Posted on 02/05/2014 5:24:50 PM PST by workerbee
Archaeologists from Israel’s top university have used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the arrival of domestic camels in the Middle East -- and they say the science directly contradicts the Bible’s version of events.
Camels are mentioned as pack animals in the biblical stories of Abraham, Joseph and Jacob, Old Testament stories that historians peg to between 2000 and 1500 BC. But Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures say camels weren’t domesticated in Israel until centuries later, more like 900 BC.
“In addition to challenging the Bible's historicity, this anachronism is direct proof that the text was compiled well after the events it describes,” reads a press release announcing the research.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
There was no “gate” called the Eye of the Needle during the time of Christ. It was built during the Middle Ages.
Christ is making a rhetorical statement in Matthew 19:24-25 and Luke 18:25.
This is similar to falconry, where (historically, although this is no longer permitted in most areas) an animal can be held long enough to serve and then released before it loses its wild instincts.
Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.
Manure piles. Find a few old ones and they can tell a very interesting tale as far as what was being fed and how well, also much easier to date this close to modern times usually.
Ah, you are just trying to out us oldsters. Yeah, I remember it. Seems it was the same time frame as the commercial with the camel saying, “I want a Clark bar”.
Yes, Tareyton. I am embarrassed to admit that the commercial, which had the slogan, “I’d rather fight than switch” won over the young me.
You open the gate.
Well, they did “pinpoint” it so I guess there’s no need for further discussion.
:-)
I’m not sure where to start?
camels, 45
Gen. 12:16, Gen. 24:10-11 (3), Gen. 24:14, Gen. 24:19-20 (2), Gen. 24:22, Gen. 24:30-32 (4), Gen. 24:35, Gen. 24:44, Gen. 24:46 (2), Gen. 24:61, Gen. 24:63, Gen. 30:43, Gen. 31:17, Gen. 32:7, Gen. 32:15, Gen. 37:25, Exo. 9:3, Jdg. 6:5, Jdg. 7:12, 1Sa. 27:9, 1Sa. 30:17, 1Ki. 10:2, 1Ch. 5:21, 1Ch. 12:40, 1Ch. 27:30, 2Ch. 9:1, 2Ch. 14:15, Ezr. 2:67, Neh. 7:69, Job. 1:3, Job. 1:17, Job. 42:12, Isa. 21:7, Isa. 60:6 (2), Jer. 49:29, Jer. 49:32, Eze. 25:5
camel, 5
Gen. 24:64, Lev. 11:4, Deu. 14:7, 1Sa. 15:3, Zec. 14:15
camels’, 3
Jdg. 8:21, Jdg. 8:26, 2Ki. 8:9
camel’s, 1
http://archaeology.about.com/od/cterms/g/camels.htm: Evidence for the domestication of Bactrian camels has been found as early as 2600 BC at Shar-i Sokhta (also known as the Burnt City), Iran.
Dromedaries may have first been domesticated by humans in Somalia and southern Arabia, around 3,000 BC, the Bactrian in central Asia around 2,500 BC,[14][62][63][64]
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/2011/04/24/were-camels-domesticated-in-the-time-of-abraham/ [10] ‘Both the dromedary (the one-humped camel of Arabia) and the Bactrian camel (the two-humped camel of Central Asia) had been domesticated since before 2000 BC.’, Scarre, ‘Smithsonian Timelines of the Ancient World’, p. 176 (1993).
[11] ‘As far as hard dates go, the 2500-1500 B.C. suggested earlier for the introduction of the camel into Somalia is the best that can be done from available data. Given the stage domestication had reached by the time the camels and their owners crossed the sea, some additional time must be allowed for earlier stages. Taking this into consideration, it is easily conceivable that the domestication process first got underway between 3000 and 2500 B.C.’, Bulliet, ‘The Camel and the Wheel’, p. 56 (1990 ed., originally published 1975).
[12] ‘Found in a context datable to 2700 B.C., the remains led the excavators to argue that camel domestication began in Turkmenia and spread south (Compagnoni and Tosi 1978: 95–99). The domestic camel was apparently known to the inhabitants of the Indus Valley Civilization by 2300 B.C., although the species utilized remains open to question (Meadow 1984: 134 and references).’, Zarins, ‘Camel’, in Freedman (ed.), Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (electronic ed. 1996).
[13] ‘Archeological discoveries have now shown clearly that references to domesticated camels in Genesis are by no means anachronistic, as some earlier scholars supposed. While camel caravans seem to have been used regularly only from the Late Bronze Age onward, archeologists have found numerous bones of domesticated camels. Thus when Parrot was excavating Mari, he found camel bones in the ruins of a house dated in the pre-Sargonic period (ca 2400 B.C.). An eighteenth-century-B.C. relief from Byblos pictured a camel in a kneeling position, and a socket on the back showed that the animal’s hump and its load had been attached separately. In accord with patriarchal traditions, cylinder seals from Middle Bronze Age Mesopotamia showed riders seated upon camels.’, Harrison, ‘Genesis’, in Bromiley (ed.), International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, volume 3, p. 547 (rev. ed. 1988).
[14] ‘Excavations in eastern Arabia, an area once believed to be a cultural backwater unworthy of archaeological investigation, have turned up evidence that camels were first domesticated by Semites before the time of Abraham. Much of this evidence has been examined by M. C. A. MacDonald of the Oriental Faculty at the University of Oxford’, Caesar, ‘Bible and Spade (13.77), 2000.
[25] ‘However, there is now a growing body of scholars who believe that camel domestication must have occurred earlier than previously thought (prior to the 12th century BC) and that the patriarchal narratives accurately reflect this (e.g., Ripinsky 1984; Coote and Whitelam 1987: 102; Zarins 1992: 826; Borowski 1998: 112–18).’, Younker, ‘Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs In The Wadi Nasib, Sinai’, Bible and Spade (13.75), 2000.
Richard W. Bulliet, "The Camel and the Wheel," pp. 64,65 : These five pieces of evidence, needless to say, may not convince everyone that the domestic camel was known in Egypt and the middle east on an occasional basis between 2500 and 1400 BC. Other early depictions, alleged to be of camels which look to my eyes like dogs, donkeys, horses, dragons, or even pelicans, might be more convincing to some then the examples described above...
It means simply that in the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries BC when Abraham and his immediate descendents appeared to have lived, camels were already known in small numbers in the northwest corner of the Arabian desert where the Western Arabian trade route branched out to go to Egypt or further into Syria. Local tribes in the area may have owned a few of the animals, perhaps as articles of prestige, without being heavily involved in breeding them. (Transcribed using speech to text software.)
Well gosh...even Gentiles understand that Moses wrote about the events from Adam to Abraham. I've never heard any assertions that he didn't. Is this some surprise to these "scholars"?
“It’s strange to think of a time when the government actually gave cigarettes to the soldiers as part of their rations. All things considered, I’d trade these days for those.”
They used to give ‘em to us on airplanes when we would fly. And on college campuses there were those who came to give away free cigarettes.
If they had found some Baal temple with writing on the wall talking about camels, they would have exclaimed, “What a find!”
The bible is the only writing I know that has to constantly prove itself (and does so) yet tells everyone that it must be taken on faith. Every other early writing is taken on faith without a shred of proof.
Thanks, bunkerhill. That pretty well rips this halfass theory. I also noticed the site he was investigating isn’t even in Israel. The fact the prof leads with his Bible is wrong conclusion is a tipoff that this guy is starting from a conclusion and looking for “evidence” to support it.
They are continually finding new archaeological items that both verify and push back the Hebrew existence in Jerusalem and the Roman Province of Palestine, even at the Temple Mount/Second Temple walls.
Funny. There was no mention of Palestinians back then.
Amen Harley. When you tell the average person that the Bible is the most reliable (historically) ancient document we have they chuckle to themselves like ignorant fools. I have even had people tell me that Jesus was not a real figure but when you point out that he is mentioned in non-Christian writings of the time you get a blank vague stare. People are willfully ignorant in a lot of cases - when you tell them to check out Josephus or Tacitus they won’t or don’t bother! Archaeological finds continue to reinforce the accuracy of the Bible and have done so as long as people have been looking - so much so that if it were any other document people would check their findings against it and question themselves a second time if they found something in disagreement with it!
Seriously well done Daniel!!!
The few camel bones found in earlier archaeological layers probably belonged to wild camels.
_________________
Probably? They make everything sound so factual but then everything is probably. Geezzzzzzz.........
The passage about Jesus in Josephus seems to be a later insertion by a Christian copyist. The early Christian apologists who might be expected to cite the Josephus passage don’t. It’s possible the Josephus did briefly mention Jesus, but that a later copyist “improved” on what he said. Tacitus’ passage, on the other hand, is genuine.
Ancient historians debate the reliability of other ancient texts—Herodotus, Livy, Egyptian inscriptions, etc. It’s just that there isn’t as much riding on the verdict.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.