receives there.
dande48 wrote:
I found this article, written by Boyd K Packer, called“The Mantle is Far, Far Greater than the Intellect”Quote:In an effort to be objective, impartial, and scholarly, a writer or a teacher may unwittingly be giving equal time to the adversary.
Quote:“There are plenty of scholars in the world determined to find all secular truth. There are so few of us, relatively speaking, striving to convey the spiritual truths, who are protecting the Church. We cannot safely be neutral.”
Quote:“Those who have carefully purged their work of any religious faith in the name of academic freedom or so-called honesty ought not expect to be accommodated in their researches or to be paid by the Church to do it.”
…forty years ago. This is still past tense. You might as well dig up Joseph Fielding Smith and that man will never walk on the moon.
Official Church History study has changed dramatically in the last 10-15 years. However, even if it hadn’t, there is a HUGE difference between instruction to Seminary teachers and views on education in general. I appreciate that you made that point in your comment, dande48, but I just want to stress it again.
At my university, the main leisure activities seem to have been drinking and sex. I had too much of the former and too little of the latter… What a contrast to BYU!
BYU seems to have better campuses and sport facilities than where I went to, but on the other hand my tuition fees were paid for by the government.
I think as a young person, going to BYU would not have been my first choice, but as an older wiser person I can see the attractions.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.