Is Divorce a Good Option in my Case?

Q.

I have been married for 20 years to my husband. We were sealed in the Temple 14 years ago. Over the past 5 or so years, my husband has slowly became less active. He tells me that he still has a strong testimony of the Gospel but feels the members are very judgmental.
My husband has pierced his ears and body recently. I am really struggling with this. We have teenage children and I feel this is sending a negative message to them. My children are not aware of his body piercings, but obviously see the 2 earrings in each ear.
My question is this... My husband told me today that he likes lip piercings. I do not agree with the piercings, I do not like the piercings, and feel like everyone is judging our family as well as my husband. When I told him how I felt he told me that I am trying to force him to be what I want him to be instead of what he wants to be. I am considering leaving my husband because I feel that we are heading in different directions with our lives. Am I wrong to be this upset over piercings?

A.

I think we have to look first at what he is feeling. People wanting to do things that make them look unusual are searching for an identity. He doesn't feel like he has an important role in society or your family life. He also would have the feeling that his opinions aren't listened to in church. When people start to get on they begin to look at their lives and wonder just who they are.

I don't know enough of your family situation and his job and calling situation to give absolute advice. However don't nag him about the piercings, as this will only further make him feel he has no role as decision maker in the home. He needs to feel your appreciation toward him. But you'll have to feel it if you want to be successful. Think of all his good points and the help he has been to you over the years.

Divorce is an ugly word, and it will pass down to your children the attitude that they can just leave a relationship when they aren't completely satisfied. The eternal family concept will fade in their minds.

As to members being judgmental at times, we all know that. Look at the Jews at the time of Christ. He got crucified. I'm sure your ward isn't that bad. I have spent years in Protestant churches, scouting, ambulance services, YMCA and business and other organisations. The church is better than any of those. It has to be remembered that the church is like a big family. And families can be got at by Satan to find fault with one another - As you mention with the piercings. There's a tendency for self-justification among all people. You have to remember that out of hundreds of members in your ward you obviously are going to get someone's back up. In fact I've seen it even in small branches. It is sad that this exists. Yet you need to help him understand that the answer isn't to run away, but to be an example of not joining in such squabbles. They need his help. As he hopes to one day be as Heavenly Father he needs to know how to deal with these problems.

I agree with you about the piercings. But while there is some vanity in this, it isn't something to divorce him over. Give him time.

I'd also suggest that you start asking him church centered questions. This will demonstrate that you value his religious opinion. Also increasing family times together would be good for him to feel his role as a Dad. Getting him to give your family religious instruction would be a good idea to keep his mind on the spiritual along with him feeling his role. Try to make a God out of the man you've got and even if he doesn't get there you will improve yourself.

Hang in there, is my advice.

What do Those in the Spirit World Do?

Q.

I just attended a friends funeral yesterday. She was of another Christian denomination and they made mention that we need not be sad because she is singing and dancing with Christ now. I began to wonder if this is what most Christians expect when they die? That Christ will be there to receive them.
Can you go into detail of what people do in the spirit world? Perhaps some of the differences for baptized individuals and non baptized persons.
Of all the billions that have been on this earth are they all still here waiting for Christ again? Perhaps Christ visits the spirit world still?
Thank You.

A.

The Protestant version of what you will be doing in heaven isn't exactly explained. There is the old version of lying down and eating grapes and playing harps. But different people have different thoughts on that. One religion believes we would spend eternity gardening - Alright if you enjoy gardening. Otherwise, too bad.

As to what people do in the spirit world; that is up to them. You can do whatever you wish; remembering that you only can control spirit matter with a spirit body mostly. You would remain upon the earth: This is where the work is for those wanting to help others. Preaching the gospel to other spirits is the greatest service a person can do in the spirit world. The ones I have seen, stand around talking or just hanging with a group. This creates opportunity for those wanting to discuss the gospel with someone interested.

There are those that still hang around friends or family, still living, that they have lived with and have a love for. They will sit and watch TV from their favorite chair, if that is vacated.

Differences for baptised and non-baptised individuals is the same as right here, as that is something that happens inside you. If you have been baptised of heart then you have the full joy of Christ dwelling in you all the time. The greater your commitment to the covenant of baptism the greater and permanent your joy. This goes with you into the spirit world. Your inner hell also goes with you if you haven't truly repented of all your sins. You will suffer until the full price is paid.

Everybody is waiting for their resurrection. Only the Terrestials and Celestials will be raised around the time of Christ's second coming. The others have to wait until sometime after the millennium. Some few have been raised since the resurrection of Christ. True joy comes from service, so the Celestials will help serve the Terrestials and the Terrestials will help serve the Telestials.

Christ or Heavenly Father can visit you at any time here, and this won't change by your physical passing.

Was the Earth made of Bits From Other Planets?

Q.

I can see where you are coming from and I agree with your response there are just a few things that I would like addressed as I believe they also pertain to the subject.
Several GAs are known to have said that the earth was in fact created from materials used to build other planets, giving credence to the truth that all matter cannot be created or destroyed only organized. So thus the earth could in fact be many billions of years old or perhaps even longer, who knows.
Most proponents of the genesis creation would argue that the earth is in fact approximately 6000 year old, which theory would appear to contradict modern science's belief in decay rates, carbon dating, and other forms of discovering just how old something is.
Thus it is natural for such individuals who's belief seems to have such a contradiction, to assume that Adam and Eve in fact existed in the garden for an incredibly long time in order to conform better with science's claims and the idea that the earth was only created in 6 days, with man being created on the 6th.
However even this would be fruitless even if one were to assume that days really referred to 1000 years, meaning the earth could then only be 12000 years old unless Adam and Eve dwelled in the garden or somehow kept in stasis for billions of years which would be quite unlikely or preposterous.
My question then is thus: Could the earth having already been used as material for other earths or just organized material that had existed for who knows how long before it became part of the earth if we tried to measure it based on our rather weak concept of time could then render the earth to actually be billions of years old as science claims?
Personally I think science really can't do what it says it can, as it so often is, but I would like your ideas on the subject if you have any.

A.
The Wikipedia claims the following in regard dinosaurs _

"They first appeared during the Triassic period, approximately 230 million years ago, and were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for 135 million years, from the beginning of the Jurassic (about 200 million years ago) until the end of the Cretaceous (66 million years ago)."

We, as Latter-Day Saints, know that all animals and life-forms (other than microscopic things) have a resurrection. That means we know that there was no dinosaurs from other planets upon this one: They would have all been resurrected. This means we know that there were no dead dinosaurs upon this planet even 6000 years ago. Yet they make these ridiculous and unscientifically supported claims of bones they've dated at millions of years old.

The theory that some GAs have presented that the earth must have been made from bits left over from other planets, seems an unsubstantiated guess. This is said also to somehow try and make an unholy alliance with the religion of "theory science" (the largest religion, by far, upon the earth). But 3 things oppose this idea.

One is that we know that this earth will be resurrected and become the Celestial Kingdom. And we speculate that therefore other planets will require resurrection for there to be other kingdoms. This demonstrates that planets get resurrected at the end. Meaning that no parts could have come from other planets. It would be unfair of God not to resurrect other planets. If their parts are in this earth then these other planets could have no resurrection of their body.

The second is that we'd have to chase way over to where the previous planetary system was to get these bits. And then drag them all the way back in large chunks. It would be far simpler and faster to just organise matter where we were.

Thirdly there is the demonstrated problems of these dating methods. Let me give you some examples _

I watched a program on TV that was discussing several skulls that had been found.

One of the dogmas of theory science is the idea that the size of that power supply in our head called a "brain" has some relevance to our intelligence (relative to our body size). Therefore they need to prove that where there is more size for a brain to exist in a skull the greater the intelligence of the being must be. This created a problem in that they had a skull dated at being millions of years older which had greater room in the skull - a terribly inconvenient problem for them. But, hey, they didn't let that stop them. They went all around the world and finally found a method that came up with a date that made the one with less space to be millions of years earlier. Scientific????

A skull was found in Australia of what they claimed had to be the forefathers of the current Australian aborigine. It was carbon dated as being 2,500 years old. But that wasn't appropriate because the aborigines can't have changed that much in such a small time (they had to prove the aborigines were the original inhabitants). So they declared that the date must be wrong because there was lime in the soil. Then they set off and tested varying systems of dating all over the world. They came out as being all under 10,000 years old (they even admit to this, what is more), in fact most were in the small numbers of thousands. Until finally, in the UK, they found one that gave the date they wanted (60,000 years old). Amazing this science!

Archaeologists discovered that the Persian Gulf had been going out for the last 2,000 years, by evidence of fishing villages being further back. Yet the geologists discovered that the Persian Gulf had been going in for the last 2,000 years. Of course upon discovering this discrepancy between the priests of theory science they formed a united front - a bit meaningless after the event.

My science book at school showed a picture of a supposed "New Stone Age" building. However they have since found a more modern town underneath. Oh, dear!

In high school my science teacher informed us that scientists said the rings around Saturn were definitely continuous in substance and of a liquid nature. However upon sending a probe past we found that they are formed of rocks and are separate from each other. None out of two! Tsk, tsk, tsk.

I remember watching a special on TV that talked of the supposed "Ice Age." They showed 3 areas in the world that demonstrated this substance in the layers, that they claimed to be evidence of this supposed age. Then, ON THE SAME PROGRAM, further along on a different subject, they showed layers over the same period in two other places. And guess what? NO Ice Age layers! Let me guess, they just didn't happen to notice that.

A Roman style sword was found, in Britain, that they figured would have been made in around 650 AD. They took it to be carbon dated. It was dated at 1380 AD! So much for carbon dating (again). But, hey, they didn't let that upset them, they took some wood samples from the rings of a tree in the area. They concluded 100 years for each ring and "recalibrated" their machine. After sufficient additional recalibration it then came to a date of 670 AD! Now that is better. Perhaps they should have just got one of their wives to date it at 650 AD and saved the money.

Then there was the most incredible one that I think even beats these. There was this scientist looking at old cave paintings in France. He noted that the people had obviously put paint in their mouths and blown it onto the wall with their hand in front, making a hand outline. He noted that this also happened in Japan. He then informed us that as the paintings in Japan were dated earlier than this it proved that the French were really from Japan originally. Having this great revelation of scientific logic I then thought upon the paintings that my children have done around their hands. And realising that the children in Japan had done the same thing many years before, I came to the great discovery that this proves we actually came from Japan too! Science????

If you need more examples (of which they seem endless) just watch any of the science programs on TV and think through what they are trying to get you to conclude. One trade mark of these shows is that they will start off saying, "this could have happened." And after saying that 2 or 3 times it goes to, "then when this happened." They've sucked the viewer in.

These "theory scientists" should stick to the truly provable areas of science and do something useful with their lives.

So all this leaves us with the knowledge that trying to mix the religion of "theory science" with God's religion is a futile gesture. Trust God, he was there.

Milky Way the Celestial Kingdom?

Q.

I don't know if you have read a book entitled The Kolob Theorem by Lynn M. Hilton. It proposes that God lives in the center of the Milky Way (that's the celestial kingdom) and that regions surrounding it are the terrestrial and telestial kingdom. And that the others galaxies follow this same pattern having their Gods in the centers. What do you think about all of this?

A.

This concept can be viewed by reading it at the following address _

http://www.ancientamerica.org/library/media/HTML/bkunbohc/Kolob%20Theorem%20Concepts.htm?n=0

The theory itself has no Scriptural backing, which means it can only be considered as wild conjecture. Unless a person receives personal revelation on such a subject or has some other evidence for such speculation I can't consider it as fact.

The Scriptural texts that have been quoted, while not opposing the idea, don't support the idea that it must be the milky way. Generally when people make such wild theories they are miles/kilometres from the truth.

Christ said, "worlds without number have I created." Then he said that people were on them. So that was just the ones that one son of Heavenly Father has created. Do you sense that one milky way just wouldn't hold all that God is doing?

Yes, Even More on Parents and Sealings.

Q.

The following is more a comment than a question, but I will answer it also _

This quote they are referring to is in regards to posterity. It is not to say that they can come into the CK in their sins but that it is a promise that they will come back, whether in this life or in the next....they will come back and it will be a thorny path and they will repent but through your faith they will come back...TPJS "Hope on, trust on, till you see the salvation of God"

A.

I only intend to answer this once more. You have not dealt with the objections that I presented to the idea. Answer these or I will not publish any further comment you choose to make on this subject.

Adam was the great archangel Michael in the pre-existence. Surely then his children will all be eventually saved into the Celestial Kingdom if we are to take these statements as absolutes.

In regard Cain the Lord said,

"If you do well, you shall be accepted. And if you do not well sin lies at the door, and Satan desires to have you; and except you shall listen to my commandments, I will deliver you up, and it shall be to you according to his desire. And you shall rule over him; For  from this time forward you shall be the father of his lies; you shall be called Perdition; for you were also before the world." Moses 5:23-24

Should we regard that such will be in the Celestial kingdom afterward: That the tentacles have reached out to save Cain? Will Cain repent? Of course not.

What of Lehi and Sariah with Laman and Lemuel? Are we to believe that we will be with Laman and Lemuel in the Celestial kingdom, repentance or no repentance? They will not become different people in the eternities. They have set their course as surely as Cain.

Or can a person commit the unpardonable sin and then be saved into the Celestial Kingdom because his father and mother were good people?

I suggest you stick to Scripture. And this idea is not only not supported in Scripture, it’s opposed irrefutably.