To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: Tel Dan (Ian and George)
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 15:46:58 +0100
On 02-03-2001 13:17 Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk> 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),