The curious case of the Camel riding Patriarchs. Could this be one such spec? The following scholarly paper submitted by Lidar Sapir-Hen and Erez Ben-Yosef makes for interesting reading...well worth a look. http://archaeology.tau.ac.il/ben-yosef/pub/Pub_PDFs/Sapir-Hen&Ben-Yosef13_CamelAravah_TelAviv.pdf Further sources: Camel archaeology contradicts the Bible | The Times of Israel Camels cast doubt on accuracy of Bible stories - World - NZ Herald News Yes...yes...I am aware that various Christian apologist sites, in the past, have mustered a range of apologia in response to the suggestion that camel riding in the era of the patriarchs is a bona fide anachronism. It will be interesting to see the responses to the latest archaeological research on the subject.
It's an interesting study, that supports the hypothesis put forward, that camels weren't domesticated until the 10th Century BCE, but I still don't see how the researchers can actually prove their hypothesis beyond a reasonable doubt, due to the presence of what is presumed to be wild camel bones appearing at many of the early sites. That, in and of itself, would seem to me to present enough contrary evidence to keep the finding from being conclusive. Next you're going to try and convince me that Odin didn't ride winged Sleipnir either. Jeesh!
Where exactly in scripture does it say that anyone rode camels? Everyone I ever read about rode asses. A medieval artist pictured someone riding one, so that proves what? This is a stretch even for you Chell. And Tuli is corrwct in that camel bones have been found in Arabia and the rest of the Middle East from the time before it was a desert. So to assume that they just wandered around and nobody had the thought to ride one. Yeah, that's problamtic.
Some will strain at a gnat but swallow a camel. What is that about it is harder for some to enter Heaven than for a camel to go through the "eye of a needle"(very small entrance into Jerusalem on the western wall (?)) One had to unload his animal and a camel had to go through on its knees.
You have it Don't. Just popped into my mind so posted it. Old jarheads have a tendency to roam about, mumble to themselves, and appear incoherent at times--some more than others--lol.
No...I will try and convince you that a certain prophet rode an Al-Buraq on a moonlight flit to Jerusalem and back from Mecca. There is no empirical evidence contradicting the existence of an Al-Buraq...so the claim must certainly be true. Checkmate skeptics!!!
Still like the idea of them making a nice hardy camel stew and spit the bones out to be found by hungry and envious archiologist...
Okay, just to be a pedantic pain in the butt, there are actually references in the Old Testament to individuals riding camels: Genesis 24:61 Then Rebekah and her attendants got ready and mounted the camels and went back with the man. So the servant took Rebekah and left. Genesis 31:17 Then Jacob put his children and his wives on camels, Genesis 31:34 Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them inside her camel’s saddle and was sitting on them. 1 Samuel 30:17 David fought them from dusk until the evening of the next day, and none of them got away, except four hundred young men who rode off on camels and fled. But, regardless, I still think it would be difficult to prove that the Israelites didn't have domesticated camels in the 10th century BCE or before. 1. They may have had them, and the evidence just hasn't been located. or 2. They may not have had them, and their existence in the Bible may be a latter construct. Either is possible. Until the late fifth century BCE, practically all historical writings contained magical or divine embellishment, or other fictional details, to flesh out the story. It was to be expected. Actual facts just weren't that important. Maybe two thousand Assyrian soldiers actually died of a plague. When the story is written, the number may have climbed to fifty thousand, or even a hundred thousand. It just made for a better story. Even Herodotus, widely acclaimed to be the first true historian, still embellished his histories with divine interaction. Thucydides, in the late fifth/early fourth century BCE, even noted in his account of the Peloponnesian War that many readers might not enjoy his account, because he had included no "to mythodes" - mythological or other story telling embellishments. It would be interesting however, to be able to prove that Israelites, vice some other dweller of Canaan, actually ate camels, domesticated or otherwise, since that would be verboten. Leviticus 11:4 The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you.
What is true and not true seems to be wild speculation. There is nothing that proves the Bible is not true. You may think otherwise, that is up to you. There are herds of wild horses in the US. Does that prove cowboys are a myth? I guess if you are determined to deny something you will leap at any sliver blindly. Just another silly baseless conclusion. Not finding something doesn't prove it doesn't exist. Ask the evolutionists. They blindly believe in it although they have searched high and low for evidence for decades. Got zilch but will swear it is a fact. Not that any of it matters. Have fun, looking forward to more speculation.
