Anyone seen pesty articles of late like this one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/science/camels-had-no-business-in-genesis.html?_r=0
Does anyone think its more than a little messed up non-believers expect me to start believing camels didnt exist in Genesis? The lengths that some will go to undermine the authenticity of The Bible - Geepers!
Yep, interesting timing, just supplied today parts of an article for a conservative writer for the Huffington Post, pointing him to Kenneth Kitchen's book - The Reliability of the OT, coming out in an Eerdmans collections, https://www.logos.com/product/36842/eerdmans-old-testament-studies-collection
The world’s foremost, renown Egyptologist argued for the textual support of camels during the biblical periods in several of his earlier books now combined in this collection. They need though to segment it out I believe, as well as publish his 8 vols. on Rameses inscriptions, would be sweet[H]. No one argues against him because they cannot, he has a tremendous command of the languages and archaeological information, as well as his colleague A. Millard; any books by these scholars are necessary.
Mr. Warner...I am pleasantly and happily surprised by your post. Thanks.
Glory to God....Jesus Lead On!
Thanks for the note Josh, would respond more to the Logos post but you guys are overwhelming at times, but we are partnering with Logos on several projects which we will be launching soon, so stay tuned.
Nice bib supplied by web site,
“Animal Kingdom” (1988), The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Cansdale, George (1970), All the Animals of the Bible Lands (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Cheyne, T.K. (1899), Encyclopedia Biblica (London: A. & C. Black).
Clayton, Peter A. (2001), Chronicle of the Pharaohs (London: Thames & Hudson).
Finkelstein, Israel and Neil Asher Silberman (2001), The Bible Unearthed (New York: Free Press).
Free, Joseph P. (1944), “Abraham’s Camels,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 3:187-193, July.
Kitchen, K.A. (1966), Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Chicago, IL: InterVarsity Press).
Kitchen, K.A. (1980), The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed. J.D. Douglas (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale).
Tobin, Paul N. (2000), “Mythological Element in the Story of Abraham and the Patriachal Narratives,” The Refection of Pascal’s Wager [On-line], URL: http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/abraham.html.
Younker, Randall W. (1997), “Late Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs in the Wadi Nasib, Sinai,”Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin, 42:47-54.
Younker, Randall W. (2000), “The Bible and Archaeology,” The Symposium on the Bible and Adventist Scholarship [On-line], URL: http://www.aiias.edu/ict/vol_26B/26Bcc_457-477.htm.
Anyone seen pesty articles of late like this one: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/science/camels-had-no-business-in-genesis.html?_r=0 Does anyone think its more than a little messed up non-believers expect me to start believing camels didnt exist in Genesis? The lengths that some will go to undermine the authenticity of The Bible - Geepers!
I noticed when one "mouses over" that picture that one ends up with a symbol that looks sort of like a Logos symbol????
What gives??? Anybody explain?
That's the universal symbol for enlarge or zoom in. It means you can click on the picture to make it larger.
non-believers expect me to start believing camels didnt exist in Genesis?
Logic, my boy, logic. First, we have no way of knowing the religious stance of the author or the archeologists. Second, the article does not say that camels didn't exist in Genesis. It says camels were not used as beasts of burden in the Palestine region during the time of the patriarchs (a portion of the time covered by the book of Genesis). On the latter I haven't reviewed the evidence and have no opinion - nor any particular reason to want one.
So bring up your Logos app and do a search on "beasts of burden" ... (I haven't a clue as to what you'll find but there is sure to be some interesting rabbit trail)
I noticed when one "mouses over" that picture that one ends up with a symbol that looks sort of like a Logos symbol???? That's the universal symbol for enlarge or zoom in. It means you can click on the picture to make it larger.
Thanks, Todd! I would never have known that! Am very grateful for the information! I must have Logos on my brain because that was the only thing I could think of ... but it was the wrong colour! Blessings!
Psalm 29:11
Logic, my boy, logic. First, we have no way of knowing the religious stance of the author or the archeologists. Second, the article does not say that camels didn't exist in Genesis. It says camels were not used as beasts of burden in the Palestine region during the time of the patriarchs (a portion of the time covered by the book of Genesis).
FWIW: http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2014/02/camels-bible-hump-day/
I noticed when one "mouses over" that picture that one ends up with a symbol that looks sort of like a Logos symbol???? That's the universal symbol for enlarge or zoom in. It means you can click on the picture to make it larger. Thanks, Todd! I would never have known that! Am very grateful for the information! I must have Logos on my brain because that was the only thing I could think of ... but it was the wrong colour! Blessings! Psalm 29:11
The magnifying glass handle is also pointing in the wrong direction. But that does point out the derivation of the Logos icon: it's meant to be a magnifying glass examining the Scriptures. It uses the well-known (at least by some) zoom icon, with a cross in the middle instead of a plus sign.
Very helpful Gabe. Thanks!
--Bro Mark
There was a good discussion about this on Issues, etc. http://issuesetc.org/2014/02/11/1-archaeologists-dispute-camels-in-genesis-dr-andrew-steinmann-21114/
These articles make me cringe. So many people will take these articles at their word and will dismiss the Bible as a big fairy tale. Sad really.
There is archeological evidence that goes against the claims of this article. However, what is most annoying is the fact that the supposed lack of evidence is being used as evidence! Give me a break.
So many people will take these articles at their word and will dismiss the Bible as a big fairy tale. Sad really.
You really think many will read this and do anything other than take it to either (a) confirm their current opinion of the Bible (b) confirm their current opinion of culture/media? I'll grant you that some articles can change minds but this?
These ploys have little effect on apologists on either extreme of the argument. I think they are aimed at the uninformed fence riders in the middle. You know, The Tea Party Types. [:)] The ones that would believe that the Israelites were never in the wilderness.
Here's another example. 800,000 year old footprints. They withstood all those eons of erosion. But were washed away by the first rain after they were "documented". Best they can tell,The name of The larger, Older male who left the footprints was George. Yup. Intended for a Tea Party audience.[:)]
http://www.wunderground.com/news/800000-year-old-footprints-discovered-england-20140210
Edit: Ms. Smith said it better than I did. Ironic we reached the same conclusion less than a minute apart.
uninformed fence riders in the middle. You know, The Tea Party Types.
Perhaps you might reconsider using "tea party types" as an example of uninformed. I consider myself rather informed. [:)]
The Tea Party Types. The ones that would believe that the Israelites were never in the wilderness.
You seem a bit confused here. Most "Tea Party types" would more likely take the Bible at face value, perhaps even be extremely literal in their interpretation. George is most likely an exception to the usual "Tea Party type" [8-|]
Perhaps you might reconsider using "tea party types" as an example of uninformed. I consider myself rather informed.
As do I, even though I think most "tea party types" are a bit extreme politically.
George is most likely an exception to the usual "Tea Party type"
Do you think it possible
I think it's not only possible, but highly probable, that speculations about political leanings of fellow forum members and about potential correlations between political and theological views are beyond the scope of this forum as laid out in the pinned thread by Phil Gons. We shouldn't go down this road.
Milford, I never knew the NY Times had such extensive clear photos going all the way back to OT Times?
The clarity is simply amazing. They look like camels to me.
Actually, I think 'camel' discussions are a great opportunity both within the church, and without as well.
First, the key question is 'Moses', not Abraham. The primary argument is how old was the writing. Late-bronze camels are great.
There's a fairly large set of 'anachronistic' updates in the older part of the OT (e.g. place-names, etc). To portray Abraham as wealthy (and indeed), lots of donkeys is like saying lots of pennys. Even today 'Jesus on a donkey' has to be explained by every pastor and almost every year.
From what I can see, the 'ball' still favors the 'where are the camels' people. Camels are what you displayed as wealth and power. The imagery should not be difficult to find. People like to gloat. And indeed that was the Bible's use. Abraham was a seriously wealthy guy. And for good reason: YHWH.
The other reason a late-bronze camel is good, is 'Solomon'. Most articles really don't discuss the mechanics of 'Solomon' and indeed many dismiss the claims. But new trading technology combined with mining in the south and agriculture in the north equates to a seriously wealthy kingdom. Again, YHWH. Also chariot-massing. It also validates 'Assyria' and the huge distances that the armies were traveling. Living then, you'd be shocked to see Assyria's armies at the gates of Jerusalem, and only one answer could make sense: YHWH.
'Camels' resonates for me because out here in the West, horses altered all the pre-existing empires. It's not difficult to find when horses showed up. The horse destroyed whole civilizations. So it's easy to see why Solomon would be held up in such high esteem. His place in time was a 'tipping point' in civilizations and all managed by .... YHWH.
These ploys have little effect on apologists on either extreme of the argument. I think they are aimed at the uninformed fence riders in the middle. You know, The Tea Party Types. The ones that would believe that the Israelites were never in the wilderness. Here's another example. 800,000 year old footprints. They withstood all those eons of erosion. But were washed away by the first rain after they were "documented". Best they can tell,The name of The larger, Older male who left the footprints was George. Yup. Intended for a Tea Party audience. http://www.wunderground.com/news/800000-year-old-footprints-discovered-england-20140210 Edit: Ms. Smith said it better than I did. Ironic we reached the same conclusion less than a minute apart.
These ploys have little effect on apologists on either extreme of the argument. I think they are aimed at the uninformed fence riders in the middle. You know, The Tea Party Types. The ones that would believe that the Israelites were never in the wilderness.
Here's another example. 800,000 year old footprints. They withstood all those eons of erosion. But were washed away by the first rain after they were "documented". Best they can tell,The name of The larger, Older male who left the footprints was George. Yup. Intended for a Tea Party audience.
Ha, ha ! Obviously you don't know much about Tea Party types since one thing they definitely do not do is sit on the fence. Thought you might like to know.
Paul C.
Perhaps you are uninformed. Most "Tea Party types" are anything but middle of the road and uninformed. Politically they are either libertarians or classic liberals who have a strong distrust of government. Economically they are free market capitalist, usually informed by Austrian economics or the Chicago school. They are anything but uninformed, but usually very well read and informed. What you are reading from the Mainstream Media is a stereotype.
Here is a great article citing several archaeological evidences for camels in the time of Abraham:
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/2011/04/24/were-camels-domesticated-in-the-time-of-abraham/
Here is a great article citing several archaeological evidences for camels in the time of Abraham: http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/2011/04/24/were-camels-domesticated-in-the-time-of-abraham/
Which would be interesting if we really knew then the "time of Abraham" was.
As do I, even though I think most "tea party types" are a bit extreme politically.Do you think it possible that those extreme political views could color their theology?
More likely to be the other way around.
As do I, even though I think most "tea party types" are a bit extreme politically.Do you think it possible that those extreme political views could color their theology? More likely to be the other way around.
"Tea Party types" are not extreme. It is the left which is so extreme that moderates like the Tea Party supporters only appear extreme. The left has become unapologetically Communist.
So many people will take these articles at their word and will dismiss the Bible as a big fairy tale. Sad really. You really think many will read this and do anything other than take it to either (a) confirm their current opinion of the Bible (b) confirm their current opinion of culture/media? I'll grant you that some articles can change minds but this?
Perhaps (a) is a better way of putting it. Those who are already opposed to Christianity will find comfort in this article. It will give them a growing confidence that the Bible cannot be trusted.
Those who are already opposed to Christianity will find comfort in this article. It will give them a growing confidence that the Bible cannot be trusted.
I think that might be to my advantage - if their confidence is supported by something as weak as this pile of quicksand, I should have no trouble showing them more solid footing.
"Tea Party types" are not extreme. It is the left which is so extreme that moderates like the Tea Party supporters only appear extreme.
Okay George, which group is the tail of the Pareto curve? They must be the extreme.
"Tea Party types" are not extreme. It is the left which is so extreme that moderates like the Tea Party supporters only appear extreme. Okay George, which group is the tail of the Pareto curve? They must be the extreme.
I think you must have only recently heard of Pareto analysis. I don't think it is appropriate for the purpose of concluding who is most extreme. The least extreme are those who adhere to the Constitution while the most extreme are those who chose to violate it.
The least extreme are those who adhere to the Constitution while the most extreme are those who chose to violate it.
The least extreme are those who adhere to the Constitution while the most extreme are those who chose to violate it.Thanks so much for clearing that up. In your view, the ones who believe in the Biblical exodus violate your constitutional rights. Yes, That makes sense...on some planet.
You are confusing politics with theology. Politically, George and I are rather closely in agreement. Theologically, …, well that's a different story [:D]
We are disusing extremism. One hand washes the other.
I think you must have only recently heard of Pareto analysis.
In geological time yes; in human time no ... and I'm much older than your not quite 39,[:D] In fact, I must have been taught Pareto before you were born. [:O] Lucky for you, I don't usually place politics on a spectrum of extremity. I tend to divide politicians into two classes - idiots and fools. "Idiots" are those who don't know what they are talking about. "Fools" know what they are talking about but are foolish enough to be interested in such a thankless profession.
Only if both hands are on the same body.
"Idiots" are those who don't know what they are talking about. "Fools" know what they are talking about but are foolish enough to be interested in such a thankless profession.
We are disusing extremism. One hand washes the other. Only if both hands are on the same body.
[:O] [:$]
The latest issue of Imprimis has an interesting piece on the Tea Party movement, both the good and the bad. IMHO it is spot on: http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/current
From my ever trusty Logos edition of Bible and Spade 1972, v 1
"It is indeed true that camels were used more widely from the period of David onwards, but it is also true that camels were used for domestic service long before Abraham traveled the lands of the Bible. Archaeologists have recovered bones and teeth, and even figurines, of camels predating Patriachal times. One figurine of a camel was excavated at Lagash in Mesopotamia and dates to about 2350 B.C., hundreds of years before Abraham. Another figurine found in Egypt, dating to about 3000 B.C., depicts a man alongside his kneeling camel."
Here are a few links for other articles dealing with Camel domestication.
https://www.academia.edu/2065314/_The_Domestication_of_the_Camel_Biological_Archaeological_and_Inscriptional_Evidence_from_Mesopotamia_Egypt_Israel_and_Arabia_and_Literary_Evidence_from_the_Hebrew_Bible_in_Ugarit_Forschungen_42_2010_Munster_Ugarit-Verlag_2011_331-384
http://blog.bibleplaces.com/2014/02/the-domestication-of-camel-observations.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BiblePlacesBlog+%28BiblePlaces+Blog%29
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2014/02/17/The-Date-of-Camel-Domestication-in-the-Ancient-Near-East.aspx
Peace, Charlene! Thank you so very much for your "sharing" this information with us! Indeed it is much appreciated! *smile*
A helpful scholarly article here: http://tyndalehouse.createsend1.com/t/ViewEmail/r/15BE54F777FEEF892540EF23F30FEDED/9A18DF388DA73556C68C6A341B5D209E
God bless everyone who contributed to this string of posts - and all those who stay focused and on target for Jesus.
Well, now that we've solved a non-issue (see David's reference concerning what the archaeologist said, vs what the press reported), this leads to another fascinating article from David's same link:
http://www.jta.org/2014/01/10/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/ancient-water-tunnel-discovered-in-east-jerusalem
This goes to show you what can happen when you sign up for a tour (field school excursion) in Israel. If you actually lived in Israel, it could also happen, but who can really say.
Which ... drum roll ... leads to yesterday's blog: http://blog.logos.com/2014/02/american-schools-of-oriental-research/
