Are Biblical Archaeologists Neutral or Biased

[eccles]

I get the feeling that many of those Biblical Archaeologists who get a lot of publicity in the popular media can be biased towards the Bible. That is that they think the bible is all factual and set out to prove it. Many diggers are not professional Archaeologists and not trained in the proper methods of excavation. Ron Wyatt comes to mind.

It seems also that some of these diggers are members of a Church and are funded by that church's congregation to set out to prove that bible factual. Once again, Ron Wyatt.

This is not true science. A true scientist must have an attitude of skepticism towards the matter in hand even to the point of pisproving it.

The other problem is that some of the major sites in Israel, especially Jerusalem are out of bounds to scientists: The Dome of the Rock, The Church of the Holy Sepulcra, The Church of the Nativity, all regarded as untouchable "Holy" places. What are the heads of t ese churchs scared of? That somebody will disprove what is "believed". Remember how the Cathedral of Turin and the Vatican refused point blank for any scientific examination of the "Holy" Shroud. When they finally relented the shroud was found out to be a forgery and no way from the time of Jesus. Even so it can never be proved (if it was from that period) whose body was in it.

I am a skeptic. I don't want biased conclusions to be made as a result of biased examinations of an Archaeological site.

[eccles]

Remember this:

One of the most important principals in government is never set up an enquiry unless you know what answer you want and the chairperson will give you the answer you want.