(Ron) Archaeology fails to support Bible (again)
Terry terry@bluebonnet.net
Thu, 11 Jun 1998 00:09:06 -0500 (00897559746, 01bd94f7$0f37f3c0$8199c1cf@terry.bluebonnet.net)
>RON
> To rehash Till's argument: King David is a myth because there is no
>archaeological evidence for him. If archaeological evidence should be
>found Till will dispute it or dismiss it. Therefore the only evidence
>one could possibly offer would be to place King David himself before
>Till. Of course even if that were possible Till would simply convince
>him that he was only a myth.
TERRY
Yes, I will have to agree with you Ron.