What's new
By:

Longest Thread Ever

reminds me of an old man I knew when I was twelve or thirteen.

Some boys were being boys and talking about boobs like they were the latest toys made by tonka. . . . .

Old man shook his head sadly and said something to the effect that it was foolish to worship the fleshly bumpers. . . ..

"Gravity and time make all women equal."
 
babe said:
reminds me of an old man I knew when I was twelve or thirteen.

Some boys were being boys and talking about boobs like they were the latest toys made by tonka. . . . .

Old man shook his head sadly and said something to the effect that it was foolish to worship the fleshly bumpers. . . ..

"Gravity and time make all women equal."
Click to expand...

I mostly agree, although size could impact the truthfulness of that statement.
 
nightmare3983 said:
I mostly agree, although size could impact the truthfulness of that statement.
Click to expand...

well, obviously it depends on which axis you are taking the measurements. I was speaking in regard to the horizontal axis, as the subject is standing erect. The chief effect of gravity and time is exercised in the vertical, that is to say, downward, dimension, where you are completely correct. Various devices have been employed to support the danglings, but the truth I speak of is purely au naturale.
 
People in JFC must have good taste. Well, raather than wipe this page off the system I'll just move the thread to a new page and start something funny. . . ..
 
babe said:
I'm not sure God has a dog in this fight either. And I rather expect the authorities/management of the LDS Church don't either. If somebody did an actual analysis of LDS authoritative statements, tracing sources attributed as basis for LDS beliefs, isolating actual teachings unique to the Book of Mormon, and not found in the Bible, as one "source", it would surprise many members that the Book of Mormon ranks about fourth place as a source of current teaching, after the authorities who quote one another, after sociologists and anecdotal references, after the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price, after the New Testament.

I'm not sure I have a dog in this fight etiher. In 1978 I read the Solomon Spaulding Manuscript Found, and more or less concluded with the idea that Sydney Rigdon who worked for several years in the printshop where the manuscript was supposedly gathering dust, might have worked on the story idea a bit. Given that he was I think an Amherst or some other early American graduate of a theological program. Later, as an innovative Campbellite preacher with a congregation of some hundreds of followers, he was found preaching ideas essentially the same as those found in the Book of Mormon, within a hundred miles of where Joseph Smith lived and where Joseph found the gold plates, allegedly. And with most of those followers became a significant majority of early converts, enough to cause the new Josephite church to settle nearby in Kirtland. Just seemed to raise some questions about some tail wagging the boy wonder prophet.

The Book of Mormon contains a set of religious beliefs not found in any place or time other than frontier America centering on Signey Rigdon, and including the fairly common belief of many of that time that the Indians were a remnant of the Lost Tribes of Israel.

From an intellectual standpoint, the fact that Manuscript Found is a chronicle of two nations warring across the Ohio River, between a white race and a brown race allegedly the antecedents of the American Indians.. . . The Kentucks. . . . with the white race being of Roman and Christian origin, sailing across the ocean a few hundred years after Jesus, just seems a bit too serendipitously similar to the major historical theme of the Book of Mormon. I'm not sure the Bible Belt Baptists are ready to claim Mormons as their spawn just yet, but they are showing signs of having pre-emptive designs on some major distinctly Mormon ideas like the fatherhood of God over mankind and families being reunited as families in the hereafter.

And while Jesus was pretty clear on the Fatherhood of God over mankind and Himself, the Catholics left no scrap of reference to families in eternity in the Christian tradition, if ever it was taught after Jesus. That Jesus considered his family important is evident to me from the story of Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha. Just how important. . . is today not permissible authorized teaching among Mormons, but these women who were at events throughout Jesus' biblical chronology were listed variously as women who turned to Jesus to settle a quarrel over household chores, blaming Him for not being there when their brother died for the presumption that He could have prevented it, and as being the women who were intending to care for his corpse on the morning he reportedly got up and walked to where the Apostles were gathered in mourning.

However, all in all, I find the most intriguing fact in the whole Book of Mormon element of Mormonism to be the fact that Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, with the survivor friends John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff spent the last few hours, of Joseph Smith's (and Hyrum's) life reading a few passages from the Book of Mormon, turning down a page of two for a way to mark the places, and bearing testimony to one another of it's factual origin.

The Biblical account of Jesus on the way to the Cross is without parallel as a testimony of His sense of mission in his life, but the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is as close a parallel as there is, and to me just as compelling.

Mormonism maintains today, a sense that no basis is necessary except being a live link with God. Whatever the history or science may say, a Mormon is a Mormon on the faith that God is God, and that God still cares for us.
Click to expand...

I respect your faith, totally. My faith has variations, many are quite a divide.. but I have nothing but respect.
 
nightmare3983 said:
I mostly agree, although size could impact the truthfulness of that statement.
Click to expand...

actually, the best way to go with this comment might be about six feet deep. Well, in the sense that whatever we may be in the pride of life, that deathclock runs out on us somehow, sometime.
 
PKM said:
I respect your faith, totally. My faith has variations, many are quite a divide.. but I have nothing but respect.
Click to expand...

well, thank you. And thanks for popping in here. I was about to go all philosophical or something. . .
 
PKM said:
I respect your faith, totally. My faith has variations, many are quite a divide.. but I have nothing but respect.
Click to expand...

So I'd be interested to hear some of those little issues, if you could just deal with it sorta loose. . . .
 
well, I don't expect the kind of "respect" that means heartfelt agreement or instant conversion like say as in just "defaulting" your whole intellect to my little exercise of words. . . .

I think you may mean "respect" in a purely civil sense of say something like tolerance, maybe a little amazement someone could think of such things or whatnot. . .. but not, certainly, putting my crap down as some sort of scripture or profound understanding of the universe or anything else. . . ..
 
About as close as I get to unmovable convictions is my realization that God loved me when I was still a kid, such as I was then. The conclusion of that conviction sorta reminds me to try to love other people, such as they may be now. . . . .
 
babe said:
well, I don't expect the kind of "respect" that means heartfelt agreement or instant conversion like say as in just "defaulting" your whole intellect to my little exercise of words. . . .

I think you may mean "respect" in a purely civil sense of say something like tolerance, maybe a little amazement someone could think of such things or whatnot. . .. but not, certainly, putting my crap down as some sort of scripture or profound understanding of the universe or anything else. . . ..
Click to expand...

I mean respect of the true sense of faith.

I don't believe (intellectually) in the LDS religion, beginning with Jospeph Smith. But I harbor no ill will, whatsoever.. none, toward those that do.

I respect those that have faith, even atheists.. I really do. I respect making a stand .. believing in something. The fact we believe two different things (no matter how small or wide the divide) is immaterial for me. I never judge on skin color, gender, or religious beliefs.. dumb.. I look at individual character, personality, etc..

I don't say I respect you in any patronizing way.. that would go against nearly everything I stand for.
 
stuff like science, facts, and other dogma just seems to keep changing, and being changed. . . .. nothing solid to it.
 
PKM said:
I mean respect of the true sense of faith.

I don't believe (intellectually) in the LDS religion, beginning with Jospeph Smith. But I harbor no ill will, whatsoever.. none, toward those that do.

I respect those that have faith, even atheists.. I really do. I respect making a stand .. believing in something. The fact we believe two different things (no matter how small or wide the divide) is immaterial for me. I never judge on skin color, gender, or religious beliefs.. dumb.. I look at individual character, personality, etc..

I don't say I respect you in any patronizing way.. that would go against nearly everything I stand for.
Click to expand...

well, to this sort of position I sorta think it's an effort to maintain some standards of tolerance for others, some effort to achieve intellectual consistency while respecting the various results others come up with. . . .Goes down in my book as a kind of faith, but a faith in human efforts towards things we believe are good, better, or best somehow.

A pretty necessary thing for humans who breathe air still.
 
Sorry Pearl. Your bucket time is just not enough nowadays to stay ahead of me. Maybe you can turn the tables on me when I have to hit the road again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top