When are we the problem and when is it someone or something else?

[bluebell]

The General Conference Thoughts thread, where some of the discussion is on things that have caused hurt or are flat out wrong to have been taught or said by a leader, has me wondering.  How do we tell the difference between having a negative reaction to something because of the human fallibility of the person who wrote it or taught it (even in our prophets and apostles and the scriptures), and having a negative reaction to something due to own weaknesses or ego or baggage (or whatever else it might be)?

I've struggled with this question a lot personally for years and that other discussion has brought it to the forefront of my mind once again.  I certainly have negative reactions to things taught or done sometimes and I honestly struggle to know when that reaction is justified (for lack of a better term) and when it's a sign that I need to change/repent/heal/am in the wrong but don't want to accept it. 

It's often really hard for me to tell the difference between my own feelings and feelings that come from a godly place (again, for lack of a better way to describe it).  When I get upset about something, I don't know that the spirit could even correct me sometimes, because I am usually so sure that my feelings are justified.  But that's not what how I want to be so how can I get better at that?  At being able to recognize the difference between myself (and specifically my negative/hurt emotions) and the spirit?

Thoughts?  What do you do to tell the difference?  How do you know when you are justified in believing that you are struggling with something because of the faults of a leader or even the weaknesses in scripture?

Edited October 3, 2023 by bluebell

[tagriffy]

I'm not sure there really is a hard and fast answer to that question, especially when dealing with something in the moment. Time and distance is the only thing that has ever worked for me.

Edited October 3, 2023 by tagriffy

[MustardSeed]

Often times we are the problem!  Imo

that being said, I don’t think a negative reaction to a talk is wrong. When we understand a persons point of view and experience, their reaction is always going to make sense, (within reason, of course) 

as an example, I enjoyed President Nelson‘s address on Sunday. But one of my clients did not. I know my client very well and I can very well understand why he did not enjoy it. My client was removed from the church. He has a strong belief in the redeeming power of the Savior, and he believes with all of his heart, that if he saw The Savior that he would be perfectly loved, and perfectly understood. But…He felt marginalized by the same talk that I enjoyed. I cannot blame him for that. His life has been much more difficult than mine.

Edited October 4, 2023 by MustardSeed

[bluebell]

Just now, MustardSeed said:

Often times we are the problem!  Imo

that being said, I don’t think a negative reaction to a talk is wrong. When we understand a persons point of view and experience, their reaction is always going to make sense, (within reason, of course) 

as an example, I enjoyed President Nelson‘s address on Sunday. But one of my clients did not. I know my client very well and I can very well understand why he did not enjoy it. My client was removed from the church. He has a strong belief in the redeeming power of the Savior, and he believes with all of his heart, that if he saw The Savior that he would be perfectly loved, and perfectly understood. He felt marginalized by the same talk that I enjoyed. I cannot blame him for that. His life has been much more difficult than mine.

I think I get what you are saying on the whole but I'm not sure how to understand the "no negative reaction to a talk is wrong" thing.

I mean, if someone is committing adultery and gets mad at the Prophet for outlining how sinful adultery is, wouldn't that be a "wrong" reaction?

[The Nehor]

If I am angry I am inclined to think I am the problem. When I am sad I have no idea.

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If I am angry I am inclined to think I am the problem. When I am sad I have no idea.

I think sad is hard too.  Sometimes I know I'm feeling sad because I'm having a woe-is-me moment and feeling sorry for myself (in some weird attempt to make God feel sorry for me I think?  It's messed up), but other times yeah, sad is difficult to categorize for me too.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I think sad is hard too.  Sometimes I know I'm feeling sad because I'm having a woe-is-me moment and feeling sorry for myself (in some weird attempt to make God feel sorry for me I think?  It's messed up), but other times yeah, sad is difficult to categorize for me too.

Sometimes it is feeling sorry for myself. Sometimes it is sadness at a teaching presented as a fundamental truth (if X, then Y) that hasn’t worked in my life. Sometimes it is worry that what is said will alienate someone I care about. Sometimes it is just my regular depression oozing into everything.

[Rain]

To me it always comes down to "are you willing?"  I think talks will all hit us in a different way because we have different experiences. Those emotions are not wrong.  It's what we do with them that counts.  Are we willing to see if God is in those words and if we find he is are we willing to learn from them and follow them? 

That's why when I heard the talk I wanted to listen to the transcript - so I could let go of my hurt and see if God is in the words. 

@BlueDreams talks about messy things.  I think this is a messy thing.  I think some of us are going to be willing and may find God in a phrase - find it inspired. Some of us may be willing and not find him.  I used to think that the person who doesn't find Him in some talks was lacking.  Now I'm ok with just thinking "I don't know why you got different answers."  I am grateful when I find other people willing to be there with me.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Rain

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes it is feeling sorry for myself. Sometimes it is sadness at a teaching presented as a fundamental truth (if X, then Y) that hasn’t worked in my life. Sometimes it is worry that what is said will alienate someone I care about. Sometimes it is just my regular depression oozing into everything.

Emotions are so hard!  I find so much comfort in the belief that God can handle any sincere emotion, even the perceived negative ones. But sometimes I still feel guilty for having them. 

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

To me it always comes down to "are you willing?"  I think talks will all hit us in a different way because we have different experiences. Those emotions are not wrong.  It's what we do with them that counts.  Are we will to see if God is in those words and if find he is are we willing to learn from them and follow them? 

That's why when I heard the talk I wanted to listen to the transcript - so I could let go of my hurt and see if God is in the words. 

@BlueDreams talks about messy things.  I think this is a messy thing.  I think some of us is going to be willing and may find God in a phrase, find it inspired. Some of us may be willing and not find him.  I used to think that the person who doesn't find Him in some talks was lacking.  Now I'm ok with just thinking "I don't know why you got different answers."  I am grateful when I find other people willing to be there with me.

Good points. I’ve found a lot of peace in being willing to let people get different answers than I have as well. When I worry about my relationship with God and let other people handle their relationship with God, it goes a lot better for me.

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Emotions are so hard!  I find so much comfort in the belief that God can handle any sincere emotion, even the perceived negative ones. But sometimes I still feel guilty for having them. 

It comes down to what you do with them.  It's not the emotion - that is a neural process.  It's the action.  

Edited October 4, 2023 by Rain

[MustardSeed]

43 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I mean, if someone is committing adultery and gets mad at the Prophet for outlining how sinful adultery is, wouldn't that be a "wrong" reaction?

I don’t think so but I’m a therapist so maybe it’s word play.  I’d say “mad” might be an understandable reaction. 
 

let’s say, for example, that someone was married in the temple, and their partner was abusive and awful, and didn’t take showers. Then they met Mr. wonderful who treated them with respect and love, and for the first time they feel self-esteem, and let’s say that they even love Jesus more because of their experience. Then the prophet says “ people who have affairs are sinful”.  Well, that might make our subject mad. Is it wrong for them to be mad?
 

Let’s say somebody’s just a straight up narcissistic jerk face who gets away with having affairs because his wife is complicit for whatever reason. He hears the prophet say that that people who have affairs are wrong and need to repent. Narcissistic jerk face gets defensive, and decides that the prophet is weak in his stance.  Is it wrong to think that way?  Eh, probably.  But it’s easy to pick on the folks who are truly awful humans.  Problem is, I don’t know many of them. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by MustardSeed

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Emotions are so hard!  I find so much comfort in the belief that God can handle any sincere emotion, even the perceived negative ones. But sometimes I still feel guilty for having them. 

I often don’t trust the promises made anymore. I have been burned by them too many times.

[Tacenda]

I feel that God is bigger than talks in Gen Conf, and I will just stick with Him. 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

certainly have negative reactions to things taught or done sometimes and I honestly struggle to know when that reaction is justified (for lack of a better term) and when it's a sign that I need to change/repent/heal/am in the wrong but don't want to accept it. 

I am not sure it matters in most cases because I can practically guarantee at least in church the other isn’t going to change or remove it and we therefore need to find a way to adapt to it in our lives if we don’t want it to keep harming ourselves even if we are justified in our reaction, to figure out how we can turn it into something positive.  But telling ourselves we were wrong and dwelling on that or spending our time trying to find out if we were wrong or right focuses on the wrong thing (what we did or didn’t do, not what we can do) and typically  turns it into an exercise of guilt from what I have seen, making it that much harder to act in effective ways.  Better to just look at it and think how can I make this work for me and if you can’t, just put it aside as not relevant in your life at this time.  You more than likely already have plenty you are working on that fills your life with meaningful purpose.  You don’t always have to focus on something just because it pops up on your radar.   If it is something you actually need to face, I have no doubt God will give you other opportunities to rethink your conclusion.

If it is something we believe we should not only not accept and still need to do something about, maybe even publicly speak against it, then I would say the next step is studying it out as much as possible, praying while doing this that we will find an appropriate and useful way to address it.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Calm

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I feel that God is bigger than talks in Gen Conf, and I will just stick with Him. 

God IS bigger 

[Meadowchik]

In my experience it is easier now that I don't presume there's another human who speaks for God to me. That kind of go-between between my own conscience and myself can be very confusing.

[Kenngo1969]

I don't have any sage advice for how to deal with the problem raised in the opening post, and even if I did, I wouldn't expect anyone to take it.  Suffice it to say* that, pretty much, it's always easier to find an external source for a problem than it is to find (to admit) an internal source for a problem.  That's human nature.  It's much easier to say, "Lord, it's him!" [or, "It's her!"] than to ask, "Lord, is it I ?"

If a particular address doesn't sit well with me, my internal dialogue says, "Welp, if the glass slipper fits, Princess! ..."  Personally, as misguided as I might believe the counsel in a particular address to be, everything ain't gonna hit everybody the same way.  One person might believe that a particular address is "The Bee's Knees," while I be like, "Meh!"  (Or vice versa.)  Or it might not hit me like that right away, and it might not be until I read (or watch, or listen to) the address, sometimes even decades later that, finally, my own "Eureka!" moment hits.

Others' mileage may vary, but what I really (really) do have a hard time dealing with (don't ask; I won't have specific examples, so we'll simply have to agree to disagree if you think, in certain cases, that this particular reaction is justified) when people (especially Latter-day Saints) attribute bad motives to a speaker.  I be like, "Mmm-hmm.  You spoke in front of a live audience of tens of thousands and a televised or Internet audience of millions more last week and were like, 'Ain't no thang!'  Right?" 

If a particular address isn't for me, it isn't for me ... or perhaps that's true ... until decades later.  I really, really have a hard time with it when people attribute bad motives to speakers in General Conference.  ("I always knew he* was an uncaring, unfeeling jerk, and a dolt to boot!")  If that's the last thing the person ever says to me, I'd rather it be something he** thinks I need to hear (even if I believe he's mistaken) than for it to be something I want to hear.

What would I speak about it I had six months to prepare but only 10-15 minutes in front of that audience, and if, in my case, it would be my one-and-only shot (and which of the no-doubt myriad reasons available might somebody find to criticize my content and my delivery)?  In a perhaps-similar vein (or perhaps not) I might feel more comfortable in a ward across town or in another city or in another state than I do where my geographic boundaries dictate that I attend, but perhaps that's the very reason why we are expected to attend where we reside.  (Are we going to learn more if we're comfortable, or are we going to learn more [and, more to the point, perhaps, to learn what we need to know] if we're afflicted?)  Would life teach us anything valuable if, as Elder Neal A. Maxwell put it, it featured an endless string of green lights with empty parking spaces just in front of our destinations?  Sometimes it's useful to have, or to learn, charity even for people we believe are prophets, seers, and revelators.

Others' mileage may vary.  To each, his or her own.  My $0.02, actual value, as always, much less.

____________

*Then why the multiparagraph bloviating, Ken? Touché!

**Or she.  Speaking of which, all of the Sisters I heard knocked it out of the park.  (But, then again, maybe that's just me.)

Edited October 4, 2023 by Kenngo1969

[CV75]

14 hours ago, bluebell said:

The General Conference Thoughts thread, where some of the discussion is on things that have caused hurt or are flat out wrong to have been taught or said by a leader, has me wondering.  How do we tell the difference between having a negative reaction to something because of the human fallibility of the person who wrote it or taught it (even in our prophets and apostles and the scriptures), and having a negative reaction to something due to own weaknesses or ego or baggage (or whatever else it might be)?

I've struggled with this question a lot personally for years and that other discussion has brought it to the forefront of my mind once again.  I certainly have negative reactions to things taught or done sometimes and I honestly struggle to know when that reaction is justified (for lack of a better term) and when it's a sign that I need to change/repent/heal/am in the wrong but don't want to accept it. 

It's often really hard for me to tell the difference between my own feelings and feelings that come from a godly place (again, for lack of a better way to describe it).  When I get upset about something, I don't know that the spirit could even correct me sometimes, because I am usually so sure that my feelings are justified.  But that's not what how I want to be so how can I get better at that?  At being able to recognize the difference between myself (and specifically my negative/hurt emotions) and the spirit?

Thoughts?  What do you do to tell the difference?  How do you know when you are justified in believing that you are struggling with something because of the faults of a leader or even the weaknesses in scripture?

I’m not sure if the difference matters since no one is perfect, everyone and everything is fallible but God. What does matter is our walk and conversation with the Lord as we deal with negative experiences and leverage them for our improvement and the blessing of others. If the difference is important, from my experience it most often comes in hindsight, after finding forgiveness for myself and others (usually concurrent processes).

There is also a talk by Elder Bednar (and others) about telling the difference between our own thoughts and inspiration from the Spirit (or the devil). As long as it brings good works, feelings and becoming like Christ, it is considered ultimately rooted in the Spirit, whether in terms of current inspiration, remembering past inspiration, or having become more sanctified.

[Rain]

21 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I don't have any sage advice for how to deal with the problem raised in the opening post, and even if I did, I wouldn't expect anyone to take it.  Suffice it to say* that, pretty much, it's always easier to find an external source for a problem than it is to find (to admit) an internal source for a problem.  That's human nature.  It's much easier to say, "Lord, it's him!" [or, "It's her!"] than to ask, "Lord, is it I ?"

If a particular address doesn't sit well with me, my internal dialogue says, "Welp, if the glass slipper fits, Princess! ..."  Personally, as misguided as I might believe the counsel in a particular address to be, everything ain't gonna hit everybody the same way.  One person might believe that a particular address is "The Bee's Knees," while I be like, "Meh!"  (Or vice versa.)  Or it might not hit me like that right away, and it might not be until I read (or watch, or listen to) the address, sometimes even decades later that, finally, my own "Eureka!" moment hits.

Others' mileage may vary, but what I really (really) do have a hard time dealing with (don't ask; I won't have specific examples, so we'll simply have to agree to disagree if you think, in certain cases, that this particular reaction is justified) when people (especially Latter-day Saints) attribute bad motives to a speaker. 

I don't like that either. 

I find though that sometimes people also attribute bad motives to a listener who doesn't agree with a talk even if they don't actually say anything about the speaker, but about the words of the talk.

Humans and communication can be frustrating sometimes! 🙂

21 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I be like, "Mmm-hmm.  You spoke in front of a live audience of tens of thousands and a televised or Internet audience of millions more last week and were like, 'Ain't no thang!'  Right?" 

If a particular address isn't for me, it isn't for me ... or perhaps that's true ... until decades later.  I really, really have a hard time with it when people attribute bad motives to speakers in General Conference.  ("I always knew he* was an uncaring, unfeeling jerk, and a dolt to boot!")  If that's the last thing the person ever says to me, I'd rather it be something he** thinks I need to hear (even if I believe he's mistaken) than for it to be something I want to hear.

What would I speak about it I had six months to prepare but only 10-15 minutes in front of that audience, and if, in my case, it would be my one-and-only shot (and which of the no-doubt myriad reasons available might somebody find to criticize my content and my delivery)?  In a perhaps-similar vein (or perhaps not) I might feel more comfortable in a ward across town or in another city or in another state than I do where my geographic boundaries dictate that I attend, but perhaps that's the very reason why we are expected to attend where we reside.  (Are we going to learn more if we're comfortable, or are we going to learn more [and, more to the point, perhaps, to learn what we need to know] if we're afflicted?)  Would life teach us anything valuable if, as Elder Neal A. Maxwell put it, it featured an endless string of green lights with empty parking spaces just in front of our destinations?  Sometimes it's useful to have, or to learn, charity even for people we believe are prophets, seers, and revelators.

Others' mileage may vary.  To each, his or her own.  My $0.02, actual value, as always, much less.

____________

*Then why the multiparagraph bloviating, Ken? Touché!

**Or she.  Speaking of which, all of the Sisters I heard knocked it out of the park.  (But, then again, maybe that's just me.)

 

[Maestrophil]

I find for me, just like the disciples at the Last Supper, I can rarely go wrong starting by asking "Lord, is it me?"  Being as flawed as I am, and as human, I can likely always find a way to take even the harshest sounding advice to heart in some way, and then temper my tendency towards guilt, shame, sadness, or anger by remembering that The Atonement was made to cover all those things and make me strong and capable - especially if I am humbly striving to do my best.  

Don't know if that helps, but that is what has helped me not become offended, discouraged, or desire to leave the fold when I feel stung by talks or counsel of the brethren or local leaders and members .  

Edited October 4, 2023 by Maestrophil

[rpn]

It helps me when I remember the times that I have sought to do His will in a calling, thought I WAS doing His will, only to know for certain at some later point, that I had not.   I just never assume infallibility or that what I'm hearing applies to me  automatically and independent of my own review to see what I can take from it to help me in my journey with Him and my fellow mortals.

And because of those experiences I have personally had knowing ultimately that what I thought I was doing right wasn't, means I just automatically act on the idea that I'm entitled to get my own spiritual confirmation and need to do the work (either then, or sometimes not then, just leaving it as "not my problem" at the moment) to determine what the Lord expects me to do with that information at this time.

[Pyreaux]

I think I have a few theological differences with the brethren, while I think they have more important matters I believe they are inspired to deal with. I feel I have the gift of knowledge but envy the gift of wisdom. I feel at times the Saints know less, they seem to be pulled to the right path, they somehow know and do the right things without really knowing. How they function this way is a miracle. And if "my truth" is not tempered may cause too much strife, so I only voice a few scriptural concepts at a time. I understand they don't read the books I do, yet often can feel the basic truth, they may know more but they rein themselves in too. Not all truths are useful.

 

 

[Vanguard]

17 hours ago, bluebell said:

The General Conference Thoughts thread, where some of the discussion is on things that have caused hurt or are flat out wrong to have been taught or said by a leader, has me wondering.  How do we tell the difference between having a negative reaction to something because of the human fallibility of the person who wrote it or taught it (even in our prophets and apostles and the scriptures), and having a negative reaction to something due to own weaknesses or ego or baggage (or whatever else it might be)?

I've struggled with this question a lot personally for years and that other discussion has brought it to the forefront of my mind once again.  I certainly have negative reactions to things taught or done sometimes and I honestly struggle to know when that reaction is justified (for lack of a better term) and when it's a sign that I need to change/repent/heal/am in the wrong but don't want to accept it. 

It's often really hard for me to tell the difference between my own feelings and feelings that come from a godly place (again, for lack of a better way to describe it).  When I get upset about something, I don't know that the spirit could even correct me sometimes, because I am usually so sure that my feelings are justified.  But that's not what how I want to be so how can I get better at that?  At being able to recognize the difference between myself (and specifically my negative/hurt emotions) and the spirit?

Thoughts?  What do you do to tell the difference?  How do you know when you are justified in believing that you are struggling with something because of the faults of a leader or even the weaknesses in scripture?

Great question(s). I think the first step (which I believe is the point of your post) is to remind ourselves that just because we have a negative emotional reaction to something does not mean we are therefore justified in claiming the entity causing the reaction is in the wrong. Powerful emotional reaction is not always synonymous with legitimate grievance. Yes, we have a right to any emotion we want though we do not have a right to therefore claim we have been legitimately grieved.

With that, I find it helpful to remind myself the art of communication is fraught with potential pitfalls even when said communication comes from those whom we respect. I suspect many times (virtually always?) the communicator does not intend to offend anyone. Perhaps it is simply a reflection of their own ignorance regards to the impact their message might have. Could they be more insightful and sensitive? Sure. Was it malicious? I doubt it. I think we could all stand to learn that lesson.  And similarly, at times it would be good to thoroughly examine our own emotional world. Could we be allowing ourselves to be led too much by our emotions? I believe it happens all of the time. It looks like both communicator and listener have much to ponder.

There is much more to be said about this. ; )

Edited to add now that I have read the other posts: I personally wouldn't emphasize feeling guilty about one's emotional reaction. Your emotions do not carry much valence in my mind but rather, what are my behaviors as a result? Is said reaction helping me move forward or contributing to keeping me mired.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Vanguard

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Vanguard said:

Your emotions do not carry much valence in my mind but rather, what are my behaviors as a result?

Usually it is violence.