Dan's epistemology (unfortunately not concerning Tell Dan Inscription)

Raymond de Hoop rdehoop at keyaccess.nl
Sun Mar 4 12:44:24 EST 2001

On 04-03-2001 13:49 Niels Peter Lemche <npl at teol.ku.dk> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Kirk [SMTP:Peter_Kirk at sil.org]
>> Well, Ian, your whole response to Dan, and often to others, reminds
>> me of the Monty Python argument sketch. And none of Dan's posts were
>> anything like 67 KB. I rather hope your five minutes are now up and we can
>> move to proper discussion rather than unconvincing point by point
>> refutations.
>> Peter Kirk
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ian Hutchesson [mailto:mc2499 at mclink.it]
>> I was thinking about not sending this post, as there seems there is
>> little hope of communication with you, Dan. You "saturation of the airwaves"
>> yesterday...
>> <very long snip>
>>> It's a text that builds to that to be sure,
>> No, it doesn't. (If one doesn't mind a reference to Monty Python's
>> argument sketch.)
>> <very long snip>

> Somehow every flame war on the basis of the TDI always end in this
> way. What is the issue, what is at stake: a very fragmentarily preserved
> inscription from the upper Huleh Valley, the biblical king David, people's
> beliefs? hardly serious scholarship.
> What about moving to something else. So far not a single new
> argument has been forwarded but mailboxes have been filled up with redundant
> mail.

Thanks NP, this was a really very funny continuation of Monthy Python's
sketch. Just because of the fact that the word "Dan" is in the subject
heading, doing if it concerns Tell Dan, not looking at its arguments which
are in it or that it might have concerned a completely different subject.
That's great! I liked it!


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list