> It's therefore not strange to find him taking the apologetic approach to the
> original problem: it simply cannot be (a priori) that there are two
> different traditions about the death of Goliath. There are not two
> traditions about the way Saul died. There are not three traditions of the
> patriarch palming his wife off as his sister. There are not (at least) two
> traditions regarding the creation of the world. Anyone who thinks so hasn't
> carefully examined the problems of those texts. One should not disagree
> with
> Dan because they, in doing so, must be wrong, ie not examining the texts
> carefully enough.
My opinion is too, that the Goliath in the David story is an intended fraud.