Is It Wrong?

[JDave]

Just not right now. This life is as bad as the Universe gets....ever. Luckily it is relatively short, as pleasant as it often is, and it will never happen again. Plus those things are puerile compared to what real joy awaits in the heavens.

Again, I think we mostly agree. I do think that we often view that joy that awaits us as being the singular emotion that we will experience. This life is singular in its aspects of our limited understanding, and the effects of a fallen mortality, but I don't think that the pain we experience in this life is puerile. It is the foundation of wisdom and it will remain with us throughout the eternities.

[Flyonthewall]

Pain can also be an indicator that something just hurts. If a close friend or family member dies, I am not sure what part of the accompanying pain needs to be 'healed'. Certainly if there is no understanding of the resurrection, or a temporary faltering in that understanding, then some healing may well be in order. But even with a solid understanding of the Atonement, and of the doctrine of the resurrection and eternal life, there is still some pain and hurt that accompanies losing a dear one. Even while we lift up our heads and rejoice in the great Plan of Salvation, we yet feel the pain of loss. I don't know if this needs to be healed as much as it simply needs to be processed and truly felt.

Did God need to be fixed or healed when he felt such great pain over His wayward children that He wept?

I agree. The loss of a loved one will cause pain, and it is not sin that caused it, but that does not mean there is not a need of healing.

The pain the Savior experienced was brought on the bad choices of His wayward children.

I used the term "healing" because that came to mind at the time I first posted. Perhaps "process" or "felt" is a good alternative or supplement.

When my father died, I greived and was deeply saddened by it. I do not live each day with that sadness, because I have come to terms with it, felt it, processed it, and have "healed".

[mfbukowski]

It's a testament to the confusion possible in language that we use the same word for the sensation which occurs when we break a toe and the sense of devastating loss we can feel in the loss of a loved one, and also a testament to how confused words can make us when somehow we think that these two phenomena have something in common.

It's just silly.

[Messenger]

As I was thinking about pain recently, and its role in our lives, I pondered on how people react to pain -- particularly those who are religious.

Pain is part of our lives - Spiritual and Physical pain. Nobody is immune from it. I personally believe that we shouldn't seek it, I also believe it can be character- building when it is thrust upon us. I can tell you that I know people that have made very serious wrong choices in their lives, and they have, and/or will learn from the pain of their decisions. Yet, the Lord does not always spare us from these, even when we come to him and ask for guidance. Some pain isn't even a decision of ours, some is a result of the decision of others that impacts us. Many experience the pain of divorce, our children, and even the spouse, yet it only takes one person or spouse to file for divorce. It took me a while to understand why Heavenly Father would call me to a mission in Australia, only to come home for knee surgery after only a year there. Why would Heavenly Father tell me to marry my girlfriend, only to watch her leave after 7 years? Free agency can not be taken away, we all have choices to make, and lessons to learn. When we are in them, the pain of the moment, we often cant see beyond our pain. Sometimes we are alone, and feel there is nobody to turn to. Ultimately we learn that Heavenly Father is always there, even if people, friends and family are not. The lessons we learn prepares us for the next lesson, and so on, and so on until we learn the ultimate self-reliance prep of all time - that we are totally reliant on Heavenly Father for direction in every tragedy or pain we encounter. We learn from our own families what support can feel like, we learn to recognize it when our Heavenly Father supports us, after all, we are his family.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Messenger

[Log]

It's a testament to the confusion possible in language that we use the same word for the sensation which occurs when we break a toe and the sense of devastating loss we can feel in the loss of a loved one, and also a testament to how confused words can make us when somehow we think that these two phenomena have something in common.

It's just silly.

I just love it when my landlord posts banners about how much he loves his residents - I love to ponder if he loves me like my children love their Easter candy...

[mfbukowski]

I just love it when my landlord posts banners about how much he loves his residents - I love to ponder if he loves me like my children love their Easter candy...

Lol - exactly!

One of my buddies talks about how he loves animals- he says he thinks they are very tasty!

"To serve man" - remember that - what was it-- Twilight Zone? Nah you're too young!

It was about aliens who came to earth "to serve man"- for dinner!

Edited April 2, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Log]

That's the third reference to that episode I've run across in the last 3 weeks. Once in sacrament, once on DCPs blog, and now you. And yes, you guys are all in a common age range!

Edited April 2, 2012 by Log

[Buzzard]

"Life is pain, Highness."

While not as accurate as your statement, I do love "The Princess Bride".

"Anyone who says different is selling you something"

[Buzzard]

On a serious note, I find that I appreciate pain and the lessons it can teach me a lot more when it is in the past then when I am experiencing it.

[mfbukowski]

That's the third reference to that episode I've run across in the last 3 weeks. Once in sacrament, once on DCPs blog, and now you. And yes, you guys are all in a common age range!

Yeah- I think I read it in DCP's blog and it reminded me of it. As far as your sacrament meeting, I plead not guilty

[JDave]

I agree. The loss of a loved one will cause pain, and it is not sin that caused it, but that does not mean there is not a need of healing.

The pain the Savior experienced was brought on the bad choices of His wayward children.

I used the term "healing" because that came to mind at the time I first posted. Perhaps "process" or "felt" is a good alternative or supplement.

When my father died, I greived and was deeply saddened by it. I do not live each day with that sadness, because I have come to terms with it, felt it, processed it, and have "healed".

I think I see where you are coming from, but I don't see how we could apply the terms "healed" or "fixed" to God. He wept in pain over His children. Was there something wrong within Him?

Regarding loss of loved ones, or a wayward child, I have too often seen well-meaning members counsel those who are grieving that everything will work out so they don't need to worry, or grieve, or essentially they don't need to feel the pain. It is wrong to feel the pain and if we only understood the gospel better we would see how things really work and that would obviate the pain. Obviously I am expressing how I don't agree with that type of well-intentioned advice.

A similar thing happens when people tell us how much worse off others are. Or when a parent says "I'll give you something to cry about!" They are essentially invalidating the pain we are feeling, saying that it isn't real or proper since it doesn't rise to some arbitrary level. Just look back at post #7 and #12. This is more an example of saying "Your perception of pain is wrong", but I believe the effect is similar and equally damaging.

[Flyonthewall]

I think I see where you are coming from, but I don't see how we could apply the terms "healed" or "fixed" to God. He wept in pain over His children. Was there something wrong within Him?

It certainly seems odd to think that God would have something wrong, and is in need of healing or fixing.. I'm not trying to say that, but you have brought up a good point. Perhaps I will need to re-think the terms I use but hopefully you get the idea I was trying to convey.

Regarding loss of loved ones, or a wayward child, I have too often seen well-meaning members counsel those who are grieving that everything will work out so they don't need to worry, or grieve, or essentially they don't need to feel the pain. It is wrong to feel the pain and if we only understood the gospel better we would see how things really work and that would obviate the pain. Obviously I am expressing how I don't agree with that type of well-intentioned advice.

A similar thing happens when people tell us how much worse off others are. Or when a parent says "I'll give you something to cry about!" They are essentially invalidating the pain we are feeling, saying that it isn't real or proper since it doesn't rise to some arbitrary level. Just look back at post #7 and #12. This is more an example of saying "Your perception of pain is wrong", but I believe the effect is similar and equally damaging.

It does not matter how well we understand the atonement or the Plan of Salvation, losing a loved one is sad and causes grief or some sort of "pain".

Many years ago, when my father-in-law died, my BIL had a teen-ager that was a handful. My nephew could not understand why his dad was greiving and asked him what his deal was. My BIL told him his dad just died. His son's reply was that if we know we will see him and be together again, he shouldn't be sad. He told his son that even though we know that, it is still sad and we need to greive.

I'm not trying to invalidate any pain or greif because as you point out, even God was pained or greived over his loved ones.

[Tarski]

It's a testament to the confusion possible in language that we use the same word for the sensation which occurs when we break a toe and the sense of devastating loss we can feel in the loss of a loved one, and also a testament to how confused words can make us when somehow we think that these two phenomena have something in common.

It's just silly.

I don't think the fact that we use the same word in both cases is without significance and indeed both are examples of a general notion of "pain". They do have something in common-to say the least. There is of course a vast difference in magnitude and duration and other differences as well. However, the painfulness of a broken toe is not literally in the sensation as such. This may seem surprising and counter-intuitive, but anyone who has experienced a profound dissociative state of the right sort will get the point. It is possible to have exactly that sensation and just not care about it. It may even seem funny.

What makes it (the broken toe) painful (for a normal person in his or her right mind) is how we can't help but care about it: It frustrates us, disrupts us, distracts us from our normal goals and concerns, it bothers us deeply with a sense of urgency. Something is broken in our world, something stands in the way of the flow. We long for it to be different, to be gone. It demands attention, we wish we could do something about it. Without all that, the pain sensation/frission would be meaningless. Pain has existential meaning--a meaning of disruption. It matters.

Similarly, losing a loved one woulnd't be painful except that we care so much. It makes the world different than what we deeply wish for. It frustrates us, it eats on us, it disrupts us, breaks us, demand oour attention...etc.

They are both truly "painful".

So they are both pain- one little and focused and the other profound and lasting. Our use of the same word is no accident or mere lexical illusion of some sort.

It is also no coincidence that people turn to opiates to deal with both kinds of pain!

Oh and both make us cry!

.

.

.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Tarski

[JDave]

I'm not trying to invalidate any pain or greif because as you point out, even God was pained or greived over his loved ones.

I didn't mean to imply that you were doing so, though I can see that it wasn't clear. Your thoughts just brought something to mind that I wanted to address.

Wasn't there a conference talk back in October that talked about not trying to make the gospel sound 'better' than it is? The gospel does not cause flowers to bloom everywhere you walk and all your troubles to evaporate. Likewise the Atonement does not obviate pain, it provides the means to properly process pain and help things work to our eternal benefit. Like mercyngrace said earlier in the thread,

And ALL of it, if we so allow, permits "the works of God [to be] be manifest".

[mfbukowski]

I don't think the fact that we use the same word in both cases is without significance and indeed both are examples of a general notion of "pain". They do have something in common-to say the least. There is of course a vast difference in magnitude and duration and other differences as well. However, the painfulness of a broken toe is not literally in the sensation as such. This may seem surprising and counter-intuitive, but anyone who has experienced a profound dissociative state of the right sort will get the point. It is possible to have exactly that sensation and just not care about it. It may even seem funny.

What makes it (the broken toe) painful (for a normal person in his or her right mind) is how we can't help but care about it: It frustrates us, disrupts us, distracts us from our normal goals and concerns, it bothers us deeply with a sense of urgency. Something is broken in our world, something stands in the way of the flow. We long for it to be different, to be gone. It demands attention, we wish we could do something about it. Without all that, the pain sensation/frission would be meaningless. Pain has existential meaning--a meaning of disruption. It matters.

Similarly, losing a loved one woulnd't be painful except that we care so much. It makes the world different than what we deeply wish for. It frustrates us, it eats on us, it disrupts us, breaks us, demand oour attention...etc.

They are both truly "painful".

So they are both pain- one little and focused and the other profound and lasting. Our use of the same word is no accident or mere lexical illusion of some sort.

It is also no coincidence that people turn to opiates to deal with both kinds of pain!

Oh and both make us cry!

.

.

.

Nice! I knew there was a sensitive side in there somewhere!

[JDave]

... and, with specific reference to the quote from PP in the OP: she's got an unfortunate perspective on a very important matter. I plan on starting my own thread on the topic, but it will take a lot of time and research, and even then some will disagree.

I never saw any spin-off from PeppermintPatty's quote, but I think that it is quite related to the topic.

Sometimes I think we tend to view our struggles, weaknesses and temptations as a sign that we are not good or worthy. I know we, especially as women, can feel a tremendous amount of guilt or shame if we can't overcome them.

I think it's important to know that EVERYONE regardless of stature in the Church has struggles, weaknesses and temptations. We will only become perfected through the Savior in the next life.

I can see how women might be more prone to fretting and worrying that can lead to guilt or shame, but I know this is not limited to women. Should people feel guilty if they continue to struggle with a weakness or temptation that they just can't shake? That seems to be the thought behind Log's post.

[CV75]

Should people feel guilty if they continue to struggle with a weakness or temptation that they just can't shake?

Guilt is a proper response to sin, but I’m not sure it is a proper response to a weakness or a temptation (which don’t become sins until they are cultivated, entertained, or acted on).

I’m not sure how long one can actually continue to feel guilty when repeatedly committing a sin he knows is wrong without the intent to repent. I think such a person, truly wanting to change, may replace the feeling of guilt with an intellectual acknowledgement of his guilt, and then with an attitude of godly sorrow. This leads to a broken heart and a contrite spirit, opening up the way to receive strength in overcoming the sin. Such a person will not be without the sustaining support of the Spirit, and having faith in Christ, his guilt would be swept away as long as he is making progress in his repentance. Backsliding in such a scenario would naturally result in renewed feelings of guilt, but then he gets back on track, hopefully with greater confidence, wisdom and resolve than before.

Some people confuse sinful thoughts (including cultivating and honing unworthy desires) with externally-imposed temptations and weaknesses. Temptation can be cast off and weakness can be strengthened with faith. Not doing so would constitute sin. Temptation and weakness need not distract one from other areas of (or general overall) spiritual progress; overcoming them is a form of spiritual progress.

Some people equate things such as orientation and obsession with sinful thoughts, but such “clinical” problems may be a sin, the result of sin, or a symptom of something beyond their control, so great care needs to be taken in managing these kinds of struggles. It always helps in such cases to be engaged in good works, service, private religious observances, etc. so as a) not to give up on Christ; b) discern what is really going on.

The expression, “I just can’t shake it” to me conveys frustration and doubt more than it does guilt.

[Avatar4321]

I don't think pain or suffering are necessarily wrong. I think much good can come from it if we have the right attitudes. But I also know that Christ suffered to take away our pains.

[JDave]

I think such a person, truly wanting to change, may replace the feeling of guilt with an intellectual acknowledgement of his guilt, and then with an attitude of godly sorrow. This leads to a broken heart and a contrite spirit, opening up the way to receive strength in overcoming the sin. Such a person will not be without the sustaining support of the Spirit, and having faith in Christ, his guilt would be swept away as long as he is making progress in his repentance. Backsliding in such a scenario would naturally result in renewed feelings of guilt, but then he gets back on track, hopefully with greater confidence, wisdom and resolve than before.

First off, I think it is often difficult to gauge progress when one is still in the midst of weakness and temptation. Secondly, this is assuming there is something to repent of.

If we feel weakness or temptation we would want that to change as well, but should there be any guilt that needs to be swept away?

Some people confuse sinful thoughts (including cultivating and honing unworthy desires) with externally-imposed temptations and weaknesses.

I agree that there can be confusion there and cultivating sinful thoughts is sinful.

Temptation can be cast off and weakness can be strengthened with faith. Not doing so would constitute sin. Temptation and weakness need not distract one from other areas of (or general overall) spiritual progress; overcoming them is a form of spiritual progress.

Doesn't this lead to precisely those guilty and shamed feelings? If I can't get rid of my weakness, then that implies that I am not faithful enough to be spiritually progressing, and it even constitutes a sin. Consider something as simple as feeling that you need to reach out to people more but it is emotionally difficult to do so. If the weakness persists despite faithfully attempting to overcome it, does that constitute a sin?

Some people equate things such as orientation and obsession with sinful thoughts, but such “clinical” problems may be a sin, the result of sin, or a symptom of something beyond their control, so great care needs to be taken in managing these kinds of struggles. It always helps in such cases to be engaged in good works, service, private religious observances, etc. so as a) not to give up on Christ; b) discern what is really going on.

Agreed. There always needs to be a recognition that in our fallen world there truly are some things we have little control over, even within our own bodies at times. This shouldn't be sought after as an excuse, but it is important to remember that counsel and advice that may be an underdose for some people could easily be an overdose for others.

The expression, “I just can’t shake it” to me conveys frustration and doubt more than it does guilt.

True, unless that frustration is then associated with the lack of spiritually progressing, a lack of faith, and finally a sin.

[JDave]

I don't think pain or suffering are necessarily wrong. I think much good can come from it if we have the right attitudes. But I also know that Christ suffered to take away our pains.

But not necessarily all of our pains, right? I understand Christ as taking away our unnecessary pains, such as those caused by sin and misunderstanding, and pointing us to the proper path to avoid such pains. In addition to that I think that Christ and the Atonement, and an understanding of the eternal principles of truth within the gospel, allows us to better contextualize our pain and to allow it to work towards our eternal benefit.

[CV75]

If we feel weakness or temptation we would want that to change as well, but should there be any guilt that needs to be swept away?

No. I was talking about a person who feels guilt for sin, not for mere weakness and temptation--sorry if I wsn't clear on that. There is an article in the April Ensign by Elder Bednar (and some of its themes were repeated in his General Conference talk). It describes how we advance from overcoming sin to overcoming weakness by putting off the natural man (step 1) and becoming a saint (step 2). Guilt is appropriately tied to the first; not to the second. In addition, frustration and doubt have no part in either the first or second steps.

I believe that that one man's "putting off" can often be another man's "becoming," depending on how mcuh light he posesses (this means that usually these are same man at two different stages of spiritual progress).

Doesn't this lead to precisely those guilty and shamed feelings? If I can't get rid of my weakness, then that implies that I am not faithful enough to be spiritually progressing, and it even constitutes a sin. Consider something as simple as feeling that you need to reach out to people more but it is emotionally difficult to do so. If the weakness persists despite faithfully attempting to overcome it, does that constitute a sin?

There is nothing wrong with well-placed guilt and shame, which depends on the specifics of the individual suffering in the kind of situation you describe. I think the implication you draw may be a bit hasty. Not all failure to overcome weakness in this life is caused by less faith than the Lord expects of us at our current stage of development. Neither does all failure represent a willful disobedience to His commandments.

What constitutes “failure” is very individual and personal. People are sometimes too quick to condemn themselves, denying the Lord His due (they aren’t even dead yet, much less standing at the judgment bar!). I think that as long as we are giving a spiritual problem our level best, the needed strength to overcome it will develop in due time. Patience, humility and trust in the Lord, and recognition that His mercy and grace will eventually be granted are developed in the meantime, and many other important aspects of spiritual progress. This is the same attitude we are taught in obeying the commandment, “Be ye therefore perfect.” We do so by becoming “as a little child” which rarely happens overnight. The article and Elder Bednar’s talk explain these ideas much better.

True, unless that frustration is then associated with the lack of spiritually progressing, a lack of faith, and finally a sin.

I think I understand this. Frustration and doubt have no part in either the repentance (associated with guilt) or perfection (associated with submissiveness) processes, both of which are made possible by applying the Atonement of Christ.

[JDave]

No. I was talking about a person who feels guilt for sin, not for mere weakness and temptation--sorry if I wsn't clear on that. There is an article in the April Ensign by Elder Bednar (and some of its themes were repeated in his General Conference talk). It describes how we advance from overcoming sin to overcoming weakness by putting off the natural man (step 1) and becoming a saint (step 2). Guilt is appropriately tied to the first; not to the second. In addition, frustration and doubt have no part in either the first or second steps.

I believe that that one man's "putting off" can often be another man's "becoming," depending on how mcuh light he posesses (this means that usually these are same man at two different stages of spiritual progress).

Very good. I just wanted to make sure what you meant.

There is nothing wrong with well-placed guilt and shame, which depends on the specifics of the individual suffering in the kind of situation you describe. I think the implication you draw may be a bit hasty. Not all failure to overcome weakness in this life is caused by less faith than the Lord expects of us at our current stage of development. Neither does all failure represent a willful disobedience to His commandments.

That wasn't my implication, it was just the logical conclusion to your statement that not casting off temptation and weakness is a sin. That is, without the qualification you make here and below. I think we are in complete agreement.

What constitutes “failure” is very individual and personal. People are sometimes too quick to condemn themselves, denying the Lord His due (they aren’t even dead yet, much less standing at the judgment bar!). I think that as long as we are giving a spiritual problem our level best, the needed strength to overcome it will develop in due time. Patience, humility and trust in the Lord, and recognition that His mercy and grace will eventually be granted are developed in the meantime, and many other important aspects of spiritual progress. This is the same attitude we are taught in obeying the commandment, “Be ye therefore perfect.” We do so by becoming “as a little child” which rarely happens overnight. The article and Elder Bednar’s talk explain these ideas much better.

Very much agreed.

Edited April 6, 2012 by JDave

[The Nehor]

Regarding loss of loved ones, or a wayward child, I have too often seen well-meaning members counsel those who are grieving that everything will work out so they don't need to worry, or grieve, or essentially they don't need to feel the pain. It is wrong to feel the pain and if we only understood the gospel better we would see how things really work and that would obviate the pain. Obviously I am expressing how I don't agree with that type of well-intentioned advice.

It's good that these people have spiritually surpassed that guy weeping at the tomb of Lazarus. He obviously just didn't understand.

Edited April 6, 2012 by The Nehor

[The Nehor]

Some people confuse sinful thoughts (including cultivating and honing unworthy desires) with externally-imposed temptations and weaknesses. Temptation can be cast off and weakness can be strengthened with faith. Not doing so would constitute sin. Temptation and weakness need not distract one from other areas of (or general overall) spiritual progress; overcoming them is a form of spiritual progress.

Plus in Ether God makes it clear that he made us gave us weakness (not weaknesses). He did it for a reason; almost as a gift.