Bill's 'Position'.

Bruce Gardner b.gardner at
Mon Mar 12 09:50:10 EST 2001

Dear Bill,
              Your position intellectually was as follows:

>I'm not saying it's not reasonable. I was griping about raising your
>personal belief about the text to the level of fact. That's was Samuel
>was doing.

I disagree that a position based on reason and evidence can be described as 
'pure conjecture'. It may be conjecture in the sense of creating a system 
of probabilities, but if those are shared by other responsible scholars it 
is dismissive of a lot of real honest work to call it simply that.

Now for your concluding comments...

>Er, um, my position? Exactly what was my position? I don't remember
>giving one.

Quite right, Bill. You didn't. I mistook your style of post for another's. 
I do apologise. I was guilty there of pure conjecture (i.e. without any 
evidence) which is a thing which very rarely works.




Bruce Gardner
b.gardner at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list