Re: [TruthTalk] Blaines Lost sheep of america

[Dave]

David Miller wrote: Perry wrote: "If you cannot find even one proven fact in the BoM that is not from the Bible, then my assertion about it's fictional nature stands." That is interesting about the barley, but it hardly consitutes a proof. There is no linkage between the barley the BoM other than in name only. I'm not sure I understand what you are looking for, Perry. If you would accept the lack of barley in the New World as evidence of the Book of Mormon being false, then it seems to me that you should accept its documentation of having existed here in a previous time as evidence of support for the Book of Mormon. Exactly what are you looking for? You know that I think the Book of Mormon is bogus, but I'm trying to understand the nature of the proof you seek. It seems to me that the best approach is not to look for proofs within the book, but to show one falsehood. Blaine, if we could prove one passage as being false, would you accept the notion that the whole book is untrustworthy? That is not to say that it would not contain some truth, but if we know one passage is false, then that means anything it says needs to be tested and the book as a whole cannot be purported as being trustworthy to others. Blaine, would you agree with this approach? DAVEH:  Hope you don't mind me interjecting a thought here, DavidM.  (I just returned and am now sorting through 1306 emails.......Wish I had unsubscribed like Blaine does when he leaves town!)     Anyway......Would you suggest unbelievers use your test (to show one falsehood) as a way to determine whether one should believe the Bible to be true or false? Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain Five email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.