19th century century Prophets could our Mormon friends comment

by barry 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    I thought Susan would show up and give me some pointers about getting this thing together about getting some wives or gf or whatever. Maybe she might like to try out for wife #1, but I'm not studying no books and she can't keep talking to me about religion all the time she got to have a sense of humour too(money wouldn't hurt either).

  • SusanHere
    SusanHere

    LOL

    Sorry Frankie, but I'm taken, now and forever. But thanks for the offer.

    I'm afraid my criteria for husband material may have been too high for you. I required, first, a man of high intelligence. Second, a man of unquestionable character. Third, a man with deep spirituality that served as guide, motivation, and restraint in his life.

    Also, he had to absolutely adore me and consider himself the luckiest man in the world to have me to love and adore him in return.

    There were a few other requirements, but those hit the highlights.

    What do you think -- would you have qualified?

    SusanHere

  • SusanHere
    SusanHere

    Also, sorry to burst everyone's bubble about the sex with 30 wives scenerio that seems so popular around this board, mostly thanks to a certain poser who showed up lately.

    But... the research makes it clear that Joseph Smith did not marry 30 women who were sexual partners to him. There is also no proof whatsoever that he had physical relations with any women who had living husbands.

    He also did not have relations with 14-year old girls.

    Sorry to be the bearer of such bubble-bursting news, but hey, fantasy is still an option, so feel free to imagine him -- or yourselves -- with scores of lovely, nubile, submissive females if it makes you happy.

    I'll stick to the facts.

    SusanHere

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Sue,

    Sorry Frankie, but I'm taken, now and forever. But thanks for the offer.

    What is that supose to mean? Your not becoming a nun are you? Don't do that you will really miss out it's lots of fun.

    I'm afraid my criteria for husband material may have been too high for you. I required, first, a man of high intelligence. Second, a man of unquestionable character. Third, a man with deep spirituality that served as guide, motivation, and restraint in his life.

    Ah what a put down.

    Alright requirement #1 I have a very "high" intelegence.

    #2 I am an unquestionable character, but you can question me if you like I give you permision.

    #3 I have a very deep deep deep spirituality, just because I don't beleive the same things you do, don't automatically conclude that I can not go very deep(spiritually speaking here not the other thingy).

    Also, he had to absolutely adore me and consider himself the luckiest man in the world to have me to love and adore him in return.

    O God anther impossible romantasist. Get real it takes time to build relationships and any body that feels that way in the begining about you is usually not going to keep it, especially if your a miss know-it-all or some other personality trait that will eventually cause some friction. It happens in all relationships, and honesty is need not fantasy to deal with it sensibly.

    There were a few other requirements, but those hit the highlights. What do you think -- would you have qualified?

    Well it seems like you are puposely stacking the cards against me, and I still got 3 out of 4 that adore thing takes time and there are no guarantees so I think you should throw that one out, way too imposible to be realistic.

  • SusanHere
    SusanHere
    Also, he had to absolutely adore me and consider himself the luckiest man in the world to have me to love and adore him in return.

    O God anther impossible romantasist. Get real it takes time to build relationships and any body that feels that way in the begining about you is usually not going to keep it, especially if your a miss know-it-all or some other personality trait that will eventually cause some friction. It happens in all relationships, and honesty is need to fantasy to deal with it sensibly.

    True, but that adoring part has to be there in the beginning, and then proven out over time. If the relationship is right, two people will overcome the challenges and difficulties, growing ever closer in the process. Marriage takes effort, work, a sense of humor, the ability to forgive, and the desire to give the health of the relationship a higher priority than anything else in life. If the love isn't strong enough in the beginning, there may not be enough water in the well to draw from during the tough times.

    Why would anybody get married if they didn't truly love and adore the other? There are other reasons, I know, but could there be a better one?

    By already taken now and forever, I mean married for time and all eternity, by choice. I caught a "keeper" on the first go-around. Not everyone's so lucky, unfortunately.

    Congratulations on your score of 3 out of 4! (I guess I didn't word the "character" part quite clearly enough!)

    SusanHere

    P.S. Women love that romantic stuff. The payoff for the men is worth the extra effort!

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Sue,

    P.S. Women love that romantic stuff. The payoff for the men is worth the extra effort!

    Yeah that's called bribery, in my book. Why is it we gentlemen have to be romantic to get alittle bumpty bump. Can't a guy just be his adorable self and not have to jump thru hoops, imposed by the opposite sexs idea of what is romantic. I not romantic persay and I feel just like a jerk when made respond that way, it is so phoney I destest it. I prefer to do more pratical things like help with bills or fix things and things like that.

    BTW I only have one post left out of my 25 per day limit. So if anyone doesn't see my post it is because of a limit some moderater put on my posting and thread starting "priviledges"

  • barry
    barry

    I have a few more questions about th ebook of mormon.

    Why is it there is no Archeological evidence for the book of mormon including no coins being found that were mentioned in the BOM, none of the 38 cities in the BOM have ever been found and not even one artifact been found?

    The top Archeologist of BYU confirms this.

    On the other hand we have coins used in bible times we have the cities mentioned in the bible being found and excavated .

    The information I have also indicates various statements have been expounged in Joseph Smiths books. On the other hand the scholars of the bible are allways ready to find evaluate any small evidence found out about the bible even small fragements of texts.

    There is also a book called the book of Abrahame that was translated by Joseph Smith even though he had no knowledge of the language. Scholars later found the manuscript to be nothing like Joseph Smith had written in his book.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit