Conclusive evidence and archaeology

Bill Ross wross at farmerstel.com
Sun Sep 3 11:29:10 EDT 2000


<Jack>
> theres no such thing as conclusive evidence when we are talking about
> documents over 2 millenia old.

<Liz>
People can conclude from the evidence, if they are willing to look at it.

<Bill>
"Conclude" implies an end. The problem with "conclusions" is that they tend
to be replaced by new "evidence" the next year, when new information is
unearthed. Liz, I can't believe that you are defending the authority of such
flimsy "evidence" as "conclusive"!

<Liz>
Friedman's book, while being *very* outdated, gives an excellent
introduction to the documentary hypothesis...I heartily recommend it, even
tho I don't agree with him any more.

<Bill>
Last year's "conclusive evidence"?

Bill Ross




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list