I recall an English class in college where the instructor read several papers to the class to illustrate good and bad techniques used by students. The assignment had been to locate an editorial article and to write a paper that argued in favor of it, or against it, and one of the papers the instructor read first invoked the Bible as an argument against physician-assisted suicide. The instructor warned that using the Bible to support a point was dangerous because so many people disagreed on the Bible, or interpreted it differently.
The instructor then read my paper. I recall having written in response to an editorial that claimed vegetarians were morally superior. Ironically, the article had invoked the Bible suggesting that the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" did not provide exceptions, so believers in the bible should avoid the taking of animal life for food. In response, I had used Bible passages that contained instructions for killing animal sacrifices, and also shown that the resurrected Christ had eaten fish.
The instructor asked the class what they thought of my writing. Some people immediately pointed out that I had used the Bible, and that it was dangerous. The instructor indicated that because I had used it in response to a biblical argument, it proved the point, and was an effective example.
At the time, I recall feeling quite proud of myself. Even now, I believe that I defended the use of animal products convincingly in response to the editorial... and even though I continue to enjoy the delicious flavor of bacon, beef, poultry, and fish... instead of pride, a small sense of shame comes to me.
As time has passed, I have come to realize that my arguments did exactly what the instructor described: they eroded trust in the Bible. They suggested that any conclusion could be obtained from the book, which implies that no conclusion derived therefrom is of any importance.
Contemporary conversations about issues ranging from health care to homosexual marriage and abortion to taxes, frequently cite the Bible... and individuals on both sides of any given argument have been known to appeal to the same religious book for justification that their point of view is morally correct or even favored by God himself. Opponents on both sides are quick to read passages that describe dietary restrictions or other obscure and archaic guides for conduct from the Old Testament to show that people are selectively following the Bible.
Enough arguments that use the Bible have circulated such that for many people... the Bible no longer matters.
To any that may have reached this conclusion (and I cannot overemphasize this), I say you are wrong.
Equally, to those who persist in using the scriptures as a weapon to prove that others have not come to the correct conclusion on any given issue... you are also wrong (even if you're right about the issue).
The primary purpose of the Bible is not to prove anything. As critics point out, there are times when the Bible seems incomplete (2 Chronicles 9:29), or confusing (Genesis 22:1-2), or archaic (Leviticus 11:2-4). Those that allow these flaws to convince them the Bible has no worth because of some passages, miss out on the truly beautiful and powerful passages that inspire.
Consider the two disciples on the road to Emmaus after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (Luke 24) Jesus expounded the scriptures to them in a powerful manner, such that after he was gone they said "did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?" (Luke 24:32, emphasis added) Certainly, defenders of the good book can point to its historical significance, or the influence that it has had on the English language, the availability of printing, the concepts of liberty and morality... but the purpose of scripture study is illustrated in the example of the disciples on the road to Emmaus. It is not to produce well-thought argument... it is to help men recognize God.
Much like other religious performances, the true power of reading the Bible depends on an existing faith in God. (see Hebrews 11:6) Just as the parables that Jesus taught meant nothing to some audiences, to some they revealed great truths (Matthew 13:34-35), the same words in the scriptures can produce different messages for different readers. Those that have "ears to hear" are those that are open to spiritual truths.
Reading the Bible with faith produces spiritual strength and understanding. I cannot help but be moved when I read the bold teachings of Christ in the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5-7), or the profound description of Jesus as the Word of God (John 1). The confidence of Isaiah and Hezekiah (Isaiah 37), the courage of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego (Daniel 3), and the fearlessness of Elijah the Tishbite (1 Kings 18) have power to inspire and strengthen.
A complete enumeration of moving passages is not practical, but I have found that the more I read, the better I come to know God. In a world of strife and conflict, the Bible matters not because it specifically and with certainty answers with logic any given issue, scenario, or question... but because it helps people become better. A world where more people strive for righteousness and selflessly devote their time and talents for the betterment of his family is precisely the reason that the Bible is here. God is trying to speak to us, and just as he did on the road to Emmaus, the scriptures are the tool that allows any disciple to recognize God.
And so if it has been a while, dust of the cover, crack open the pages, or even go online for free(https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bible?lang=eng). No matter where a person is in life's journey, reading the Bible, when properly used and diligently studied, can help them get to a better place... a place closer to God himself.
Monday, November 24, 2014
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
Authenticity and social media
I enjoy using social media. I regularly check Facebook, and although I rarely tweet anything, I follow a number of individuals and personalities on Twitter. There are a number of blogs I regularly read. Of course, as wonderful as some sources of news and information can be on the internet, I know enough to avoid some of the dark corners where the ugliness of humanity is on display...
Perhaps the experience of seeing how cruel people can be in the comments below videos and news articles made something I read from Elder Quentin L Cook's Facebook shocking to me. He said this:
On the other hand... Quentin L Cook is a prominent religious leader. He can't be advocating the kind of comments on YouTube that use the F-bomb in every part of speech except an article and a pronoun... can he? The invitation to authenticity can't mean an invitation to express hatred and vitriol from the comfort of the computer desk... right? He's not excusing people harassing one another because they authentically want to... Of course not.
The point is "we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work."
So to apply this, imagine an individual is having a difficult day at work. Because they are short-handed, this person is required to do more work than normal, but still has pressure to appear positive when dealing with impatient and unhappy customers. Under this pressure, the person makes a small mistake, and the supervisor has to come and assist in correcting it. The supervisor has a frustrated tone as they remind the person of the correct procedure, adding to the frustration of the day. After the workday is over, they come home to their computer and go to Facebook. Here they see advice telling them to "be authentic" in the use of social media, and not just "broadcast the smiling details" of life. They decide to write a big status indicating that their boss is a jerk for overworking them without increasing their pay, and that they were a jerk for handling a minor mistake. Unfortunately for this individual, they have forgotten that their boss followed them on Facebook. The boss posts a scathing reply and indicating how much pressure they were under, and how costly their mistake was. The individual is then invited to turn in their supplies and find another job.
While I don't personally know anyone who has dealt with it to that extreme, I do know people that have experienced negative consequences for using what seemed to be authenticity regarding their employment or schooling.
Not only online, but in many situations, religious standards ask disciples not to be true to themselves, but rather to discipline themselves. Consider the words of Alma to his son Corianton:
The goal behind every Christian faith should always be to make bad men good, and to make good men better... not to make men comfortable with how they currently are.
So how do the two ideas become reconciled?
The answer involves understanding the link between what Elder Cook described as "authenticity" and the word honesty.
The same dilemma is sometimes mocked in social media posts where a girlfriend approaches her boyfriend in some unflattering outfit and asks if it makes her look "fat." If he answers honestly, even if he is as polite as he can be, the girlfriend takes offense. If he tells her that it does not, he is being dishonest. And anymore, if he dodges the question, the girlfriend takes it as a yes, and takes offense. How does a person be "authentic" while still "denying himself"? How can a person be honest and kind?
Let me suggest that the request to be authentic is not a suggestion to air dirty laundry. It's not to "vent" or "lash out" or be "passive aggressive" toward people that seem irritating. When prophets and scriptures counsel men to be honest, they do not mean to be cruel. Latter Day Saints, as all Christians, ought to embrace that which is "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." (Art of Faith 1:13) The invitation to be authentic does not mean to become cynical or pessimistic
either.
Being authentic means attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Practicing what we preach is vital to religious worship. In other words... continue to broadcast the smiling details of your life AND make sure you smile in life. Make a smiley-face emoji, but also try to make your face smile.
Being authentic also applies to how you treat others. If you have "friends" online... try and be actually friendly to them. If you disagree with someone, be civil, and resist the urge to stir up contention.
Don't pretend to be happy... become happy. Don't pretend to have faith... exercise faith. Don't pretend to be better than you are... but in a deliberate, diligent, and authentic manner, and in social media as well as every other aspect of life... become like Christ. Because Christ was the ultimate example of being the best.
Perhaps the experience of seeing how cruel people can be in the comments below videos and news articles made something I read from Elder Quentin L Cook's Facebook shocking to me. He said this:
Elder David A. Bednar recently cautioned members to be authentic in the use of social media. A prominent thought leader, Arthur C. Brooks, has emphasized this point. He observes that when using social media, we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work. We portray an incomplete life—sometimes in a self-aggrandizing or fake way. We share this life, and then we consume the “almost exclusively … fake lives of [our] social media ‘friends.’” Brooks asserts, “How could it not make you feel worse to spend part of your time pretending to be happier than you are, and the other part of your time seeing how much happier others seem to be than you?”At first glance, it almost seemed like he was advocating using social media to whine. Don't try to be positive... be yourself... right? And if you are authentically a disagreeable individual who derives pleasure from provocation, then don't pretend to be nice, because that's not authentic. If you are the type of individual who secretly indulges in graphic depictions of sex and/or violence, then don't pretend you are only online to read the Bible... right? Be true to yourself. Be authentic. Right?
On the other hand... Quentin L Cook is a prominent religious leader. He can't be advocating the kind of comments on YouTube that use the F-bomb in every part of speech except an article and a pronoun... can he? The invitation to authenticity can't mean an invitation to express hatred and vitriol from the comfort of the computer desk... right? He's not excusing people harassing one another because they authentically want to... Of course not.
The point is "we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work."
So to apply this, imagine an individual is having a difficult day at work. Because they are short-handed, this person is required to do more work than normal, but still has pressure to appear positive when dealing with impatient and unhappy customers. Under this pressure, the person makes a small mistake, and the supervisor has to come and assist in correcting it. The supervisor has a frustrated tone as they remind the person of the correct procedure, adding to the frustration of the day. After the workday is over, they come home to their computer and go to Facebook. Here they see advice telling them to "be authentic" in the use of social media, and not just "broadcast the smiling details" of life. They decide to write a big status indicating that their boss is a jerk for overworking them without increasing their pay, and that they were a jerk for handling a minor mistake. Unfortunately for this individual, they have forgotten that their boss followed them on Facebook. The boss posts a scathing reply and indicating how much pressure they were under, and how costly their mistake was. The individual is then invited to turn in their supplies and find another job.
While I don't personally know anyone who has dealt with it to that extreme, I do know people that have experienced negative consequences for using what seemed to be authenticity regarding their employment or schooling.
Not only online, but in many situations, religious standards ask disciples not to be true to themselves, but rather to discipline themselves. Consider the words of Alma to his son Corianton:
Now my son, I would that ye should repent and forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes, but cross yourself in all these things; for except ye do this ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Oh, remember, and take it upon you, and cross yourself in these things. (Alma 39:9)Consider also the words in the book of Matthew:
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. (Matthew 16:24-25)
The goal behind every Christian faith should always be to make bad men good, and to make good men better... not to make men comfortable with how they currently are.
So how do the two ideas become reconciled?
The answer involves understanding the link between what Elder Cook described as "authenticity" and the word honesty.
The same dilemma is sometimes mocked in social media posts where a girlfriend approaches her boyfriend in some unflattering outfit and asks if it makes her look "fat." If he answers honestly, even if he is as polite as he can be, the girlfriend takes offense. If he tells her that it does not, he is being dishonest. And anymore, if he dodges the question, the girlfriend takes it as a yes, and takes offense. How does a person be "authentic" while still "denying himself"? How can a person be honest and kind?
Let me suggest that the request to be authentic is not a suggestion to air dirty laundry. It's not to "vent" or "lash out" or be "passive aggressive" toward people that seem irritating. When prophets and scriptures counsel men to be honest, they do not mean to be cruel. Latter Day Saints, as all Christians, ought to embrace that which is "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." (Art of Faith 1:13) The invitation to be authentic does not mean to become cynical or pessimistic
either.
Being authentic means attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Practicing what we preach is vital to religious worship. In other words... continue to broadcast the smiling details of your life AND make sure you smile in life. Make a smiley-face emoji, but also try to make your face smile.
Being authentic also applies to how you treat others. If you have "friends" online... try and be actually friendly to them. If you disagree with someone, be civil, and resist the urge to stir up contention.
Don't pretend to be happy... become happy. Don't pretend to have faith... exercise faith. Don't pretend to be better than you are... but in a deliberate, diligent, and authentic manner, and in social media as well as every other aspect of life... become like Christ. Because Christ was the ultimate example of being the best.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)