When one thinks of the role of rhetoric and persuasion in the gospel, the Spirit comes to mind. How persuasive is the Spirit compared to members? What is the most effective strategy to convince others of truth? Christ convinced Peter to walk on water, and he successfully taught priests in the temple when he was only twelve. Was it his method, or was it the aid of the Spirit?
If we examine the way the Spirit operates, perhaps we can transfer those tendencies to our own rhetorical approaches. What works and what does not? There are many stories told about investigators who were not convinced through words heard by members, but by feelings they have experienced through the Spirit in certain situations. Alma the Younger was convinced of the falseness of the teachings of the gospel, but when the Spirit intervened, he was completely changed. He became a missionary. Nephites in the Americas were convinced of Christ's coming on a completely different continent. The ability to bring others to have such faith is a strong one.
The Spirit is the most effective persuasive tool for most LDS members. It usually works most effectively on people who are ready to hear it. People are humbled by its effects because it works in a quiet way; it's not obnoxious or pushy. The Spirit does not argue, it simply compels others. As missionaries, members should learn how to share the gospel with others without trying to force feed it to others. When trying to persuade others to come to church or read the Book of Mormon, members should let inactives or non-members exercise their agency, because very few people want someone else to make their decisions.
The Spirit also operates often in such a way that others do not even know it is there. It is there subconsciously, and sometimes is not noticed right away. If members can learn to be good examples instead of simply preaching doctrine, it could be very beneficial. People learn best through what they experience, and when they experience the good example of a member, they usually experience the presence of the Spirit, which then teaches them in an unobtrusive manner.
There are many ways to implement rhetoric in the gospel, especially when we are contacting others with the gospel. The Spirit is the best example of teaching, and we should try to emulate its power and reverence.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like the your writing style and the way that you depict your ideas, however I have a fundamental problem with some of the subject matter. With people who have become desensitized to what they feel due to fear of bias obscuring truth or whatever else, this method will fail. With many converts in poor countries where education isn't a "big deal," and especially in areas were philosophical inquiry into works of prevalent non-christian authors isn't emphasized, this is an effective method. However avoiding the prejudice of feeling in certain dialectical methods, is often a feature of many intellectual circles. They fear being irrational. A balance of the two methods in conversion is necessary. We must be able to ration our beliefs to a large extent. My priest quorum leader used to say "if you aren't questioning, you're not growing." Learn to ration our beliefs, and don't be blind, and fall into the cultural straitjacket.
ReplyDeleteAustin Hammer Section 113
I am with you on many of your points. However, I believe that the most effective way to use rhetoric is using rhetoric through the influence of the Spirit. The Spirit will often let the teacher know if the student needs to be pushed. I heard a story once of two missionaries who were out knocking doors. One door opened, and then was slammed shut. Disheartened, they started walking away when the Spirit told the missionaries to go back. The went back, and by listening to the Spirit converted the angry man inside. I suggest the most effective way to use rhetoric is by using it in conjunction with the Holy Ghost.
ReplyDeleteI think it's impossible to analyze the Spirit in order to use it in out own rhetoric (you say this is your aim in paragraph 1). The Spirit can be with us and direct us, but it is not an element of persuasion that can be called upon the same way as parallel structure or tricolons can. The Spirit is a heavenly being that chooses to help us when we act worthily. That being said, you are absolutely right that we cannot force people to listen to the gospel; but must rely on the Spirit to direct us. So my problem is mainly how you approach rhetoric in the church; because the Spirit cannot be analyzed that way. Grammatical/stylistic side note: you have some awkward sentences like "The Spirit also operates often in such a way that others do not even know it is there" try and make it more concise by cutting out "also" and "in such a way".
ReplyDeleteI like your idea of using the examples of spiritual rhetoric found in the scriptures to model our own rhetoric. It could help people avoid the slanderous forms of persuasion so often found today.
ReplyDeleteThis brings up the interesting question, can just plain rhetoric be a good bases upon teaching the gospel? I do enjoy your analysis on the spirit being the main teacher, but would also like to know your opinion on whether or not plain rhetoric is enough to commit people to baptism.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments-I'll try to address them.
ReplyDelete*I agree with the statements that the Spirit and rhetoric should work together, and I realized I addressed mostly the cases when they are used separately. In many cases, rhetoric is guided by the Spirit.
*Erika-I think it is possible to analyze the manner of the Spirit and the feelings it brings out in us, but you're right in saying we can't apply those methods in purely rhetorical manner. I agree that we have to live worthily to experience its influences.
*Ben-If by 'plain rhetoric' you mean rhetoric without the gospel,-no, I don't think it's a good basis for teaching the gospel. I consider teaching the gospel without the Spirit kind of dangerous, actually. Also, I think that it's possible for people to commit to baptism through rhetoric only. It's definitely not the best idea to be baptized purely because you are persuaded and it makes sense, but hopefully that will transform into an actual testimony built off of the Spirit.
Good discussion, everyone. Rachel, I think one thing that could help your writing, that would've perhaps answered some of people's counterarguments and responses before they were given, would be to add more concreteness to your writing. Give a concrete example or story where this applies--even if it's only a sentence or to long--or give an actual phrase or scriptural reference. Writing with concrete details can help your writing be more clear and compelling.
ReplyDeleteGreat post!