mrmarklin

No one likes straight talk I guess. The child's father had to get a restraining order!!!!! Wake up people! If that's not abuse I don't know what is, and frankly it doesn't seem like the mother did enough to protect her son, So I repeat: Shame.

We must always remember that in many ways most of the epistles are out of context in the sense that they were presumably replying to specific problems in the various churches to which they are addressed. We do not have the correspondence nor are we privy to the events that instigated the replies, we can only infer what some of the problems and questions were. Therefore, while I realize that all this is scripture it is in some sense out of context.

Shame on you for making your son endure 7 years with this abusive man. You should leave now. I hope your son can forgive you.

None of the clothing etc has anything to do with your salvation. But remember the temple is a learning experience, and all these things are there to reinforce what you are learning in the ceremonies. We not only learn with our ears, but also our eyes and actions etc.

I see both sides of this going to the Bishop. Why not go to a neutral party such as a marraige counselor first? Most Bishops are not trained in this (although I'm sure they see more stuff than they want). The counselor may have some very valuable insights into the situation, while the Bishop's priorities can be much different. Such as counselling her to hang on to a lost situation, or having the husband in his office ASAP to begin the repentance process. Why not iron out some of these issues before clergy gets involved? I agree the OP needs counselling ASAP.

You said you had a rocky start to begin with. Apparently nothing has changed. You need to move on and get your own life in order. I doubt you are truly in love, but sexual activity can lead to that false assumption. He certainly doesn't love you because if he did he would respect you more.

AFAIK all temples have a "Holy of Holies". The Oakland temple does, and its location was once pointed out to me.

Science accepts that everything is either energy or matter except the vacuum of space, I suppose. So by definition something cannot be created from nothing, because nothing does not exist in nature. AFAIK there is nothing in the bible that states the world was created from nothing. To believe this is patently absurd.

Yes Fairchild, actions do speak louder than words..............................

It's good to see someone move forward with life instead of "hanging on" to a lost cause.

I personally know a person who converted his (future) wife on his mission, went back after he got home and married her. They are now sending their children on missions.

Line upon line, precept upon precept. No one, not even God expects you to do everything all at once. Try doing one thing at a time. And gradually build upon that.

I've never been a Bishop, but I know selfishness when I see it, and as has been stated by other posters, your family should be worth something......

Please quit being selfish. Your youngest child is 6 and deserves to be raised in an intact family. Your husband is obviously not a monster, so this is really all about YOU, isn't it??? Your children deserve better, assuming that they don't know how you really are.

Photoshop.................................

Obviously clothing is cultural. I've notice that on this discussion none of you can seem to get away from your North American roots. In Latin American LDS services it's very common for many if not most male members not to wear ties because of economics, or climate or social status. I live near Silicon Valley, and wearing a tie at work is now almost a non-event unless one is in sales, or in court! That does not mean everyone wears cheap Wal-Mart clothing. People in Silicon Valley I daresay are among the most expensively dressed in the nation. Witness the price of casual clothing at Saks or Nordstrom. I haven't worn a tie since 2000 and I'm a CPA. I gave away all my suits, and had to buy one when my daughter married a couple of years ago! I generally go to church wearing a shirt and tie (never a white shirt I hate them!) without any jacket. The leather soled shoes are almost history as well, I only have two pair left, and when they're gone they're gone. Most guys wear jackets and ties, but not everyone any more. Some women come occasionally in pantsuits. But all in all I would say everyone is well-dressed in California style. No one has showed up wearing a Burka. Some of the Polynesian men wear a skirt (called a Lava lava) with their shirt and ties. I wouldn't consider them underdressed by any means. I think most of you are making too big a deal of this. The tie did not become common until the early 1800s, and was popularized by a fashion dandy named Beau Brummel. Women's fashions have been all over the lot since then. A white wedding dress was worn and popularized by Queen Victoria. Before that they could be of any color and were. My point is that all this stuff is a passing fancy. Wear what you want, with all due respect!

I know for a fact that in the local Catholic churches just about anything goes that's not totally outrageous. By that I mean jeans for both men and women, even shorts (not too short) have been noted on hot days. In general I'd say us Mormons are more formal, at least here in the US.

Members of the Church should be the foremost environmentalists on the planet. After all we are the stewards of this world that God has given us. Unfortunately the environmental movement has sometimes given itself a bad name because it has been hijacked by self serving political forces, various NGOs and educational institutions that will say and do almost anything to get their next grant. Or to gratify whatever pet hobby-horse that may pique their fancy.

Well, Mexican culture is a lot closer than one would think, and the language is farther apart! Just got back from Spain, and though I'm a fluent Spanish speaker at times I felt the need of a dictionary to translate the menu! The tortillas are not the same...................

While I would agree with Loumouth's take on self reliance, the fact remains that most of us in the West are anything but. With the world itself becoming increasingly interdependent, we would have to rely on our families, friends and yes, even the authorities to maintain our very lives. One would not want to be independent, and in fact the vast majority could not.

You don't say whether you have children or not. If not, I would say move on with your life. If you have children, you should stay for them, and raise them properly.

jmpcs, You're probably correct in your surmise.

It's lucky your sister didn't marry your husband!!!!

You are not married. You owe this person nothing. What you're seeing now is only a preview of your possible married life together. That is why it's called "dating", to see if you're compatible and a "match". This relationship is not a match. Cut your losses.

Matthew0059, Here is an excerpt from last year's Sunday School manual of the Old testament: "President Kimball taught: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was restored in 1830. … This is the kingdom, set up by the God of heaven, that would never be destroyed nor superseded, and the stone cut out of the mountain without hands that would become a great mountain and would fill the whole earth” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1976, 10; or Ensign, May 1976, 8–9). • What did Daniel prophesy concerning the Church in the latter days? (See Daniel 2:34–35, 44.) a. Be “cut out without hands” (Daniel 2:34). b. Become “a great mountain, and [fill] the whole earth” (Daniel 2:35). c. “Never be destroyed” (Daniel 2:44). d. “Not be left [given] to other people” (Daniel 2:44). e. “Consume all [other] kingdoms” (Daniel 2:44). f. “Stand for ever” (Daniel 2:44). • What did it mean that the stone would be “cut out without hands”? (See Daniel 2:34. It would not be man-made.) How is the restored Church of Jesus Christ like a stone cut out without hands? Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin said: “Our Lord and Savior stands at the head of this church and directs it through his servants. This is the Lord’s church; it is not a church of men” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1993, 4; or Ensign, Nov. 1993, 5). • How is Daniel’s prophecy that the Church will “fill the whole earth” and “never be destroyed” being fulfilled today? (You may want to refer to the second chart in the attention activity.) President Gordon B. Hinckley testified: “This Church is true. It will weather every storm that beats against it. It will outlast every critic who rises to mock it. It was established by God our Eternal Father for the blessing of His sons and daughters of all generations. It carries the name of Him who stands as its head, even the Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world. It is governed and moves by the power of the priesthood. It sends forth to the world another witness of the divinity of the Lord. Be faithful, my friends. Be true. Be loyal to the great things of God which have been revealed in this dispensation” (“Keep the Faith,” Ensign, Sept. 1985, 6)." Note the quote by President Kimball. This church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will roll forward and fill the earth. I have never heard another interpretation in any manual, speech or anything else that contradicts this. As far as I'm concerned, these ideas appearing in the Gospel Doctrine manual taught to all the church, is tantamount to doctrine.