It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Camel bones suggest error in Bible, archaeologists say

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by dashen
 


Also the ebla tablets confirm an ancient camel trade in the area. Facts




posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by dashen
 


Sorry, but I'm not seeing any relevant facts or proof in any of your links. Perhaps you can quote the passages, cite the items, that are supposed to prove your position?


edit on 6-2-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
The Bible was heavily edited, redacted, and rewrote by Israelite Rabbis after the death of Moses, as early as 12th C BC to as late as the 1st C. BC. The "Five Books" of Moses are largely based on compositions originating in Mesopotamia, mostly dealing with "Creation". The Old Testament redacted many of it's books because later orthodox views were in conflict.

When the creation stories first emerged, in Mesopotamia, camels were part of that story. When the stories were later incorporated into the Israelite/Hebrew bible, focusing on the Levant region, the camels remained a part of the story, even if they were only just being introduced to the region by nomads.

It's just another piece of evidence the Bible is a compilation of other cultures origin stories.

On a side note: we often hear the Hebrew's "stole" the Genesis story from Sumerians, but the truth is, nomadic Hebrews shared a cultural affinity with Akkadians (one of the original Semitic people's in Mesopotamia and a major part of Sumer), and these nomadic Hebrews were a part of the shared culture of Sumer. So in some respects, those Genesis stories are theirs as well. However, since the time of Abraham leaving Ur, they've continually revised these stories, bringing it closer and closer to their developing ideology of Monotheism. I say "developing" because we can see the earliest parts of this bible still incorporated a plurality of deities (Elohim) which Rabbinical revisioinsts, even as far back as 10th-1st C. BC had attempted to eradicate, much like the Christian apologist philosophers, using doublespeak to make older writings and ideology conform to current ideology.

On yet another side note, I could argue that most of the cultures at that time had an "evolving ideology" that was approaching monotheism, even Egyptians, Greeks and Mesopotamians.
edit on 6-2-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   


That reads as just trying to make the illogicalness of the bible make sense. There are people in the bible that are cited as having lived 900 years. Even with your correction, that would still be 450 years. I'd be more willing to believe nixie's idea that a year was a month to them and that 900 years to them was 75 to us, though I also pointed out the inconsistency of this idea as well.
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


You could be absolutely right. I do not deny that there can be embellishments in all eras of literature and I will go one step further to say that some history has been changed to suit the reigning power in which it was revised. We see this even today where history books have degraded many American presidents and even as recent as WWII we see history rewritten to the point that what I was taught some seventy years ago is today not considered true at all. So yes, you have a good point.

All literature had to be tradition before it became written literature. My belief is that when Moses gathered his literature from all over the known and accessible areas of his day that it was more of a compiling literature into book form and not that he wrote all of the Torah. Torah was written and compiled in the last year of his life and he was reported as being 120 years old. It is believed that he had well over 71 scribes who helped in presenting Torah and if that is true then I do believe that most stories were gathered material from tradition of the 12 tribes as well as outside sources.

You and I both have heard that a certain woman named Clinton is the most brilliant woman in the world but we also know that is an exaggeration to say the least. Everyone in the world has not been tested and compared to this woman's mental status. So we understand that it is simply an exaggeration to compliment her. But in a thousand years from now who knows what will be written concerning this woman. Maybe she will become a goddess in some literature and maybe lots of people will believe that she was a goddess.

So what do we do with what we have? One thing that I do is to speculate. I read and sort out the things that my mind wants to consider. I know I read that Sampson killed a thousand men with a jawbone of an ass. I read that when I was knee high to a grasshopper but I never believed it. But that's just me. My brother believed it but I always found that to be a little too much. But now that is not to say that Sampson did not live. He could very well have been a very strong guy and beat up a lot of people but not a thousand all at once. So I would not say that another book in the bible is a lie simply because Sampson was embellished. After all that other book was a separate piece of literature before it was compiled into the bible. So I would be unfair to judge one book at the expense of another book.

No, I am not trying to justify inaccurate data. What do I get from the flood of Noah? It could have been a local flood
at that particular time and the calendar of reckoning could have been from one equinox of Spring to Fall or from Fall to Spring. But that is not to say that all later civilizations reckoned time in this manner. The subject was Noah and that possibility is a sensible one to consider. Now as far as termites are concerned the flood only killed the breathing creatures of flesh from the face of the earth and I am really not sure that a termite is a breathing creature of flesh. In spite of what I sort out does not mean that you believe what I believe. It was just that I ran across this theory as I was studying the dating of the book of Job. Wishing you well --



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 


Here is where you will need to consider something. Jewish people dislike the bible and go out of their way to disprove it when they can. reason why? because it makes them look bad for sending jesus to die on a cross. Its all about saving face for them.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by yuppa
 


hmm, you realize it was Jews who wrote the Bible, yes? Even the New Testament, since Jesus and those disciples of his who contributed books to it were Jews.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 



Two problems:

1) Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

2) Abraham did not come from Israel - he came from Ur of the Chaldeans.

...so, if camels weren't domesticated in ancient Israel, does that necessarily mean Abraham and his family didn't have camels? No it does not.

Now, if archaeologists were to prove conclusively that the area around ancient Ur didn't have camels... that would be a more relevant finding.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


carbon dating is not a constant, it has many flaws and cant be used to precisly measure anything.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


No they were not jews who wrote the bible, if they believed Jesus they were CHRISTIANS. Actually the OT was written by HEBREWS but the NT was written by the first Christians.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by yuppa
 


What language was the OT and NT written in? Many people have gotten that question wrong.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Seede
 


That reads as just trying to make the illogicalness of the bible make sense. There are people in the bible that are cited as having lived 900 years. Even with your correction, that would still be 450 years. I'd be more willing to believe nixie's idea that a year was a month to them and that 900 years to them was 75 to us, though I also pointed out the inconsistency of this idea as well.

Also, it's not just the dating that I have issue with (that can be chalked up to oral reciters not remembering the numbers correctly), it's the fantastical stories that archeology is more and more showing not only aren't as fantastical as written, but also never even happened to begin with. Noah's Ark (impossible, explain to me how Noah housed termites on his ark or fed the carnivores or what happened when an animal got sick and died), Exodus of Moses (no records of a mass exodus of slaves from Egypt, no evidence in the desert of any large traveling band of people wondering for 40 years), Tower of Babel (the idea that all people on Earth shared the same language at one point is just ludicrous), Jonah and the Whale; these are all stories in the bible that belong more in a fairy tale then a book of history.

The bible and the religions it inspired need to go the way of other ancient religions like the Pantheon of the Greeks. People who try to come up with explanations for these things like in the article you linked are just trying to desperately keep the bible relevant in lieu of overwhelming evidence to its lies.


What an ignorant and presumptuous thing to say.



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Grimpachi
reply to post by yuppa
 


What language was the OT and NT written in? Many people have gotten that question wrong.


In pig latin, of course. Thats why Jewish people don't eat pigs....it is a holy animal.




posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 12:32 AM
link   
What?

An error in the bible! The horror!



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Tidbit :
The oldest archaeological evidence for domesticated cats was found
on the Greek island of Cyprus, where several animal species including cats
were introduced by 7500 BC.
. . . If cats were domesticated in 7500BC, then surly 'beasts of burden' were
too.
Btw, the o.p. article was from fox-'news'

domesticated cats



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ToneDeaf
 


Sure, fox is a joke of news, but it was first on the list of web sites with this news. Here is couple more, if you doubt reasarch:

www.techtimes.com...

www.christianpost.com...

www.timesofisrael.com...

www.greenprophet.com...

www.natureworldnews.com...

Is that better? I am sure that archaeozoologist might know about timeline of domestication of certain species, and as already said multiple times in this thread, all of those are based on findings/evidence.




supergravity
 


carbon dating is not a constant, it has many flaws and cant be used to precisly measure anything.

Care to show some evidence, or this is just something you 'believe' among other things?




Awen24
 

Two problems:

1) Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

2) Abraham did not come from Israel - he came from Ur of the Chaldeans.

...so, if camels weren't domesticated in ancient Israel, does that necessarily mean Abraham and his family didn't have camels? No it does not.

Now, if archaeologists were to prove conclusively that the area around ancient Ur didn't have camels... that would be a more relevant finding.


1. Claim without supporting evidence is just pure speculation.

2. Research was not done only on findings in Israel, but whole Arab peninsula. Please check articles. Ur is on Arab peninsula as well.




yuppa
 


Here is where you will need to consider something. Jewish people dislike the bible and go out of their way to disprove it when they can. reason why? because it makes them look bad for sending jesus to die on a cross. Its all about saving face for them.


That is nice conspiracy.... They must have run around destroying all camel remains just to prove bible being wrong in this... Or should be simple that whoever wrote bible had no idea how long those have been domesticated, as they were part of every day life at that time. That conspiracy sounds even better, don't you agree?





edit on 7-2-2014 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 07:13 AM
link   

TiedDestructor

What an ignorant and presumptuous thing to say.


You obviously don't know what the words "ignorant" and "presumptuous" mean because my post is neither. Of course I'm not surprised considering I'm responding to a one line poster who couldn't be bothered to back up his ad hominem attacks against my post, so I'm not surprised.



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Seede
 


Oh there is most definitely grains of truth in the bible. It's what helps its believability. There are also obvious embellishments in it (which many Christians should do well to recognize, you are probably correct in that the flood was a local event that spanned the known world of those people). Though keep in mind, historical fiction has many truths in it, but we still recognize it as fiction. I have no problem with studying the bible as a work of fiction or even as a guide to view what people back in those times believed. Heck there are some good lessons in there (though this statement is weird since I can learn good lessons from books like Aesop's Fables as well, but I don't use it as a book of worship).



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by yuppa
 


I would argue against the NT being written by "Christians", per se. Christ himself was not a "Christian". The concept of "Christianity" didn't set in until nearly the end of the 1st C. AD. Christ and his earliest followers were still Jews. Christ still followed Judaic worship. It wasn't until long after his death that "Christians" began recognizing themselves as a new sect, and celebrating events pertaining directly to Christ, Christ's teachings, and his death. There's a lot of back and forth over the semantics of when "Christians" first appeared and you could fill books with arguments either way. Instead I'll just comment that the very earliest of Christ's followers saw themselves as a Second Temple sect of Judaism.

You can bet that during the lifetime of the Apostles, the "Apostolic age", a lot of time was spent developing the "canon" of what would become the New Testament. Codifying their sect into what would later be a breakaway religion.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   


Text What language was the OT and NT written in? Many people have gotten that question wrong.
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


As most English bibles stand right now the old testament is considered to have been from the Greek Septuagint or the Hebrew and Aramaic Masoretic text. There is also a Lamsa bible which is considered to have been entirely Aramaic. The English New Testaments are mostly from Greek manuscripts and Latin sources. But it is not really that simple. Actually all people are not in agreement as to the source of the material.

Before the Roman Empire slaughtered the Jews in 70 CE and 135 CE and stole the Christian sect, we had a different picture. The first Christian Church had no new testament and their old testament was only Torah (the first 5 books of the old testament bibles that we have now). Their liturgy was entirely Hebrew and Aramaic. The Greek speaking Jews were allowed as grafted brothers at a later time. It was in the Jerusalem church where the Apostles and disciples of Jesus taught and preached in Hebrew and Aramaic. It is believed by many scholars that the original letters of the Apostles were written in Hebrew and Aramaic but naturally there is no proof in any of this.

Actually the question as you have asked is very complicated to say the least. The Old Testament that we have now in the Masoretic text was written in stages of periods estimated as between 1500 BCE to 500 BCE with Torah being the original. The Greek Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew before Jesus but that original Hebrew text is lost. So the lost Hebrew text which was used to make the Septuagint was replaced by this re written Hebrew text called Masoretic text. That is why some modern bibles use the Greek Septuagint
and some use the Hebrew Masoretic.

To make it simple we could say that we now have 39 OT books which were gathered over a period of about 1,000 years and put into one big book which we call the Old Testament. But the language of Torah is not the same as when Jesus walked the earth. So as you can see, we have a very extensive thing to study in language. Even modern linguists do not agree in many avenues of what you have asked.

Wishing you well



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


There was a camel fossil found dating to something like 65-250 million years ago, I forget the exact date, but I know it was pretty damn old. I am searching for the fossil, it was for sale online for like 50k or something...




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join