The Trials That Don’t Go Away

[amykeim]

2 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Two points:

1) We are not completely separated from "Babylon" on our mission. I know missionaries who embraced "Babylon" even on their mission.

2) Anxiety isn't a brain disorder. Let's review scriptures from the Book of Mormon:

Jacob 2:3, "but I this day am weighed down with much more desire and anxiety for the ^awelfare of your souls than" (emphasis mine)

Jacob 4:18, "I will unfold this mystery unto you; if I do not, by any means, get shaken from my firmness in the Spirit, and stumble because of my over anxiety for you." (emphasis mine)

To some degree the majority of the population experiences "anxiety." Even our prophets of old recognized how "anxiety" is able to increase our desires, and our "over anxiety" can cause us to fear more than we should, and I find Jacob's words enlightening that over anxiety can cause us to stumble and be shaken from a firmness in the Spirit. (obviously, Jacob probably used a different word than anxiety, but that is how the Lord translated the word used by Jacob)

As one who struggled with anxiety, it took me four years to overcome a specific over anxiety I faced. There is an aspect in my life where I have to watch my levels, and I haven't yet found/discovered the root of this anxiety. Anxiety doesn't "need" to be treated; however, if a person feels therapy or medicine will help that is a personal choice. Line upon line, precept upon precept, over four years (two of those on my mission) the Lord showed me the catalyst to my over anxiety and through the atonement helped me to overcome.

Anxiety in and of itself is not bad (not a brain disorder), over anxiety is what we have to watch for in ourselves.

 

 

Have you read “Like a Broken Vessel”? Not everyone has clinical anxiety and depression, but some — like Elisha — actually have chemical imbalances that cannot just be fixed by sheer willpower. And anxiety IS classified as a disorder, especially depending on what type of anxiety you have — there are panic disorders, generalized anxiety disorders, etc. 

Also, Elisha is a beautiful, wonderful person, and it makes me sad that instead of sympathizing with the struggles she faces and applauding her for turning to God in her moments of darkness, people want to focus on how her struggles with anxiety may stem from her own poor choices regarding what music she listens to or television she watches. 

Of course what we watch, listen to, and allow into our homes and lives affects us — but I think the things the author mentions aren’t worthy of the condemnation people on this post have issued and I think it’s a huge stretch to say that they are the root of her anxiety.

Edited June 19, 2019 by amykeim

[Guest Mores]

42 minutes ago, Vort said:

Ennui is French for "boredom", and it has that basic connotation in English. Ennui is a restlessness, a deep dissatisfaction with one's condition, about which one can seemingly do but little. It's actually intimately related to boredom. If we suffer from spiritual ennui, the likeliest cause is that we're spiritually flabby and out of shape. We're probably spending our time "nourishing" our spirits with the so-called entertainment of Babylon and adopting Babylon's foolish, short-sighted ideas as our own to champion. The solution to spiritual ennui is always the same: Come out of Babylon and gather to Zion.

Since Elder Uchtdorf introduced us to Weltschmerz a General Conference or two ago, here's an article to help you decide whether you're suffering from angst, ennui, or Weltschmerz. Good luck, soldier!

Conversely, "Elenyi" means "Sunshine".  (That's for you, Mr. Technical Writer).  -- Completely unrelated.  But I originally got the two mixed up.

And "Enya" means "kernel of a nut or seed."

Edited June 19, 2019 by Mores

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, amykeim said:

Elisha, the primary author of this post, talks about struggling with anxiety since she was a very, very little girl — during a time when she probably watched "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood" rather than "Breakfast at Tiffany's," when "The Good Place" wasn't out, and when her music choices probably consisted mainly of primary songs. I don't think her lack of morality — or associating with people or things that are morally repugnant — was an issue at that point. She also talks about experiencing deep, debilitating anxiety on her mission, a time when you're completely separated from "Babylon." 

Similarly, she said nothing about the Church needing to reorient itself; instead, she focused on how Heavenly Father has helped her through her trials. 

Anxiety is a real, genuine brain disorder that needs to be treated through therapy and sometimes medicine — rather than pointing the finger at all the things you think she's doing wrong by associating herself with "bad" things, perhaps we could consider that she has a real, psychological problem that needs addressing and that simply changing what she watches on the television isn't going to fix the problem.

I don’t believe I said it would completely fix the problem, Amy.  Nor did I say that it was the exclusive cause of the problem.  Nor did I state that anxiety is not a bona fide psychological problem potentially warranting therapeutic intervention. 

I did, however, fully intend to suggest that modern Babylon exacerbates the situation in ways we are frankly unwilling to acknowledge; and that it is incongruous to expect full healing while remaining steeped in Babylonish attitudes and practices.  

And I stand by that.  

Whatever cultural vices Sister Ransom may have forsaken during her mission—she apparently went right back to seeking at least some of them out, once she got home.  Indeed, she wrote an article describing her choice to seek solace in a Beatles song rather than Church; and lionizing two frankly degenerate shows as a source of resolution to her problems, rather acknowledging them as at best an exacerbating factor in her spiritual challenges.  (“You know, I was watching this porn flick the other day, and the pizza delivery guy character said something I found incredibly thought-provoking in the context of this week’s priesthood lesson about strengthening our marriages . . .”)

There are challenges that stay with us because that’s the nature of the challenge.  But there are also challenges that stay with us merely because we aren’t willing to pay the price it would take to be well and truly rid of them.  Until we’ve laid everything on the altar to try to make those challenges disappear—including resolving to permanently lay aside trash cultural icons like those mentioned in the article—we probably won’t be well-served by suggesting that those challenges were divinely ordained to be insurmountable.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

11 minutes ago, amykeim said:

I think the things the author mentions aren’t worthy of the condemnation people on this post have issued

I must have missed the condemnation. I've seen discussion, speculation, and tangents, but not condemnation.

[amykeim]

11 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I don’t believe I said it would completely fix the problem, Amy.  Nor did I say that it was the exclusive cause of the problem.  Nor did I state that anxiety is not a bona fide psychological problem potentially warranting therapeutic intervention. 

I did, however, fully intend to suggest that modern Babylon exacerbates the situation in ways we are frankly unwilling to acknowledge; and that it is incongruous to expect full healing while remaining steeped in Babylonish attitudes and practices.  

And I stand by that.  

Whatever cultural vices Sister Ransom may have forsaken during her mission—she apparently went right back to seeking at least some of them out, once she got home.  Indeed, she wrote an article describing her choice to seek solace in a Beatles song rather than Church; and lionizing two frankly degenerate shows as a source of resolution to her problems, rather acknowledging them as at best an exacerbating factor in her spiritual challenges.  (“You know, I was watching this porn flick the other day, and the pizza delivery guy character said something I found incredibly thought-provoking in the context of this week’s priesthood lesson about strengthening our marriages . . .”)

There are challenges that stay with us because that’s the nature of the challenge.  But there are also challenges that stay with us merely because we aren’t willing to pay the price it would take to be well and truly rid of them.  Until we’ve laid everything on the altar to try to make those challenges disappear—including resolving to permanently lay aside trash cultural icons like those mentioned in the article—we probably won’t be well-served by suggesting that those challenges were divinely ordained to be insurmountable.

She said she was so anxious, she had to get out of church, then sat at home organizing gummy bears and listening to the same Beatles song on loop for two hours — something was obviously very, very wrong. Please do not condemn her for not being in church when something was obviously going very wrong in her brain.

[Just_A_Guy]

8 minutes ago, amykeim said:

She said she was so anxious, she had to get out of church, then sat at home organizing gummy bears and listening to the same Beatles song on loop for two hours — something was obviously very, very wrong. Please do not condemn her for not being in church when something was obviously going very wrong in her brain.

It’s not a matter of condemning her, or making her out to be a terrible person.  

It’s a matter of learning from her experiences, which I presume is why she (quite bravely) put them out there for public consumption.

Its a matter of pointing out that from an objective standpoint, there’s stuff that hurts and stuff that heals.

The Beatles, on the whole, does not heal—it hurts.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s does not heal—it hurts.

The Good Place does not heal—it hurts.

 

The Atonement is powerful.  But it should be noted that it wouldn’t have to be so powerful, if we all didn’t run around cavalierly engaging in stuff that so potently undermines the changes that the Atonement was designed to effect.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

5 hours ago, Vort said:

I must have missed the condemnation. I've seen discussion, speculation, and tangents, but not condemnation.

All discussion is condemnation. Apparently.

[amykeim]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

All discussion is condemnation. Apparently.

Haha, I see you throwing shade at me! 

I used that word twice: first, applying it toward how Breakfast at Tiffany’s, the Beatles, and the Good Place have essentially been labeled as morally repugnant (which fits into the definition of condemnation, since they’re being strongly disapproved); second, when I felt that Elisha was being judged harshly (again, strong disapproval or condemnation) for leaving church one Sunday because she was so anxious. 

I think it fit in both places I used it, Daniel Tiger, but I’m sorry if I’m being too sensitive.

Edited June 20, 2019 by amykeim

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, amykeim said:

Haha, I see you throwing shade at me! 

I used that word twice: first, applying it toward how Breakfast at Tiffany’s, the Beatles, and the Good Place have essentially been labeled as morally repugnant (which fits into the definition of condemnation, since they’re being strongly disapproved); second, when I felt that Elisha was being judged harshly (again, strong disapproval or condemnation) for leaving church one Sunday because she was so anxious. 

I think it fit in both places I used it, Daniel Tiger, but I’m sorry if I’m being too sensitive.

I'm quiet supportive of anyone that wants to condemn Breakfast at Tiffany's or the Beatles or The Good Place.

But no one condemned Elisha.

Suggesting someone might consider a different course isn't condemnation. Suggesting that a course someone chose might be harmful isn't condemnation.

When someone goes home from church because they're feeling over anxiety -- that's one thing. But when they choose to listen to a Beatles song over and over again then the suggestion that maybe that wasn't the best choice isn't condemning. It's a suggestion that there might be a better choice.

And as @Just_A_Guy said, it's by way of consideration as to how we (meaning how I, for myself) ought to choose. I consider it in terms of what media, etc., I should be consuming -- especially on a Sunday.

I'm not sure I agree with @Just_A_Guy on the evils of the Beatles and Breakfast at Tiffany's per se. But it's certainly an idea worth consideration, and definitely doesn't suggest condemnation of anyone any more that suggesting that eating donuts might not be the best choice for someone struggling with poor health. It's basically saying that if we are spiritually unhealthy then we probably ought to not eat spiritual junk food.

[carlimac]

What if Blackbird is sung by Gentri? Does that make it ok to listen to? https://youtu.be/oRrTPi4DoCE

[Guest Mores]

Announcing a collaborative project with Home Free, Elenyi, Piano Guys, and Van Halen performing the soundtrack to All That Jazz.

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, carlimac said:

What if Blackbird is sung by Gentri? Does that make it ok to listen to? https://youtu.be/oRrTPi4DoCE

I'm not sure the implication or inference is meant to be that Blackbird is not ok to listen to.

[carlimac]

14 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm not sure the implication or inference is meant to be that Blackbird is not ok to listen to.

It comes across that way.  "The Beatles, on the whole, does not heal—it hurts." - JAG

Edited June 21, 2019 by carlimac

[The Folk Prophet]

11 hours ago, carlimac said:

It comes across that way.  "The Beatles, on the whole, does not heal—it hurts." - JAG

Understood. But I think the "on the whole" is important. The Beatles had millions of people who worshiped them as idols. Their message(s) and personas were not exactly wholesome. They drove a lot of teenagers into wickedness in their days. They became icons of a movement that is still at the root of family destruction, elicit sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. But that doesn't mean every instance of every song from them is evil and corrupting in every circumstance.

Once again, I'll use the donut analogy (Or other junk food). Saying "Donuts, on the whole, do not heal, they hurt" cannot and should not reasonably translated to mean, "never, ever, ever eat a donut no matter what!"

But if one is treating a donut as if it's health food, then one needs to be informed...donuts, on the whole, do not heal, they hurt!