John Dehlin is becoming increasingly transparent in terms of
his allegiances, and much of what others (including myself) have long suspected
being confirmed. In short, the sheep’s skin is coming off. He seems to be
freely removing it himself. Nonetheless, I’ve been meaning for some time now to
call attention to an anonymous blog, titled “Dear John Dehlin,” which is making
some interesting observations about his behavior and the process. If you, like
me, are concerned about Dehlin’s influence on unsuspecting innocents, then I
suggest you check it out.
Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new
video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book
of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related
paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:
As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…
As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…
I would argue that for perceptive folks, Dehlin's sheep skin came off years ago. But thank you for the link; it appears to be a great summary of his apostate statements and online activities.
ReplyDelete