Posted by BrianJ on May 30, 2007
I taught this lesson Sunday and asked the following question (because I didn’t have a good answer myself, not because I already had the answer):
Why does Jesus tell three parables in Luke 15 that all apparently have the same moral: joy comes in finding what was lost?”
Posted in Lessons:Sun. School | 8 Comments »
Posted by Robert C. on May 30, 2007
Julie M. Smith at Times & Seasons has written several excellent posts on the parallel account of the anointing in Mark:
* Temples and Leprous Houses: There seems to be an inversion where “the temple has been dismissed as incurably leprous and the leper’s house becomes the scene of a temple rite” (anointing the king).
* The JST of Mark 14:8: The JST seems to change only the structure of account in Mark, not the meaning per se. The new structure highlights chiastically the anointing of Christ.
* Mark 14:3-9: The Anointing at Bethany as Markan Christology: This is Julie’s dissertation which argues that “the anointing is both a burial and a messianic anointing and that its dual meaning is central to its christological vision. It will be suggested that the anointing encapsulates Mark’s Christology.”
* Ye Have the Poor with You Always: In citing Deuteronomy 15:11, Jesus is not saying you shouldn’t worry about the poor because they will always be a problem, but is referencing a passage that condemns the very attitude that Mary’s accusers take.
Here are a few additional rough thoughts of my own regarding the Johannine account (most of the scriptures cited can be found here): Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Lessons:Sun. School, Scripture topics | 3 Comments »
Posted by joespencer on May 28, 2007
We don’t begin studying the Book of Mormon until next year, but I’ve been doing quite a bit of work on Abinadi in writing a chapter of my book, and I’m increasingly convinced that we have paid far too little attention to this book. So let me anticipate six lessons to be taught next year and see if I can’t generate some discussion that might be profitable for me (and others) now as well as for teachers a year from now.
What is at work in the Book of Mosiah? Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Lessons:Sun. School, Scripture topics | 7 Comments »
Posted by robf on May 26, 2007
I’ve been puzzling over some of the parables in Luke 15 and 17, especially the story found in Luke 17:7-10. To what extent are we to consider ourselves servants of the LORD? And what might that mean? I think to some extent we are more comfortable thinking of ourselves as children of the LORD, perhaps as either the prodigal or ungrateful sons in Luke 15. Is it appropriate for us to think of ourselves as servants? If so, what does Luke 17:7-10 tell us about how we should expect to be treated? And if we are servants, but aren’t doing all that we are commanded to do, what does that imply about our status with the LORD? The thought of being a servant of the LORD does not give me great comfort at this point, as I’m afraid I could only be considered a pretty mediocre one at best. Are we best considered servants or perhaps (somewhat wayward) children of the LORD?
Posted in Lessons:Sun. School | 57 Comments »
Posted by nhilton on May 22, 2007
Sitting in the car on the way home from piano lessons my children heard a new radio ad asking, “What is the purpose of life?” The station was 97.1, pop rock. We turned up the sound to clearly hear the ad. This was the same ad we had heard during Sunday School in a video presentation educating church members about the recently launched church media blitz being tested in a few select cities, including our Las Vegas. After the ad, my teenagers said they felt weird hearing it over the radio, like we were trying to sell people something. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Misc. | 22 Comments »
Posted by joespencer on May 18, 2007
Our conversations on the blog, whenever they are the most prolific, are—let us be quite honest here—ultimately neurotic. Since I’m obviously thinking of Freud here, let me explain the point. The neurotic (and remember that Freud says that all “normal” people are neurotic to some degree or another) is defined by repression: there is some kind of trauma that the neurotic has never brought into language. In analysis, the neurotic essentially circles around and around this repressed trauma, always approaching it but unable to bring it directly into language so as to work through it. Analysis thus often goes on for several years while the analyst tries to help the analysand confront that traumatic experience linguistically (the “talking cure”). (Different branches of psychoanalysis, of course, have very different ways of helping the analysand confront the trauma, some far more effective than others obviously.)
So I’d like to diagnose our blog today: we are neurotic, suffering from the inability (or at least the near inability) to articulate a particular trauma, and it is something that makes it difficult for us, often enough, to do what we would like to do here. After nearly six months of watching us free-associate, I think I’m prepared to try to force us to articulate—to symbolize, to bring into language—this trauma, the “fundamental fantasy” that often keeps us from getting down to work. (I hope everyone recognizes that I write all of the above with a smile!) So, here we go. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in About Feast | 29 Comments »
Matthew
joespencer
Robert C.
robf
BrianJ
douglashunter
Kevin Barney
Jim F.
nhilton
cherylem
Clark Goble
NathanG
jennywebb
janetlisonbee
kirkcaudle
Karl D.
Karen