To: "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: RE: Conclusive evidence and archaeology
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:29:10 -0500
<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Friedman's book, while being *very* outdated, gives an excellent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
RE: Conclusive evidence and archaeology,
Bill Ross, 09/03/2000