LDS Sunday School - User contributions [en]

User talk:Teacher

2009-04-24T21:56:27Z

Teacher: /* Questions */ new section

Teacher,

Thanks so much for your contributions! I really appreciate your help!
[[User:Reds0xfan|Reds0xfan]] 18:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

== Questions ==

I have a couple of quick questions. I have just decided to copyright the stuff that I write for my blog (Gospel Doctrine Underground). I note at the bottom fo the page that I am not supposed to submit copyrighted material without permission. Is it OK for me to keep posting my stuff gtom Gospel Doctrine Underground? And, is it OK for me to indicate that the stuff I submit is copyrighted?

Thanks.

DC-Lesson 15

2009-04-24T21:45:40Z

Teacher: /* Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts? Really? */

''' "Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

== Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts? Really? ==

This post originally appeared at ''Gospel Doctrine Underground,''[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/2009/04/seek-ye-earnestly-best-gifts-really.html]

I am going to say something that might be a little controversial. I think we in the LDS Church have a complicated relationship with gifts of the spirit.
Spiritual gifts get a lot of lip service in the church. On paper, we really like them, and section 46 is prime evidence of that. What’s more, certain gifts of the spirit are very accepted among Mormons. The gifts of healing and being healed are very big. People have great faith in them, and most families have multiple stories of these gifts blessing their lives. The gift of prophesy is also very highly regarded, especially to the extent it refers to gaining a testimony of Christ and his church. Even beyond that, most people are very comfortable with the gift of prophesy as it relates to promptings and premonitions that keep us and our families safe from physical or spiritual harm, or that help us serve those around us who are in need. The gifts of wisdom, teaching, discernment, etc. - - all very well accepted.

But other spiritual gifts are viewed with some, well, hesitation. Although no one would rule them out, the gifts of ministering angles and working miracles would be exercised and talked about very rarely. Maybe I lack faith, but if my neighbor told me (s)he had seen angels, I would wonder what was really going on. And the gift of tongues? Well, unless you are talking about missionaries or general authorities being able to learn and speak a language more easily than expected, I think you should proceed with caution. Can you imagine if someone started speaking in an allegedly angelic language in sacrament meeting? Even if someone there was allegedly able to interpret? How would your Bishop respond?

This ambivalence about spiritual gifts started early in our history. As the saints started gathering to Kirtland, many experienced and exhibited some fairly extreme spiritual manifestations. Speaking in strange languages, seeing visions, acting in unusual ways supposedly under the influence of the spirit - - it was all going on in Kirtland. Joseph was not always comfortable with these demonstrations, and often tried to rein them in. In fact, a theme of the Doctrine & Covenants is how to avoid deception by false spiritual experiences and manifestations.

It seems to me, the more subtle or understated the spiritual gift, the more readily accepted it is in the Church. Remarkable and emotional displays of spiritual fervor, or claims of special spiritual endowment, while commonly accepted by some Christians as gifts of the Spirit, would cause discomfort if not downright suspicion among most members of the Church.

So, are some gifts better than others? What are the “best gifts” referred to in Section 46, and how do we earnestly seek them? And if we earnestly seek them, what should we really expect to find?

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 16]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 14]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 14

2009-04-24T21:45:07Z

Teacher: /* Joseph Smith and Wealth Redistribution */

''' The Law of Consecration '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

== Joseph Smith and Wealth Redistribution ==

''This article was originally posted by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground'' [http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

The Law of Consecration offers a lot of interesting discussion topics and ideas. As a political junkie, one of the most interesting concepts tied up in consecration is the idea of equality. The Book of Mormon has some interesting passages regarding equality; I cannot help thinking that they got Joseph thinking about economics and righteousness. Or, the impact of temporal things upon righteousness, anyway.

So, when the Lord gives the newly organized Church his Law, equality is a big issue. Nowhere is this more powerfully stated than in Section 78, where the Lord tells his people that the time has come , “[t]hat you may be equal in the bonds of heavenly things, yea, and earthly things also, for the obtaining of heavenly things. For if ye are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things; For if you will that I give unto a place in the celestial world you must prepare yourselves by doing the things which I have commanded you and required of you.” (D&C 78:5-7).

The idea just has the ring of revelation. If we were all equal, think of the problems we could avoid. There would be no poor, at least in the relative sense within the Church. There would be less pride and envy and greed. It would be much easier to avoid materialism if everyone was on an even plane, economically. Equality is a great idea, right?

On the other hand, as Joseph soon learned, voluntary consecration is hard to achieve. As an initial practical matter, there must be a “critical mass” of wealth to sustain the group. But once that is achieved, not everyone will easily overcome their temporal desires. For those who can, it is hard to be equal with someone who is not particularly interested in being equal with you. If you don’t have everyone on board, the whole system is destined for failure. As Richard Bushman points out in Rough Stone Rolling (p. 183),

The system never worked properly. The lack of property to distribute among the poverty-stricken early saints hampered the system’s effectiveness from the start. Joseph struggled on, aided by [Edward] Partridge and loyal Colesville Saints, who made up a large part of the Mormon population in Zion. In 1833, the Mormon’s expulsion from Jackson County would close down everything. The system’s two year existence was about average for the various communal experiments being undertaken in the period.

So what about consecration for you and me, today? I have to say, many members of my ward are kind and generous and charitable - - much more so than I. I truly believe that they take their commitment to consecration seriously. But, I do not see any big push to be “equal in earthly things.” In fact, most of my ward members seem downright resistant to the wealth equalization, Obama-style. (I know, I know, it’s not the same, but still . . .)

So what do you think? Is earthly equality a something to shoot for? Or is it a heavenly aspiration we cannot achieve in the real world? Could Joseph ever have made it work by free will alone, without an economic or political system to reinforce (enforce?) it? Why has the Church implemented it in only the loosest sense? And, would Joseph have voted for the Obama tax and budget plans?

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 15]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 13]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 15

2009-04-24T21:42:53Z

Teacher: /* Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts? Really? */

''' "Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

== Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts? Really? ==

This post originally appeared at ''Gospel Doctrine Underground,''[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/2009/04/seek-ye-earnestly-best-gifts-really.html]

I am going to say something that might be a little controversial. I think we in the LDS Church have a complicated relationship with gifts of the spirit.
Spiritual gifts get a lot of lip service in the church. On paper, we really like them, and section 46 is prime evidence of that. What’s more, certain gifts of the spirit are very accepted among Mormons. The gifts of healing and being healed are very big. People have great faith in them, and most families have multiple stories of these gifts blessing their lives. The gift of prophesy is also very highly regarded, especially to the extent it refers to gaining a testimony of Christ and his church. Even beyond that, most people are very comfortable with the gift of prophesy as it relates to promptings and premonitions that keep us and our families safe from physical or spiritual harm, or that help us serve those around us who are in need. The gifts of wisdom, teaching, discernment, etc. - - all very well accepted.

But other spiritual gifts are viewed with some, well, hesitation. Although no one would rule them out, the gifts of ministering angles and working miracles would be exercised and talked about very rarely. Maybe I lack faith, but if my neighbor told me (s)he had seen angels, I would wonder what was really going on. And the gift of tongues? Well, unless you are talking about missionaries or general authorities being able to learn and speak a language more easily than expected, I think you should proceed with caution. Can you imagine if someone started speaking in an allegedly angelic language in sacrament meeting? Even if someone there was allegedly able to interpret? How would your Bishop respond?

This ambivalence about spiritual gifts started early in our history. As the saints started gathering to Kirtland, many experienced and exhibited some fairly extreme spiritual manifestations. Speaking in strange languages, seeing visions, acting in unusual ways supposedly under the influence of the spirit - - it was all going on in Kirtland. Joseph was not always comfortable with these demonstrations, and often tried to rein them in. In fact, a theme of the Doctrine & Covenants is how to avoid deception by false spiritual experiences and manifestations.

It seems to me, the more subtle or understated the spiritual gift, the more readily accepted it is in the Church. Remarkable and emotional displays of spiritual fervor, or claims of special spiritual endowment, while commonly accepted by some Christians as gifts of the Spirit, would cause discomfort if not downright suspicion among most members of the Church.

So, are some gifts better than others? What are the “best gifts” referred to in Section 46, and how do we earnestly seek them? And if we earnestly seek them, what should we really expect to find?

© 2009 The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 16]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 14]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 14

2009-04-24T21:42:24Z

Teacher: /* Joseph Smith and Wealth Redistribution */

''' The Law of Consecration '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

== Joseph Smith and Wealth Redistribution ==

''This article was originally posted by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground'' [http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

The Law of Consecration offers a lot of interesting discussion topics and ideas. As a political junkie, one of the most interesting concepts tied up in consecration is the idea of equality. The Book of Mormon has some interesting passages regarding equality; I cannot help thinking that they got Joseph thinking about economics and righteousness. Or, the impact of temporal things upon righteousness, anyway.

So, when the Lord gives the newly organized Church his Law, equality is a big issue. Nowhere is this more powerfully stated than in Section 78, where the Lord tells his people that the time has come , “[t]hat you may be equal in the bonds of heavenly things, yea, and earthly things also, for the obtaining of heavenly things. For if ye are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things; For if you will that I give unto a place in the celestial world you must prepare yourselves by doing the things which I have commanded you and required of you.” (D&C 78:5-7).

The idea just has the ring of revelation. If we were all equal, think of the problems we could avoid. There would be no poor, at least in the relative sense within the Church. There would be less pride and envy and greed. It would be much easier to avoid materialism if everyone was on an even plane, economically. Equality is a great idea, right?

On the other hand, as Joseph soon learned, voluntary consecration is hard to achieve. As an initial practical matter, there must be a “critical mass” of wealth to sustain the group. But once that is achieved, not everyone will easily overcome their temporal desires. For those who can, it is hard to be equal with someone who is not particularly interested in being equal with you. If you don’t have everyone on board, the whole system is destined for failure. As Richard Bushman points out in Rough Stone Rolling (p. 183),

The system never worked properly. The lack of property to distribute among the poverty-stricken early saints hampered the system’s effectiveness from the start. Joseph struggled on, aided by [Edward] Partridge and loyal Colesville Saints, who made up a large part of the Mormon population in Zion. In 1833, the Mormon’s expulsion from Jackson County would close down everything. The system’s two year existence was about average for the various communal experiments being undertaken in the period.

So what about consecration for you and me, today? I have to say, many members of my ward are kind and generous and charitable - - much more so than I. I truly believe that they take their commitment to consecration seriously. But, I do not see any big push to be “equal in earthly things.” In fact, most of my ward members seem downright resistant to the wealth equalization, Obama-style. (I know, I know, it’s not the same, but still . . .)

So what do you think? Is earthly equality a something to shoot for? Or is it a heavenly aspiration we cannot achieve in the real world? Could Joseph ever have made it work by free will alone, without an economic or political system to reinforce (enforce?) it? Why has the Church implemented it in only the loosest sense? And, would Joseph have voted for the Obama tax and budget plans?

© 2009 The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 15]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 13]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 15

2009-04-24T21:19:23Z

Teacher: /* Additional Teaching Materials */

DC-Lesson 14

2009-04-16T15:01:20Z

Teacher:

DC-Lesson 11

2009-03-17T06:24:15Z

Teacher:

''' “The Field Is White Already to Harvest” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

OK, I admit it. I am having a hard time deciding what to do with Lesson 11. As a friend recently said, what is the point of including all these mission calls to specific individuals in the Doctrine & Covenants? What are you and I supposed to glean from them? I am having a hard time coming up with the themes I want to talk about. The manual focuses on serving with your heart, might, mind and strength, preparing to serve, blessings of service, etc. There are some nice ideas there, but I am wanting more.

Here are two ideas that have occurred to me.

1. These sections highlight the idea that the core of service to God is saving souls. Section 18 teaches this in very clear terms. Maybe your calling is gathering sheaves in the missionary field, or maybe, like Thomas Marsh, you are called to be a “physician unto the Church, but not unto the world.” D&C 31:10. Whatever your calling, it is about bringing souls to Christ.

2. I also like the “if you have desires to serve, ye are called to the work” idea. If you are like me, you have great intentions, but lots of reasons not to jump in and serve. The timing isn’t right. You don’t really know that person. You don’t want to overstep your bounds. You are busy. A prominent theme in these sections is that we need not wait for a special calling or assignment. (Interestingly, the message of Section 11 is a little different). There are opportunities to save souls all around us, and we should jump in feet first. I think this idea ties in with the Pres. Eyring quote in the manual, although he is really addressing missionary work.

So, what do you think? What do these sections say to you? How would you present Lesson 11?

This Post is from The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground.[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 12]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 10]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 10

2009-03-17T06:22:53Z

Teacher: /* Additional Teaching Materials */

''' “This Is My Voice unto All” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==
IS HE TALKING TO ME?

One of my ongoing challenges with the Doctrine & Covenants is trying to decide what, exactly, I am supposed to do with it. So many of the revelations, particularly the earlier ones, seem to be directed to specific individuals, facing specific situations. Section 25 is a perfect example. This revelation closes with the Lord telling Emma Smith, “[T]his is my voice unto all.” Yet, the section is a tangle of general admonitions to avoid pride and worldliness and keep the commandments, along with very specific directives that were clearly intended for Emma and her unique situation. She was told to support Joseph in his calling, act as his scribe and compile a hymn book. These were not instructions for “all”; they were personal instructions for her.

The challenge repeats itself over and over in the D&C. Many of the sections are in response to specific questions or directed to specific individuals. Yet they have become scripture, supposedly with broad - - even universal - - application. See D&C 1:38; 25:16. How do you interpret these revelations and decide what they really mean to us? Is it reasonable to conclude that Lord’s instructions to Oliver Cowdery on translating the gold plates are a pattern for how I seek answers to my prayers? Does the direction to Emma to support Joseph in his calling as a prophet and “rejoice in her husband, and the glory which shall come upon him” really have application to how I should treat my wife? What am I to make of the Lord’s instructions regarding whether specific missionaries were to travel by land or water?

I wonder if our attempts to "liken the scriptures unto ourselves" are sometimes a bit too superficial. Maybe Emma’s instruction to rejoice in her husband was more about accepting and embracing the challenges the Lord had given her. Maybe it teaches us more about submission and gratitude than about marriage and family relations. For me, that is the challenge of the Doctrine & Covenants - - trying to understand what the real message is for us. For that, I think we need to know the context and background, in addition to the words. We cannot always take things as they appear on the surface, but need to think and study and work at it. Realizing this makes me appreciate Joseph Smith all the more. Understanding revelation is hard work.

This post is from The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground.[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 11]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 9]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 11

2009-03-17T06:20:26Z

Teacher:

''' “The Field Is White Already to Harvest” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

[This Post is from The Teacher at [Gospel Doctrine Underground]http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/.]

OK, I admit it. I am having a hard time deciding what to do with Lesson 11. As a friend recently said, what is the point of including all these mission calls to specific individuals in the Doctrine & Covenants? What are you and I supposed to glean from them? I am having a hard time coming up with the themes I want to talk about. The manual focuses on serving with your heart, might, mind and strength, preparing to serve, blessings of service, etc. There are some nice ideas there, but I am wanting more.

Here are two ideas that have occurred to me.

1. These sections highlight the idea that the core of service to God is saving souls. Section 18 teaches this in very clear terms. Maybe your calling is gathering sheaves in the missionary field, or maybe, like Thomas Marsh, you are called to be a “physician unto the Church, but not unto the world.” D&C 31:10. Whatever your calling, it is about bringing souls to Christ.

2. I also like the “if you have desires to serve, ye are called to the work” idea. If you are like me, you have great intentions, but lots of reasons not to jump in and serve. The timing isn’t right. You don’t really know that person. You don’t want to overstep your bounds. You are busy. A prominent theme in these sections is that we need not wait for a special calling or assignment. (Interestingly, the message of Section 11 is a little different). There are opportunities to save souls all around us, and we should jump in feet first. I think this idea ties in with the Pres. Eyring quote in the manual, although he is really addressing missionary work.

So, what do you think? What do these sections say to you? How would you present Lesson 11?

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 12]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 10]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 11

2009-03-17T06:18:47Z

Teacher: /* Additional Teaching Materials */

''' “The Field Is White Already to Harvest” '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

[This Post is from The Teacher at [Gospel Doctrine Underground]http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/.]

OK, I admit it. I am having a hard time deciding what to do with Lesson 11. As a frined recently said, what is the point of including all these mission calls to specific individuals in the Doctrine & Covenants? What are you and I supposed to glean from them? I am having a hard time coming up with the themes I want to talk about. The manual focuses on serving with your heart, might, mind and strength, preparing to serve, blessings of service, etc. There are some nice ideas there, but I am wanting more.

Here are two ideas that have occurred to me.

1. These sections highlight the idea that the core of service to God is saving souls. Section 18 teaches this in very clear terms. Maybe your calling is gathering sheaves in the missionary field, or maybe, like Thomas Marsh, you are called to be a “physician unto the Church, but not unto the world.” D&C 31:10. Whatever your calling, it is about bringing souls to Christ.

2. I also like the “if you have desires to serve, ye are called to the work” idea. If you are like me, you have great intentions, but lots of reasons not to jump in and serve. The timing isn’t right. You don’t really know that person. You don’t want to overstep your bounds. You are busy. A prominent theme in these sections is that we need not wait for a special calling or assignment. (Interestingly, the message of Section 11 is a little different). There are opportunities to save souls all around us, and we should jump in feet first. I think this idea ties in with the Pres. Eyring quote in the manual, although he is really addressing missionary work.

So, what do you think? What do these sections say to you? How would you present Lesson 11?

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 12]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 10]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:15:40Z

Teacher:

''' The Restoration of the Priesthood '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

'''When Was the Melchizedek Priesthood Restored?'''

One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, 1829 when John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on the banks of the Susequehanna River. The Melchizedek Priesthood? Well, that’s a different story.

We do not really know when it was restored. We know that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say that they were visited by Peter, James and John. We know these three restored to Joseph and Oliver the keys of the apostleship. But unlike John the Baptist, Peter, James and John do not get their own section of the Doctrine & Covenants with a handy date.

Putting a date on this appearance has been difficult. “Ben” at The Juvenile Instructor wrote a very interesting post a while ago on dating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. You can find his post here[http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/dating-the-melchizedek-priesthood-restoration/]. Richard Bushman, in Rough Stone Rolling, fleshes out his opinion (referred to in the JI post) that the three apostles may have appeared to Joseph and Oliver when they were fleeing a mob near Colesville, Ohio in June 1830. Does it matter when it happened? If so, why? Why the specificity with respect to some important visions and manifestations, but not this one?

To add to the uncertainty, Bushman suggests that it is not entirely clear that the Melchizedek Priesthood, per se, was restored by Peter, James and John in that original vision. Bushman notes that at a June 1831 conference, Joseph ordained several men to the “high priesthood.” At least in some sources, Joseph and others state that this was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in this dispensation. In fact, Bushman says Joseph himself was ordained to the “high priesthood” that day by [Lyman Wight][http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/b/wight_lh.phtml].

If Peter, James and John had restored the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829 or 1830, why was Joseph ordained to the “high priesthood” by Lyman Wight in 1831? And what about those statements that the 1831 conference was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in the last dispensation? I have some thoughts about this, but would like to hear yours.

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

'''The Power of Godliness'''

The reading material for Lesson 8 contains one of my favorite passages from the Doctrine & Covenants, D&C 84:19-21. This passage explains that in the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, the “power of godliness is manifest.”

This passage is interesting for a number of reasons. At its most basic level, I like the idea that the power of godliness is manifest in priesthood ordinances. For those of us who have been in the Church for a while, it is easy to take the sacrament, see a child baptized or attend a wedding and think it is pretty routine, ordinary stuff. This passage reminds me that it is not. Priesthood ordinances show us God’s power and bind us to him as we covenant to obey, receive remission of sins, and renew promises to always have His spirit to be with us. And what greater manifestation of God’s power can we see than the creation of a family that will continue into beyond death?

I think it is interesting, though that this passage does not refer to the power of God, but the power of godliness. As mentioned above, the power of God is manifest in priesthood ordinances that save us and bless our lives. But I think the power of godliness is also manifest in priesthood ordinances in at least a couple of ways. First, there is an obvious synergy between a priesthood-holder’s righteousness and discipleship, and the priesthood power he is able to exercise. This connection between worthiness or godliness and priesthood power is pretty clear. See, e.g., D&C 121:36-42. Second, I think that each individual achieves greater levels of godliness as they receive priesthood ordinances and enter into covenants with God. Our own personal power of righteousness grows as we progress and come closer to God, assisted by ordinances like baptism, confirmation, the endowment and marriage.

Finally, I think it is pretty intriguing that Joseph received this revelation in 1832, relatively early in the restoration timeline. This was well before the sealing power was restored or temple ordinances were understood. In fact, although I am no historian, I do not believe that the Church at this time was really performing any Melchizedek Priesthood ordinances, unless you count ordinations to offices in that priesthood. I wonder what Joseph thought that phrase meant. Did he understand this as a foreshadowing of additional knowledge and ordinances?

How do you think the power of godliness manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood? Is there a difference between the power of God and the power of godliness? And what (if anything) does Section 84 say about Joseph’s understanding of the restoration process?

PS: Mormon Matters had a recent post on ordinances with some interesting discussion. You can find it here[http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/15/why-would-god-create-ordinances/].

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 9]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 7]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:15:07Z

Teacher:

''' The Restoration of the Priesthood '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

'''When Was the Melchizedek Priesthood Restored?'''

One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, 1829 when John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on the banks of the Susequehanna River. The Melchizedek Priesthood? Well, that’s a different story.

We do not really know when it was restored. We know that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say that they were visited by Peter, James and John. We know these three restored to Joseph and Oliver the keys of the apostleship. But unlike John the Baptist, Peter, James and John do not get their own section of the Doctrine & Covenants with a handy date.

Putting a date on this appearance has been difficult. “Ben” at The Juvenile Instructor wrote a very interesting post a while ago on dating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. You can find his post here[http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/dating-the-melchizedek-priesthood-restoration/]. Richard Bushman, in Rough Stone Rolling, fleshes out his opinion (referred to in the JI post) that the three apostles may have appeared to Joseph and Oliver when they were fleeing a mob near Colesville, Ohio in June 1830. Does it matter when it happened? If so, why? Why the specificity with respect to some important visions and manifestations, but not this one?

To add to the uncertainty, Bushman suggests that it is not entirely clear that the Melchizedek Priesthood, per se, was restored by Peter, James and John in that original vision. Bushman notes that at a June 1831 conference, Joseph ordained several men to the “high priesthood.” At least in some sources, Joseph and others state that this was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in this dispensation. In fact, Bushman says Joseph himself was ordained to the “high priesthood” that day by [Lyman Wight][http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/b/wight_lh.phtml].

If Peter, James and John had restored the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829 or 1830, why was Joseph ordained to the “high priesthood” by Lyman Wight in 1831? And what about those statements that the 1831 conference was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in the last dispensation? I have some thoughts about this, but would like to hear yours.

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

The Power of Godliness

The reading material for Lesson 8 contains one of my favorite passages from the Doctrine & Covenants, D&C 84:19-21. This passage explains that in the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, the “power of godliness is manifest.”

This passage is interesting for a number of reasons. At its most basic level, I like the idea that the power of godliness is manifest in priesthood ordinances. For those of us who have been in the Church for a while, it is easy to take the sacrament, see a child baptized or attend a wedding and think it is pretty routine, ordinary stuff. This passage reminds me that it is not. Priesthood ordinances show us God’s power and bind us to him as we covenant to obey, receive remission of sins, and renew promises to always have His spirit to be with us. And what greater manifestation of God’s power can we see than the creation of a family that will continue into beyond death?

I think it is interesting, though that this passage does not refer to the power of God, but the power of godliness. As mentioned above, the power of God is manifest in priesthood ordinances that save us and bless our lives. But I think the power of godliness is also manifest in priesthood ordinances in at least a couple of ways. First, there is an obvious synergy between a priesthood-holder’s righteousness and discipleship, and the priesthood power he is able to exercise. This connection between worthiness or godliness and priesthood power is pretty clear. See, e.g., D&C 121:36-42. Second, I think that each individual achieves greater levels of godliness as they receive priesthood ordinances and enter into covenants with God. Our own personal power of righteousness grows as we progress and come closer to God, assisted by ordinances like baptism, confirmation, the endowment and marriage.

Finally, I think it is pretty intriguing that Joseph received this revelation in 1832, relatively early in the restoration timeline. This was well before the sealing power was restored or temple ordinances were understood. In fact, although I am no historian, I do not believe that the Church at this time was really performing any Melchizedek Priesthood ordinances, unless you count ordinations to offices in that priesthood. I wonder what Joseph thought that phrase meant. Did he understand this as a foreshadowing of additional knowledge and ordinances?

How do you think the power of godliness manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood? Is there a difference between the power of God and the power of godliness? And what (if anything) does Section 84 say about Joseph’s understanding of the restoration process?

PS: Mormon Matters had a recent post on ordinances with some interesting discussion. You can find it here[http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/15/why-would-god-create-ordinances/].

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 9]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 7]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:13:56Z

Teacher:

''' The Restoration of the Priesthood '''

{{D&C top}}
{{D&C stubs}}

==Additional Teaching Materials==

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

'''When Was the Melchizedek Priesthood Restored?'''

One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, 1829 when John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on the banks of the Susequehanna River. The Melchizedek Priesthood? Well, that’s a different story.

We do not really know when it was restored. We know that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say that they were visited by Peter, James and John. We know these three restored to Joseph and Oliver the keys of the apostleship. But unlike John the Baptist, Peter, James and John do not get their own section of the Doctrine & Covenants with a handy date.

Putting a date on this appearance has been difficult. “Ben” at The Juvenile Instructor wrote a very interesting post a while ago on dating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. You can find his post here[http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/dating-the-melchizedek-priesthood-restoration/]. Richard Bushman, in Rough Stone Rolling, fleshes out his opinion (referred to in the JI post) that the three apostles may have appeared to Joseph and Oliver when they were fleeing a mob near Colesville, Ohio in June 1830. Does it matter when it happened? If so, why? Why the specificity with respect to some important visions and manifestations, but not this one?

To add to the uncertainty, Bushman suggests that it is not entirely clear that the Melchizedek Priesthood, per se, was restored by Peter, James and John in that original vision. Bushman notes that at a June 1831 conference, Joseph ordained several men to the “high priesthood.” At least in some sources, Joseph and others state that this was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in this dispensation. In fact, Bushman says Joseph himself was ordained to the “high priesthood” that day by [Lyman Wight][http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/b/wight_lh.phtml].

If Peter, James and John had restored the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829 or 1830, why was Joseph ordained to the “high priesthood” by Lyman Wight in 1831? And what about those statements that the 1831 conference was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in the last dispensation? I have some thoughts about this, but would like to hear yours.

==Navigation==
*Next [[DC-Lesson 9]]
*Previous [[DC-Lesson 7]]

[[Category:Doctrine & Covenants]]
[[Category:Gospel Doctrine D&C]]

This material has been added by The Teacher at Gospel Doctrine Underground[http://gosepldoctrineunderground.blogspot.com/]

The Power of Godliness

The reading material for Lesson 8 contains one of my favorite passages from the Doctrine & Covenants, D&C 84:19-21. This passage explains that in the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, the “power of godliness is manifest.”

This passage is interesting for a number of reasons. At its most basic level, I like the idea that the power of godliness is manifest in priesthood ordinances. For those of us who have been in the Church for a while, it is easy to take the sacrament, see a child baptized or attend a wedding and think it is pretty routine, ordinary stuff. This passage reminds me that it is not. Priesthood ordinances show us God’s power and bind us to him as we covenant to obey, receive remission of sins, and renew promises to always have His spirit to be with us. And what greater manifestation of God’s power can we see than the creation of a family that will continue into beyond death?

I think it is interesting, though that this passage does not refer to the power of God, but the power of godliness. As mentioned above, the power of God is manifest in priesthood ordinances that save us and bless our lives. But I think the power of godliness is also manifest in priesthood ordinances in at least a couple of ways. First, there is an obvious synergy between a priesthood-holder’s righteousness and discipleship, and the priesthood power he is able to exercise. This connection between worthiness or godliness and priesthood power is pretty clear. See, e.g., D&C 121:36-42. Second, I think that each individual achieves greater levels of godliness as they receive priesthood ordinances and enter into covenants with God. Our own personal power of righteousness grows as we progress and come closer to God, assisted by ordinances like baptism, confirmation, the endowment and marriage.

Finally, I think it is pretty intriguing that Joseph received this revelation in 1832, relatively early in the restoration timeline. This was well before the sealing power was restored or temple ordinances were understood. In fact, although I am no historian, I do not believe that the Church at this time was really performing any Melchizedek Priesthood ordinances, unless you count ordinations to offices in that priesthood. I wonder what Joseph thought that phrase meant. Did he understand this as a foreshadowing of additional knowledge and ordinances?

How do you think the power of godliness manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood? Is there a difference between the power of God and the power of godliness? And what (if anything) does Section 84 say about Joseph’s understanding of the restoration process?

PS: Mormon Matters had a recent post on ordinances with some interesting discussion. You can find it here[http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/15/why-would-god-create-ordinances/].

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:07:59Z

Teacher:

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:07:14Z

Teacher:

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:06:27Z

Teacher:

DC-Lesson 8

2009-02-21T23:05:50Z

Teacher: /* Additional Teaching Materials */

LDS Sunday School:Community Portal

2009-02-21T22:59:42Z

Teacher: New page: One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, ...

One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, 1829 when John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on the banks of the Susequehanna River. The Melchizedek Priesthood? Well, that’s a different story.

We do not really know when it was restored. We know that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say that they were visited by Peter, James and John. We know these three restored to Joseph and Oliver the keys of the apostleship. But unlike John the Baptist, Peter, James and John do not get their own section of the Doctrine & Covenants with a handy date.

Putting a date on this appearance has been difficult. “Ben” at The Juvenile Instructor wrote a very interesting post a while ago on dating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. You can find his post here. Richard Bushman, in Rough Stone Rolling, fleshes out his opinion (referred to in the JI post) that the three apostles may have appeared to Joseph and Oliver when they were fleeing a mob near Colesville, Ohio in June 1830. Does it matter when it happened? If so, why? Why the specificity with respect to some important visions and manifestations, but not this one?

To add to the uncertainty, Bushman suggests that it is not entirely clear that the Melchizedek Priesthood, per se, was restored by Peter, James and John in that original vision. Bushman notes that at a June 1831 conference, Joseph ordained several men to the “high priesthood.” At least in some sources, Joseph and others state that this was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in this dispensation. In fact, Bushman says Joseph himself was ordained to the “high priesthood” that day by Lyman Wight.

If Peter, James and John had restored the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829 or 1830, why was Joseph ordained to the “high priesthood” by Lyman Wight in 1831? And what about those statements that the 1831 conference was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in the last dispensation? I have some thoughts about this, but would like to hear yours.