Really. Then why are archaeologists shying away from being
called " biblical"?
The long sorry history of phony / tainted archeology-
and pseudo- archeology supporting the bible might be a reason
not to want the moniker.
As for the “MILITANT atheist” we suspect a made up fact
tuvked into a actual ad hom.
This is all so unnecessary.
This may well be a nice honest publication being promoted.
It appears to be.
I was dubious, coz Ive seen how characters like Ron Wyatt
dupe the credulous.
Bible and Archaeology does not interest me particularly.
Of course some of the bible is semi historical and there is stuff
besides Egypt being real to be found confirming that.
Withal, the bible being the most overrated overstudied book ever,
and the disportionate effort to dig up that part of the middle east-
usually to " prove" the bible makes it less interesting to me than to a Believer.
Anyway, carry on, its an ok pop archeology though.
I read ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, of more general / wider interest.