- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I reference the Bible dictionary or a regular dictionary quite often, specifically when I want to try to correct a mistaken definition that has grown into cultural doctrine or when I want to drill down and make a point that is important to me without misunderstanding. (Three excellent examples of this within Mormon culture are talking about grace/atonement, doctrine, and repentance.) I think it is important to make sure language is used as precisely as possible, since imprecision often is the root of misunderstanding. Different words often mean the same thing but make people believe they are talking about different things, and the same word can mean different things that make people think they disagree when, in actuality, they would realize they agree if they used different words.
Human language is tricky, and citing definitions can provide a common ground that can help people understand each other better. One of my favorite quotes says:
Quote:It is more important not to be misunderstood than it is to be understood mostly. If you have to choose one or the other, choose to be understood partially and not misunderstood at all than to be understood more fully but be misunderstood partially, as well.
Very very occasionally dictionary definitions are alright but whenever I hear “The Bible Dictionary/Merriam Webster/Oxford Dictionary says/defines … as”, my heart sinks a little. SamBee, I’ll have to start using The Golden Bough as my source of all definitions for church talks! I guess I concur with Sam a bit on this. There are routine phrases and styles we use in LDS pulpit addresses that just flip my off switch. “
For those who don’t know me, let me introduce myself.” – I see it as a time wasting excuse. Or “ I bring you greetings from the Stake Presidency. They want you to know how much.…” . Lastly, “ Today my talk is on repentance. The dictionary says “repentance is the act of….”I hear what those of you who use it are saying, and yes defining word a or phrase can improve knowledge, but our use of them, in my mind reduces the talk. Often times I don’t care what the dictionary or Elder So and So said about something – I want to know what you feel, understand, or have experienced with something.
Now if you are a youth and just learning about things definitions help. So I get it to a point. I also know we ask people to speak who are terrified to speak, because of that I will cut everyone slack on my pet peeves, but I wish we didn’t fall into key phrase traps. I think that limits all of us.
mom3 wrote:Now if you are a youth and just learning about things definitions help. So I get it to a point. I also know we ask people to speak who are terrified to speak, because of that I will cut everyone slack on my pet peeves, but I wish we didn’t fall into key phrase traps. I think that limits all of us.
I have been in toastmasters (professional peaking group) for about 5 years now. I have a shelf full of trophies from speaking contests. I have attempted to employ some of the techniques that make a great speech in church talks. I do not believe that it is well received. There are certain norms that we adhere to in church talks. Rather than to use the space and show body language and movements – we tend to hide behind the pulpit and be rather reserved in our use of body. A small prop may be brought in to help with a story – but props tend to be discouraged. Give a good talk but not TOO good of a talk.
One great article that I read was from an anthropologist that applied his anthropological training to SM. He analyzed the forms and structure of the meeting, the talks, and the testimonies. There was a certain tone and cadence that he called “spiritual speech” and it mimics the ways of speaking that the GA’s use. He theorized that men in a given area that are able to mimic this form well are viewed as more spiritual and are more likely to be given callings of authority.
DarkJedi wrote:I actually don’t have a problem with a youth speaker saying “I looked up faith in the dictionary and the definition is….” because it shows me that they put some effort into their talk and at least attempted to understand their topic instead of just parroting their Primary teachers.
I dunno…I’d be more likely to stay awake if they led off with “I swiped this whole talk off SermonSite/Sermons.org/etc.
More likely to be something I haven’t already heard repeatedly and/or not a tearful travelogue.
Quote:One great article that I read was from an anthropologist that applied his anthropological training to SM. He analyzed the forms and structure of the meeting, the talks, and the testimonies. There was a certain tone and cadence that he called “spiritual speech” and it mimics the ways of speaking that the GA’s use. He theorized that men in a given area that are able to mimic this form well are viewed as more spiritual and are more likely to be given callings of authority.
Roy – I totally get that. I even understand (though I disagree with it) why toastmasters and TED style talks don’t get support in our church.
But I have never heard President Holland begin a talk with “Some of you here are new and so I just want to take a minute and introduce myself. I met Pat when she was a popular cheerleader at high school. Yada, yada, yada.” Nor have I heard “I was asked to speak on mercy. The dictionary defines Mercy as….” Or at Regional Conference, “I bring you the greetings of the First Presidency.”
Those parts of our “giving a talk” came from somewhere totally different.
I’m going to start my talk on Sunday with, “After the straitest sect of our religion I was raised a Pharisee.” Should be fun. The topic is grace.
I would love, love, love to give a talk on grace. Mercy is when you do not get (the punishment) what you deserve.
Grace is when you get (the reward) that you do not deserve.
I would also lean heavily on the teachings on grace found in the book Believing Christ (lots of BoM scriptures on grace) and the talk His Grace is Sufficient by Brad Wilcox.
The trick is to teach something just different enough to get people to think or reconsider previous notion but not so different that you are dismissed out of hand as being heretical.
Believing Christ is one of my favorite LDS books. Roy you would do a Grace talk very well. Reuben I love your opening.
I’d also include Uchtdorf’s talk on grace in any talk I gave on the subject, especially the part about why we obey. We don’t obey to save the pennies, the pennies don’t matter because Christ has already paid the full price. In the end it doesn’t matter what we do as long as we believe in Christ (really, really). That’s why we obey – because we believe that Christ/God loves us, not to earn any reward or avoid any punishment. The debt has been paid and as Roy says none of us deserve the grace or mercy. I like your opening Reuben. I wasn’t raised int he church but I may use a variation on that theme sometime anyway.
Looks like a minor thread-jack. Sorry! Roy wrote:I would love, love, love to give a talk on grace.
I know, right? I totally lucked out. My assigned topic is faith, but I was given explicit permission to talk about any adjacent subject I feel strongly about. Based on my recent reinvestigation into the Church, I’ve decided that the #1 way that Church culture causes harm is by burdening members with unnecessary guilt, and that teaching grace is the top mitigation strategy.
Pre-FC, I would have chosen the same topic, but for slightly different reasons.
Quote:Mercy is when you do not get (the punishment) what you deserve.
Grace is when you get (the reward) that you do not deserve.
I would also lean heavily on the teachings on grace found in the book Believing Christ (lots of BoM scriptures on grace) and the talk His Grace is Sufficient by Brad Wilcox.
Neat definitions! Also, thanks for the suggestions, Roy. I’ll take a look at them again. I think I’ve read Wilcox’s talk, and I know I’ve at least skimmed Believing Christ. The funny thing is, I came to the same conclusions from reading the Book of Mormon while doing my best to forget what I already thought it said. How salvation is supposed to work is plain when you do that.
DarkJedi wrote:I’d also include Uchtdorf’s talk on grace in any talk I gave on the subject, especially the part about why we obey. We don’t obey to save the pennies, the pennies don’t matter because Christ has already paid the full price. In the end it doesn’t matter what we do as long as we believe in Christ (really, really). That’s why we obey – because we believe that Christ/God loves us, not to earn any reward or avoid any punishment. The debt has been paid and as Roy says none of us deserve the grace or mercy.
I was dancing in my chair when I first heard this talk. Thanks for reminding me! I’m planning to talk about how salvation is immediate, complete, free, and done solely by God. The pennies analogy illustrates the last two points nicely.
Quote:I like your opening Reuben. I wasn’t raised int he church but I may use a variation on that theme sometime anyway.
The actual quote is from Acts 26:5, which doesn’t say anything about how Paul was raised: “after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.”
FWIW, I think I’ve settled on “after the straitest sect of Mormonism I was raised a Pharisee.”
To bring the discussion back around to the Bible Dictionary: I find what it says about Pharisees to track very well with how I was raised, and describe nicely what I see in a certain kind of Mormon. Quote:They prided themselves on their strict observance of the law and on the care with which they avoided contact with things gentile. […] They upheld the authority of oral tradition as of equal value with the written law. The tendency of their teaching was to reduce religion to the observance of a multiplicity of ceremonial rules and to encourage self-sufficiency and spiritual pride. They were a major obstacle to the reception of Christ and the gospel by the Jewish people.
This describes that rigid counselor of mine perfectly. Good gravy. I might have to be careful to not offend him…
Quote:They prided themselves on their strict observance of the law and on the care with which they avoided contact with things gentile. […] They upheld the authority of oral tradition as of equal value with the written law. The tendency of their teaching was to reduce religion to the observance of a multiplicity of ceremonial rules and to encourage self-sufficiency and spiritual pride. They were a major obstacle to the reception of Christ and the gospel by the Jewish people.
Reuben –
Stop showing everyone pictures of me. It’s embarrassing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.