One aspect of my job requires me to take complex systems and distil them to a couple of Power Point viewgraphs that even upper management can understand. I enjoy this, but I have yet to have the opportunity to use a Venn diagram in these presentations. I love Venn diagrams, especially funny ones. I even included one in my introduction when I joined Wheat & Tares are a blogger.
So today I’ll share some Mormon flavored diagrams, some I made up myself (like the WofW one above), and others I found on the internet (google is your friend) and changed them to meet my needs for this post.
I’d like your comments on the diagrams, what works, and what I missed in each. For example, the Word of Wisdom one above, what could I change to make it better? I thought about adding alcohol, but it was both a 19th century idea (temperance) and a current health guidance, though for health there is a difference between strong drinks and something like wine, which modern health science and D&C 89 understand, but the WofW does not. I couldn’t figure how to add it. Your thoughts?
The above is a fun one I found on the internet. I was wondering what other thing you could insert for DMV and Star Wars and still have it make senses.
This one I also found, but modified some of the intersections. This is just fun, with a small dig at our modesty obsession, and misunderstanding the true meaning of the word modesty.
I found one like this on google, but changed some things to have it align with my views. I think the takeaway here is that members teach things not taught by the Prophet, and that nobody encompasses all the truth. What would you add or change?
This one I made up. I was trying to show how little the doctrine of the Book of Mormon is in modern Church teachings, and that there is no mention of any temple ordnance in the BofM. What did I miss?
And lastly here is one I found and changed it up some.
So please share any fun Venn diagrams you have.
Wheat & Tares 
Your first Venn diagram should include beer, which is described in the Word of Wisdom as “barley for . . . mild drinks.” There wasn’t any other mild barley drink. The Word of Wisdom includes an understanding of the difference between fermented drinks like wine and beer and distilled drinks of much higher alcohol content which it calls “strong drink.” Although the Word of Wisdom was received in 1833 a few years after D&C 27 in 1830 where it says, “it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament.” The assumption now is that water is just fine or even preferable for the sacrament. But in the Word of Wisdom the Lord suggest that wine is to be used “only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him. 6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.”
Very interesting. Thinking in depth on each one brings up more questions..
My first pass observation was on Venn #4. How the temple and the book of mormon have no cross over. And more importantly how the temple and Jesus Christ have ZERO cross over.
I posted one on FB for biographies I have recently read: John Lennon, Trump, and Butch Cassidy.
I missed Faith’s observation the first time I looked at Venn #4. Perhaps the intersection of Bible, BoM, and Modern Teachings needs to be labeled somehow for Christ. On the other hand, one of the Church’s modern teachings is that “Everything in the temple points us to Jesus Christ. As we participate in temple ordinances, we are assured that He is mindful of us.” How could you get that into a Venn diagram that still shows the absence of temple liturgy in the BoM? Maybe it’s a notation in some part of the Modern Teachings set that doesn’t overlap with the BoM.
If you’re doing a Venn diagram that includes the “BOM” and “true doctrine”, you would think there would be more overlap. But the fact is, much of what we are told to believe has very little to do with the BOM but is instead sourced from the temple, D&C, P of GP, and GC talks. That seems strange to me given that we consider the BOM to be the most correct book ever.
Even when I was a TBM I couldn’t understand why the BOM was so incomplete. Why would the Lord go to all the trouble of preserving for us a record that really has so little to do with Church teachings and practices? I guess I justified it with some kind of line-upon-line argument or a “thank goodness for continuing revelation” mentality. But now that I’ve moved on, I recognize that JS was just building a theology piece by piece in the order he happened to stumble on things. For example: the King Follet discourse. It all starts to make more sense if you’re willing to acknowledge JS’s (not the Lord’s) random methodology.
Josh H, While the “most correct of any book on earth” is a quotation attributed to JS, I have suspected it is too often ripped out of context. In addition to and perhaps more important than the context of time, place and audience, and JS’ hyperbolic style, for me the rest of the sentence is important to understanding what could be meant by the first part. Perhaps by “most correct” he meant something like most helpful collection of precepts if the goal is to get nearer to God.
“I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.)
Of course, the BoM is also said to contain the fulness of the gospel. But that word “gospel” has a variety of meanings. Perhaps in the BoM it is limited to what the BoM says is the doctrine of Christ — a greatly more restricted “gospel” than many more modern LDS uses of the term.
Just wondering.
Wondering: you make an interesting point about the context of the phrase “most correct book” that we should consider. But whether you intended to do so or not you actually highlighted the point I was trying to make when you reminded us that we also say the BOM “contains the fullness of the Gospel”. Again, there is so much about “the Gospel” that seems to have nothing to do at all with the BOM. And I find this strange given that we say the BOM is the keystone of our religion.
As you say, maybe it depends on the definition of the word “Gospel”. I will say this: I believe that the BOM can indeed bring you closer to Christ than any other book. I really still believe that. But I think you can believe that AND also not believe that it is an actual history of an actual people. Inspired fiction can be very powerful. And it’s true that the BOM is much more Christ-centered then the other scriptures and the temple, so there is that.
I think what throws me off too is that we see members and leaders testifying that “I know the BOM is the word of God” but we don’t often see the same people saying “I know the P of GP is true” or “I know the D&C is the word of God” and yet so much of our theology depends on those, not the BOM. This would all represent a very complex venn diagram.
John Venn had a deep belief that all people should be actively engaged in serving each other through charitable endeavors. He strongly believed in morality.
Ironically, the Venn diagrams printed above demonstrate just how far modern society has moved from traditional morality.
The masses do what these diagrams do: pick and choose convenient parts of the whole in a way that justifies self-centered ideology. Picking and chowing rules according to what justifies behavior.
Josh H. Yes, “you can believe that AND also not believe that it is an actual history of an actual people. Inspired fiction can be very powerful.”
I don’t find the “keystone” analogy troublesome when I remember (1) that the BoM’s doctrine of Christ is a matter of faith in Christ (and His “good news” or “gospel”), repentence, baptism, Holy Ghost, and enduring to the end, and (2) that a keystone is a very small part of an arch — clearly not including most of the arch, even if it is what in effect holds it together.
Mr Charity: I think you meant to say “picking and choosing” not “picking and chowing”. Still thinking about hot dog eating contests?
According to the study below, “[t]he level of alcohol consumption that minimised harm across health outcomes was zero (95% UI 0·0–0·8) standard drinks per week.” Note that the study is focused on alcohol, not wine. Wine has ingredients other than alcohol, all of which can be found in other grape produces. The alcohol in wine is covered by the Lancet study. Alcohol belongs right next to tobacco on your Venn diagram.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31310-2/fulltext
lastlemming, good idea per the Lancet. I’ve added Alcohol to the tobacco intersection for future use!
Unfortunately, Church leaders are increasingly drawing Venn diagrams that exclude young people. If the current course continues, the Church will lose more an more youth.
The diagram of the Word of Wisdom is right on. The Church ignores about half of it, and includes things that are not in it. Members eat bacon wrapped lil’ smokies like there is no tomorrow, but shun anyone who drinks green tea? This makes no sense for health or spirituality. It certainly does not to the billions in Asia who the Church would proselyte to.
The diagram of Church teachings is also spot on. From the Adam-God theory to the priesthood ban to the name of the Church, young people can no longer be fooled into thinking that Church leaders never make mistakes. It would go a long way for leaders to admit that those in the past and those today are imperfect and can make mistakes.
I fear for what will happen if there is no change. My wife and I faithfully had scripture study and family home evening with our children. Countless Church leaders promised parents if they did these things, their children would not go astray. And yet most of children are inactive. Not because of “sin,” but because they see that the Venn diagrams being promoted don’t have room for them.
This is a fun exercise. A couple of snarky comments: for the Truth circle maybe add Truth about vaccines and how much (little?) it overlaps for the average member – this is a pet peeve of mine. Another Venn idea as a trained organist – you could have a circle with pianists who play the organ but don’t know anything about it, bishops who don’t know anything about music, and organists.
Maybe I’m the minority here, but the more I am exposed to them, the more I dislike Venn diagrams. Their most common use seems to be as “meme-creation” where the intent seems to be to prop up one particular worldview and belittle another by oversimplification and manipulation of relative sizes and locations of the responses. I find it a very deceptive method of presenting “data”. We think it is “data” because it is graphical, but in reality, there is no data there. The only purpose seems to be to make one’s own point of view look good at the expense of a rival.
I think it’s good that Bill doesn’t typically use this in his “data for dummies” presentations. They highly distort what is really going on purely by the format of the diagram.
You really ought to submit that D&C 89 Venn diagram to the Ensign (oops, the Liahona). One clear picture is worth a thousand words of confusing and often misguided explanation one gets from members and in manuals.
Crocs and sweatpants are both very comfortable.
I’m with Dave B in particularly liking the Word of Wisdom one. I always find Venn diagrams funny, but I have a hard time creating them.
Faith, zero connection between temple and Christ is inaccurate. Ahem…..handshakes with accompanying lecture.