The Last Mormon Freedom

[Scott Lloyd]

But is God really just looking for a pep rally for himself?

No. But He commands us to love and revere Him. I believe he does this for our sakes.

[consiglieri]

I viewed his comments not so much as blamming the listener as it was empowering the listener, thus illustrating again his point about how two listeners or readers can be impacted differently by what is said, and this because of how they respectively listen.

I view it as how the listener can effectively stop listening to what is said and focus instead on his own inner world.

Not a bad ploy as ploys go, but I think the deeper question is why this should be so.

Some see the world as it is and ask why . . .

All the Best!

--R.F.Consiglieri

[emeliza]

The Holy Ghost doesn't need to witness to me that some guy loves his wife. Great for him. The Holy Ghost will witness if he testifies that he knows that God lives and Jesus is our Savior and loves us etc. and those things will be of value to me and to others in the congregation--because that is what a 'testimony' is.

Pure Testimony puts the emphasis on God, Jesus Christ, his divine mission, his church, his scriptures etc. And that's the biggest drawback to the Thanktimonies, Travelogues and lectures in that they take the emphasis from God and put it on the person talking at the pulpit--who can only offer their listeners warm-fuzzy feelgoods; IMO, a poor substitute for the real deal.

Although I agree.....I don't think there is anything wrong with a guy saying how much he loves his children or his wife. I have never heard these type of expressions said without the person tying it into how they are trying to be more Christlike or how they are learning so much more about Christ thru these experiences. IDK, maybe I don't have it down, but generally giving a big of a personal reference or experience to tie it into your testimony doesn't seem wrong. Last week we had a guy get up and bear his testimony about love and how he felt he was learning and appreciating more of what Christ taught about love thru his wife and kids. He spoke about how love isn't that gushy feeling and he sees now how much more is expected and how much more he feels it. He praised Christ, but put it into terms of what we deal with every day. His testimony was short, but definitely had a bit of personal experience added in. I think that is fine.

[wenglund]

I view it as how the listener can effectively stop listening to what is said and focus instead on his own inner world.

Not a bad ploy as ploys go, but I think the deeper question is why this should be so.

I view it as the listener using the instruction as an edifying catalyst for expanding the horizons of his or her understanding, thereby positioning him or her better to instruct, both at the time as a student, and/or perhaps later as a teacher.

I also view it as the student rightly taking some responsibility for his or her own eductaion, rather than over-burdening the teacher with that obligation, thereby individualizing the instruction and making a myth of some assumed mold.

And, I'm not sure I would classify humility and active listening as a "ploy", but from my own experience as an active listemer and somewhat humble student, and evidently in Dr. Eyring's and President Eyring's experience as well, the valued question is: what works best for all parties concerned. Given that the three of us have been professional educators during our lives, and at least two of us have achieved the highests levels of education, perhaps we have gained some valued insights into how best to learn.

Some see the world as it is and ask why . . .

Some see the cup as half empty and are moved to complain, while ohers see the cup as half full and are moved to drink in gratitude.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Doctor Steuss]

Some see the cup as half empty and are moved to complain, while ohers see the cup as half full and are moved to drink in gratitude.

Some just get a smaller cup.

[nicolasconnault]

Some just get a smaller cup.

No.

[Doctor Steuss]

No.

Makes it overfloweth.

[nicolasconnault]

Makes it overfloweth.

Saying that some people get a smaller cup is like saying "Some people get a plastic cup, others get a paper cup". Unless you explain the analogy, it's useless.

[Doctor Steuss]

Saying that some people get a smaller cup is like saying "Some people get a plastic cup, others get a paper cup". Unless you explain the analogy, it's useless.

The internet is serious business, folks. Serious business.

(Thought it didn't need explainin')

[consiglieri]

Some just get a smaller cup.

Let's try to keep this from being personal, shall we, Herr Doktor?

[consiglieri]

I view it as the listener using the instruction as an edifying catalyst for expanding the horizons of his or her understanding, thereby positioning him or her better to instruct, both at the time as a student, and/or perhaps later as a teacher.

Is there any appreciable difference between what Elder Eyring's dad did and just bringing a good book to read?

Or bringing some cups to play with?

Half-empty, half-full; big or little; plastic or glass; all are precious in His sight.

(It's a good thing I didn't insist on making that rhyme.)

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Doctor Steuss]

[Deleted... upon thought, not tasteful. Sorry.]

[nicolasconnault]

Is there any appreciable difference between what Elder Eyring's dad did and just bringing a good book to read?

Yes. The difference is that Dr Eyring trusted that the Lord would set the topic of his learning during the meeting, and he was humble enough to accept learning from anyone, not just from a book he chose to read.

[consiglieri]

Yes. The difference is that Dr Eyring trusted that the Lord would set the topic of his learning during the meeting, and he was humble enough to accept learning from anyone, not just from a book he chose to read.

Would it make any difference if Elder Eyring's dad opened his Book of Mormon during a customarily boring talk?

How about his copy of Jesus the Christ?

How about his galleys for Faith of a Scientist?

I am not sure I see the difference between ignoring the speaker in favor of one's own mental cogitations and reading the mental cogitations of another.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[nicolasconnault]

Would it make any difference if Elder Eyring's dad opened his Book of Mormon during a customarily boring talk?

How about his copy of Jesus the Christ?

How about his galleys for Faith of a Scientist?

I am not sure I see the difference between ignoring the speaker in favor of one's own mental cogitations and reading the mental cogitations of another.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

The difference is that Dr. Eyring was first trying to understand what the speaker was trying to say, then he gave himself a sermon on that topic. I suppose that if he opened up one of the aforementioned books to study on that topic it would have been similar. But note that he also looked intently at the speaker. That is a form of respect. Another big difference. There are two things I do when listening to talks: look at the speaker and take notes. When you're up there speaking, seeing people do these two things is very encouraging, because hopefully you are speaking to edify.

[consiglieri]

Like all good fathers, he must have read my mind, because he started to laugh. He said: "Hal, let me tell you something. Since I was a very young man, I have taught myself to do something in a church meeting. When the speaker begins, I listen carefully and ask myself what is is he/she is trying to say. Then, once I think I know what he/she is trying to accomplish, I give myself a sermon on that subject.

Please note--Elder Eyring's dad does not even have to describe the Church speaker as boring; it is taken for granted. For Elder Eyring's dad, it would be redundant to say in a Church setting, "Boring speaker."

Please note--This has been going on since Elder Eyring's dad was a "very young man," and it makes no difference that the current speaker is from the high council.

Please note--There is nothing in the story that indicates Elder Eyring's dad was looking at the speaker; and even if he were, would it be considered to be respectful to be looking at someone who is speaking while paying absolutely no attention to what they are saying?

Please note--Is it appropriate for Church leadership to recognize so pervasive a problem in Church meetings and yet, the best they can do to remedy the situation is advise the members to lay back and think of England?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[nicolasconnault]

Please note--Elder Eyring's dad does not even have to describe the Church speaker as boring; it is taken for granted. For Elder Eyring's dad, it would be redundant to say in a Church setting, "Boring speaker."

Please note--This has been going on since Elder Eyring's dad was a "very young man," and it makes no difference that the current speaker is from the high council.

Please note--There is nothing in the story that indicates Elder Eyring's dad was looking at the speaker; and even if he were, would it be considered to be respectful to be looking at someone who is speaking while paying absolutely no attention to what they are saying?

Please note--Is it appropriate for Church leadership to recognize so pervasive a problem in Church meetings and yet, the best they can do to remedy the situation is advise the members to lay back and think of England?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Well that's a cynical view... Then again you probably had fun writing it. No matter what you think, Elder Eyring learned a valuable lesson from that story, so did I, and obviously you didn't.

I know many speakers who are not boring. I suspect the pygmalion effect is your constant companion in Church meetings.

Is the pervasive problem you mention "boring speakers" or "prideful, unteachable listeners"?

[mercyngrace]

My dear distractable Consiglieri,

I suggest that when the meeting is boring, you make your own entertainment, you would be in great company:

My brethren, I reiterate that, as holders of the priesthood of God, it is our duty to live our lives in such a way that we may be examples of righteousness for others to follow. As I have pondered how we might best provide such examples, I have thought of an experience I had some years ago while attending a stake conference. During the general session, I observed a young boy sitting with his family on the front row of the stake center. I was seated on the stand. As the meeting progressed, I began to notice that if I crossed one leg over the other, the young boy would do the same thing. If I reversed the motion and crossed the other leg, he would follow suit. I would put my hands in my lap, and he would do the same. I rested my chin in my hand, and he also did so. Whatever I did, he would imitate my actions. This continued until the time approached for me to address the congregation. I decided to put him to the test. I looked squarely at him, certain I had his attention, and then I wiggled my ears. He made a vain attempt to do the same, but I had him! He just couldn

[wenglund]

Is there any appreciable difference between what Elder Eyring's dad did and just bringing a good book to read?

Is there an appreciable similarity between what you are asking and the point that Elder Eyring was trying to make?

Is there appreciable value in picking this nit--as precious as we all ar in the sight of God?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[consiglieri]

Is there appreciable value in picking this nit--as precious as we all ar in the sight of God?

I'm just wondering why I get slammed for saying the same thing that Elder Eyring's dad gets a pass on.

That's all.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[mercyngrace]

I'm just wondering why I get slammed for saying the same thing that Elder Eyring's dad gets a pass on.

That's all.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

You're not getting slammed by me, Consig. I hope you know that I was being facetious when I addressed you as "distractable".

MnG

[consiglieri]

You're not getting slammed by me, Consig. I hope you know that I was being facetious when I addressed you as "distractable".

MnG

I know.

You're a peach, mercyngrace.

I could say that the distracted and mildly hypocritical multitude know who they are.

But they probably don't.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Zakuska]

The quote you provided doesn't sustain that interpretation.

I happen to agree with you. I was just mocking JeffK's over literal interpretation of what Elder Ballard said.

[Zakuska]

I think you mean "the question this prompts" or "the question this raises". "Begging the question" is a name for a logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise.

And I would respond simply by saying that the meeting is being hijacked from those who attend expecting to be uplifted and edified in the manner prescribed by the prophets and apostles.

And there in lies the problem, What one member might deam "uplifted and edified" another member might not find it as such.

Also who are the Apostles and Prophets to dictate to me what I find "uplifted and edified"? I personally feel the spirit stronger and get much more out of the scriptures than I do listening to conference talks about some ones great aunt who knew someones cousin who helped out in a flood that bought wheel chairs for his eagle scout project for an orphanage.

[wenglund]

I'm just wondering why I get slammed for saying the same thing that Elder Eyring's dad gets a pass on.

Hmmmm...and here I thought it was you doing the "slamming".

Thanks, -Wade Englund-