General Discussion

zeemike

(18,998 posts)

46. I dislike having this conversation and that is why I stay out of the religious forum.

Tue Feb 11, 2014, 09:25 PM

Feb 2014

But it seems it is brought into GD as long as it is mocking of believers and that is OK.

And I don't like it because it will make people like you that I have a great deal of respect for dislike me, and you will if I continue with this.

But there is no proof that camels were not used 2000 or even 3000 years BC...only speculation...and that speculation is taken as fact by those who have the need to prove the bible wrong.
But what you are saying is that you know the bible was written down then,....but that does not prove that it was never written down before, or passed on as an oral tradition as it was in Homer's time and written down at a later date.
It is imposable to know that...sense we have little that survived time...except that written in stone, but a ruling king who may well be biased and not telling all...or even knowing anything beyond his own land.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

147 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Archaeologists: There are too many camels in the Bible, out of time and out of place [View all] TheMathieu Feb 2014 OP

But it is the word of "God" so it must be correct. Motown_Johnny Feb 2014 #1

If they just watched the history channel they would know camels are alien ghosts Agnosticsherbet Feb 2014 #6

Isn't that on Chanel #5 Motown_Johnny Feb 2014 #8

You might be right. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2014 #49

. Motown_Johnny Feb 2014 #86

Space pictures show signs of a huge nuclear blast fadedrose Feb 2014 #67

Make a good novel. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2014 #75

I love the title of this. justiceischeap Feb 2014 #2

Call it "When History meets Stupidity" . . . fadedrose Feb 2014 #77

Only one problem, no archaeologist ever said this. Coyotl Feb 2014 #88

I still love the title, nonetheless. :) nt. justiceischeap Feb 2014 #89

You mean they were at the manger....... Historic NY Feb 2014 #3

Did anyone ever think it WASN'T written or edited long after the events it narrates? frazzled Feb 2014 #4

Yes, virtually every Christian fundamentalist believes it's verified history. (nt) jeff47 Feb 2014 #10

Earliest known version here dipsydoodle Feb 2014 #12

Not as early as the "Twible"-- thucythucy Feb 2014 #50

Similarities between Sumerian myths and the first five books Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #100

Where I am from, that is LITERALLY what they believe. Jamastiene Feb 2014 #108

Sure, but this is the New York Times frazzled Feb 2014 #110

They didn't ride camels, they rode dinasaurs. Ken Ham told me so! Scuba Feb 2014 #5

Eh, neither: jsr Feb 2014 #9

ahhhhhhhhh!!!! tomm2thumbs Feb 2014 #24

LMFAO! How any could believe a T-Rex would not devour them JRLeft Feb 2014 #41

They claim the huge teeth weren't for eating meat, but JoeyT Feb 2014 #47

That is true. They used smaller dinosaurs for opening cans, though: Arugula Latte Feb 2014 #90

Just what are you trying to push on us? Anyone with any sense knows that picture can't be true. A Simple Game Feb 2014 #97

You know what everyone says about him, doncha Scuba? fadedrose Feb 2014 #76

Bible-thumpin' nutjob. Scuba Feb 2014 #85

I thought better of my post fadedrose Feb 2014 #87

What is most interesting to me is that this research came from Israel BlueStreak Feb 2014 #7

Your comments seem too broad brushed to me. Big Blue Marble Feb 2014 #15

In private, maybe, but from the pulpit, no. BlueStreak Feb 2014 #55

American Right Wing Christians are Authoritarians and GOD is the ULTIMATE boss.... Spitfire of ATJ Feb 2014 #92

Cause the Patriarch did not exist nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #11

Oh, I can't wait for the day when my field disproves the rest of the bible. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #13

Maybe Abraham�s servant was smoking a Camel on a mission to find a wife for Isaac. dipsydoodle Feb 2014 #14

Joe Camel, a Giant in Tobacco Marketing, Is Dead at 23 warrant46 Feb 2014 #29

Oh No, somebody let the camel out of the bag. N/T Big Blue Marble Feb 2014 #16

Genesis was oral tradition written down to chronicle events of millions of years before. freshwest Feb 2014 #17

The story of Lot, his wife and daughters is a ribald shaggy dog pun in Sumerian. aquart Feb 2014 #26

Well Noah itself went through a few interesting changes nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #32

Love that pic ! nt eppur_se_muova Feb 2014 #94

It is an internet meme classic nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #95

I always smile when I hear the Fundie argument... Wounded Bear Feb 2014 #109

odly they never bring up the one that matches the flood story nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #111

That's just not true... Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2014 #62

That's probably the LEAST of the problems with the "holy" bible snooper2 Feb 2014 #18

When was young rickyhall Feb 2014 #19

OT is not inspired word of God. It's what we've got from our past to lead us forward. aquart Feb 2014 #27

Lead us forward? The OT is one fucked-up book of twisted tales. Arugula Latte Feb 2014 #99

It's a lot of old folklore which is why an American Bible should include Paul Bunyan. Spitfire of ATJ Feb 2014 #93

There are also too many other modern contrivances jmowreader Feb 2014 #20

I think earrings are pretty old justiceischeap Feb 2014 #21

I think the point is dballance Feb 2014 #22

two thousand years ago, yes, absolutely nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #35

I've read that the exodus happened thucythucy Feb 2014 #52

Now I would like to read that about this small tribe nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #54

I'll have to dig this up for you. thucythucy Feb 2014 #58

Not a problem. And Homer's works and the Bible nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #64

Back again, at least for a bit. thucythucy Feb 2014 #79

See you again, and I agree with you on this nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #81

Yes they did. zeemike Feb 2014 #36

Certainly gold leaf was used in the days of King Tut Art_from_Ark Feb 2014 #84

I'm sure the term 'camel' actually meant 'klondike bar' tomm2thumbs Feb 2014 #23

then what about cvoogt Feb 2014 #25

That is so interesting! nt cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #28

"So I guess the whole, Camel Through The Eye Of A Needle thing is false" thelordofhell Feb 2014 #30

Well by the time that parable was written they did have camels nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #33

There are some interesting interpretations of that bon mot. stopbush Feb 2014 #83

I always get a bitter laugh sammythecat Feb 2014 #131

Thanks both of you nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #135

That saying isn't really about the rich or indicting the rich. stopbush Feb 2014 #137

"Camels probably had little or no role in the lives of such early Jewish patriarchs " zeemike Feb 2014 #31

This is actually quite old. Have read similar things from back in the 1800's The Straight Story Feb 2014 #34

I have read many things like that before. zeemike Feb 2014 #39

Thing is, some people 'want' to believe something instead of wanting to find facts The Straight Story Feb 2014 #48

So have I...going back to the 60s. zeemike Feb 2014 #53

The Per-Ankh article about Moses is pretty speculative but touches on some key points. bklyncowgirl Feb 2014 #124

The more research done the more we find the patriarchs nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #37

Well if they have some facts I want to hear it. zeemike Feb 2014 #38

Yes they were domesticated nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #42

"the bone is probably a wild dromedary" zeemike Feb 2014 #44

That single document is the whole bible nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #45

I dislike having this conversation and that is why I stay out of the religious forum. zeemike Feb 2014 #46

So archeological evidence by damned nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #51

No evidence not be damned. zeemike Feb 2014 #59

It is not one bone nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #61

And the bone was "probably" a wild camel. zeemike Feb 2014 #70

Because domestic weight bearing camels nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #71

Well the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. zeemike Feb 2014 #73

Nope, you did nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #74

No I did not. zeemike Feb 2014 #78

Once again, have a wonderful day nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #80

Then I guess I was right...it does divide us. zeemike Feb 2014 #82

Nonsense. Post something that makes the bible "sound true". Please. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #128

TOS. zeemike Feb 2014 #136

And they should not expect people to "respect" their faith as in "validate" it Arugula Latte Feb 2014 #138

+1 . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #142

Cannibalism is pretty well accepted by archaeologists now in the southwest. bluedigger Feb 2014 #145

Yep it is all settled now...don't even think it is not. zeemike Feb 2014 #146

Thanks for all your posts in this thread. thucythucy Feb 2014 #56

Watch that video, it is mind blowing nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #57

Marked for later viewing. thucythucy Feb 2014 #60

+2. Thank you for all your posts in this thread. nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #129

You welcome nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #132

Science comfortable w uncertainty. Religionists demand certainty & priests stand ready to supply it. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #101

Well I am comfortable with uncertainty too zeemike Feb 2014 #113

The bible is false. We can be as certain of that as we are about the germ theory of disease. nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #114

So you just confirmed what I said. zeemike Feb 2014 #116

Wrong Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #117

Young earth creationism and original sin are not in the bible. zeemike Feb 2014 #118

Correct, not in the bible, per se. Bible story of creation is still wrong. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #119

Wrong or an allegory? zeemike Feb 2014 #120

It's an allegory that is all wrong. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #123

Well I see you wish to escalate it with that last sentence. zeemike Feb 2014 #125

"camel technology had become common" snooper2 Feb 2014 #126

plus it's a rip-off of Borges! MisterP Feb 2014 #40

LMFAO more Lewis Black on creationism. JRLeft Feb 2014 #43

There is a lot of embelishment within and outside of the Bible. Xolodno Feb 2014 #63

This significant only to biblical literalists... Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2014 #65

Holy shit, it's just a book.. that's been re-"translated" and manipulated for centuries NightWatcher Feb 2014 #66

Ok one bone to pick with you nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #68

Fine, if you're going to be that way NightWatcher Feb 2014 #69

Hey feel free nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #72

Everyone knows the early Jewish patriarchs rode dinosaurs. KamaAina Feb 2014 #91

Now that IS a painting waiting to happen nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #96

Scientific evidence shows there was a Great World Flood Ichingcarpenter Feb 2014 #98

Isn't wikipedia just people's opinion? upaloopa Feb 2014 #102

Wrong. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2014 #115

That is not a flood cthulu2016 Feb 2014 #103

A Flood by defination Ichingcarpenter Feb 2014 #121

Nearly all early human societies formed around rivers. NuclearDem Feb 2014 #105

There is no evidence of a worldwide flood that happened in the bible times. Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #140

No there is no evidence of this nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #141

Some scholars claim the bible was written by Roman aristocrats NorthCarolina Feb 2014 #104

That is the NEW Testament nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #134

. jberryhill Feb 2014 #106

But...but...the Earth is only 6,000 years old. Jamastiene Feb 2014 #107

Ham's head just exploded.... blackspade Feb 2014 #112

Maybe it was slaves in camel costumes. wheniwasincongress Feb 2014 #122

"The bible is a book with some beautiful poetry, a bloodstained history, a wealth of obscenity, and Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2014 #127

following the History Channel - I would have to surmise that the camels were probably brought to Douglas Carpenter Feb 2014 #130

Thread winner!!!! nadinbrzezinski Feb 2014 #133

Hey, that makes as much sense as the Bible. Arugula Latte Feb 2014 #139

I Have Always... Found The Camels Questionable... WillyT Feb 2014 #143

Also, kilts were invented about 250 years after the events depicted in "Braveheart" Recursion Feb 2014 #144

Well, duh. It's fiction. They made shit up. ladyVet Feb 2014 #147