Teaching Institute: Science v Bible
In a post about a current "Dialogue Flood Article," Julie M. Smith explained how "to lay the groundwork for a non-traditional reading of the Bible in a way that a traditionalist can accept ... as I did it this week as I taught the first session in a year-long Institute class on Genesis." I commented: Julie, you no doubt already know this, but Guide to the Scriptures at LDS.org says: "During Noah's time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth." (s.v. Flood at Noah's Time.) Is it really your job as Institute instructor to teach that the student manual is wrong? "The earth was immersed. It was a period of baptism." (Religion 301: Old Testament Student Manual, Genesis—2 Samuel [2003], p.55.) Julie responded: R. Gary asks, "Is it really your job as Institute instructor to teach that the student manual is wrong?" It is part of my job as an Institute instructor to help my students understand the difference between scripture and commentary on scripture. We don't believe that the scriptures are without error; it boggles the mind that I would teach my students that commentary on the scriptures is without error. But more to the point, I don't "teach" a limited flood. I review the evidence supporting the idea of a local flood (pros and cons) and the evidence supporting a universal flood (pros and cons) and tell my students that faithful LDS can believe either. (And I really do believe this. If you go back to the post I did for my SS lesson notes, you'll see that I defend in theory those who believe in a universal flood.) I also tell them that focusing on the issue too much (on either side) is a distraction from what the scriptures are really about–namely, moral lessons and personal application thereof. Speaking from the perspective of a father and grandfather, I think Institute teachers should focus on the manual. It has been carefully prepared and approved for teaching Institute. In this case, the manual teaches a worldwide flood and uses the words of John Taylor to explain from a scriptural point of view how it happened: I would like to know by what known law the immersion of the globe could be accomplished. It is explained here in a few words: "The windows of heaven were opened" that is, the waters that exist throughout the space surrounding the earth from whence come these clouds from which the rain descends. That was one cause. Another cause was "the fountains of the great deep were broken up"—that is something beyond the oceans, something outside of the seas, some reservoirs of which we have no knowledge, were made to contribute to this event, and the waters were let loose by the hand and by the power of God; for God said He would bring a flood upon the earth and He brought it, but He had to let loose the fountains of the great deep, and pour out the waters from there, and when the flood commenced to subside, we are told "that the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained, and the waters returned from off the earth." Where did they go to? From whence they came. Now, I will show you something else on the back of that. Some people talk very philosophically about tidal waves coming along. But the question is—How could you get a tidal wave out of the Pacific ocean, say, to cover the Sierra Nevadas? But the Bible does not tell us it was a tidal wave. It simply tells that "all the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered. Fifteen cubits upwards did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered." That is, the earth was immersed. It was a period of baptism. (Religion 301: Old Testament Student Manual, Genesis—2 Samuel [2003], p.55.) All of us may believe whatever we want. But we are not authorized to teach it in a Church setting unless it is grounded in the scriptures. "It is the business of those who are to teach His children to teach the principles of the gospel [not] notions or guesses at truth [not] philosophies or sciences of the world [but] the principles of the gospel as found in the four standard works." (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Harold B. Lee, p.59.) If the standard works (click here), modern prophets (click here), and the Institute manual all teach a worldwide flood, why would an Institute teacher lay the groundwork for a non-traditional reading of the Bible as preparation for a discussion of current sciencific evidence for a non-worldwide flood?