My “Urim & Thummim” is the new [now old] King James bible with all the bells and whistles. I am usually perusing it, while I sit through the class. It is the most comprehensive, organized, resource of knowledge made available by the First Presidency. I just love to sit at my computer reading and following up on the myriad of references, etc.

You know what I get . . . mental stimulation. Knowledge that remains in my mind. Faith is not the traditions of the fathers, which these lesson books are.

Faith is knowledge or learning line upon line and precept upon precept. Now, if you’ve worked on a Master or PHD, you will likely be experienced in that process. What you retain is your vocation and professional reputation.

It was written of Jesus of Nazareth, that He spoke with authority and not as the Scribes.

If I teach from this manual, I will add those aspects to my lessons, but it seems it would not have been difficult to add a page to each lesson to provide that context and to stimulate consideration of the implications of each doctrine. It is my perception that many theologians who take a fresh and honest look at the Bible are being drawn toward concepts that are similar to LDS doctrine, because those concepts offer hope and understanding that sustain us in our mortal journey. This includes concepts like ancient Israel’s worship of the Son of God (Margaret Barker), the openness of God, and post-mortal evangelism. It is necessary to understand the Restored Gospel, but it is even better if we appreciate how it is superior in so many ways to traditional Christian teachings, over and above simply being true.

In all honesty, I did not find the gospel principles lessons to be any more basic or difficult to teach than the regular priesthood or Sunday School lessons.

My style, of course, is to ask questions (and decline to give answers, if asked). (That way no one can accuse me of heresy, because I don’t express my opinion on things. I just ask.) That style worked as well in the investigators class as in Sunday School or Priesthood.

On what I think are the core teachings of the gospel–loving God and God’s creations–I do not think the knowledge or expertise level in an investigators class is particularly different from a long time members class. I enjoyed teaching (and participating when I did not teach) because the discussions were pretty open and frank. There were not a lot of “primary”/Sunday School answers and quite a few unique and provocative insights offered by class members.

One challenge for teachers in RS and PH will be to undo the assumptions of class members that this is an “elementary” class. I honestly don’t think the lessons are elementary–again, at least no more elementary that the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church has been.

For example, in the gospel principle lessons about God and Jesus and the Holy Ghost, I think discussions of social trinitarianism, modalism, Monarchianism, Tri-theism would all be appropriate. Or discussions of what importance or significance of the embodiment of God might have (if it has any). As long as teachers and class are sharing openly and honestly, I do not worry about Sunday School/primary answers making discussions pointless.

On the other hand, someone who teaches the Presidents’ teaching class in a boring way will probably teach gospel principles the same way.

“The comment by Steve Evans that no manual is a cure for boredom is spot on. As much as can be said about the Correlation Commitee I don’t see that Salt Lake is trying to dictate every word being said in our classes — quite the opposite I think. Stimulating discussion and edification can never come from a top-down corporate-style approach. I like that the lessons are short which essentially calls for class members to fill in the blanks. Lessons can be more intimate and applicable to the congregation.”

^ Exactly!

I have been ecstatic ever since hearing we would be using the revised Gospel Principles manuals. Finally we will no longer be largely limited to what one particular prophet happened to say about particular topics. Instead we will be much more free, and we will likely find it necessary if we intend to fill the time, to search the scriptures and prophetic teachings for elucidation of the doctrines. As I see it, we will have a greater chance to explore aspects of the gospel in a more comprehensive (and possibly systematic) manner, examining the interconnectedness of our doctrines and exploring their facets.

The same can certainly not be said for the GP manual. I feel a profound disappointment. The language and presentation are often cartoonish, demand very little of the audience, place the entire burden of a healthy meeting in the hands of lay instructors and attendees, and are bound to perpetuate generic and unreflective discussions on precisely the same material that we’ve been recycling since we were 12. I believe in ritual, in repetition, but there’s absolutely nothing sacramental about the content of the GP manual.

It’s silly to suggest that a committee whose job is to produce the best materials possible for our weekly meetings have no obligation toward improving the caliber of those meetings. All manuals are not created equal. The only silver lining I see is Nietzsche’s suggestion that what won’t kill me will make me stronger. Perhaps, as he suggests, we can come to see the beautiful in the necessary, and somehow learn to endure nihilistic meetings with style.

Like you, I’m one who hopes for better teaching with this manual, partly because newer or younger teachers have been intimidated by the large blocks of text in the TP manuals and haven’t really known how to teach with that material. This manual demands more discussion … as long as inexperienced teachers don’t fall into a pattern of having class members read scripture verses and then asking catechistic questions about what was just read. Real questions without simple, obvious answers, is what we need. The best teachers will be prepared with some of those to initiate a discussion, but prepared class members can also have some in mind before going to class.