Tel Dan (Ian and George)

Raymond de Hoop rdehoop at
Fri Mar 2 09:46:58 EST 2001

On 02-03-2001 13:17 Niels Peter Lemche <npl at> wrote:

> Dear George,
> This argument is clearly below your usual standard. It can just as
> easily be turned around to say that the credulous people who accept the
> inscription as genuine, do so because they have already accepted the
> biblical story about David to be history or almost history. I cannot really
> believe that you mean this, because your argument might be understood as a
> recommendation: don't read Garbini! He is no good-one of those liberals whom
> you should never read or pay attention to such negative and dishonest
> persons. Just think of Dever's, Rendburg's and others more or less insane
> attacks on the so-called revisionists.
> Regards,
> NP
> PS: Ugaritic is probably not so important in this place. We should
> really stay with inscriptions from the Iron Age and not invoke Ugaritic or
> Biblical examples at this stage.

Dear Peter,

Apparently you've missed a colon here, for it was a reply TO George not FROM
him. (I will react in another mail on your comments),



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list