[fieldmarshaldj]

*ping of interest*

[Inwoodian]

Reparations for Jebusites?

[Genoa]

rekindling a longstanding debate about using the Bible as a field guide to identifying ancient ruins

There's no debate. The Bible has been shown to be accurate for such purposes time and time again. The AP wants to make it "controversial."

[rusty schucklefurd]

It’s true that archaeology is not an exact science. It is nearly impossible to NOT have some kind of bias in regard to what is found.

That being said, at one time the Bible was ridiculed for mentioning Canaanite peoples such as the Hittites, Perizittes, Amorites, and others as being “mythical” and “fanciful” with no evidence to their existence. Then, lo and behold some years later all these groups have been demonstrated to have existed, and in the places where the Bible said they existed.

The same ridicule was directed at the Bible for it’s mentioning the existence of Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar - until the city and Nebuchadnezzar’s palace was discovered.

So, is it possible that Mr Shukron is mistaken, but just because he’s come to the conclusion that the Bible is a reliable source for archaeological study should not automatically disqualify his opinion or his research.