http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=858
Camels and the Composition of Genesis
Arguably, the most widely alleged anachronisms used in support of the
idea that Moses could not have written the first five books of the Bible
(a theory known as the Documentary Hypothesis) are the accounts of the
early patriarchs possessing camels. The word “camel(s)” appears 23 times
in 21 verses in the book of Genesis. The first book of the Bible
declares that camels existed in Egypt during the time of Abraham
(12:14-17), in Palestine in the days Isaac (24:63), in Padan Aram while
Jacob was working for Laban (30:43), and were owned by the Midianites
during the time Joseph was sold into Egyptian slavery (37:25,36). Make
no mistake about it, the book of beginnings clearly teaches that camels
were domesticated since at least the time of Abraham.
According to skeptics (and a growing number of liberal scholars),
however, the idea that camels were domesticated in the time of Abraham
directly contradicts archaeological evidence. Over one hundred years
ago, T.K. Cheyne wrote: “The assertion that the ancient Egyptians knew
of the camel is unfounded” (1899, 1:634). In his oft’-quoted book on the
various animals of the Bible, George Cansdale stated:
The Bible first mentions the camel in Gen. 12:16, where the presents
are listed which the pharaoh gave to Abram. This is generally reckoned
to be a later scribe’s addition, for it seems unlikely that there were any camels in Egypt then (1970, p. 66, emp. added).
More recently, Finkelstein and Silberman confidently asserted:
We now know through archaeological research that camels were not domesticated as beasts of burden earlier than the late second millennium and were not widely used in that capacity in the ancient Near East until well after 1000 BCE (2001, p. 37, emp. added).
By way of summary, what the Bible believer has been told is: “[T]ame
camels were simply unknown during Abraham’s time” (Tobin, 2000).
While these claims have been made repeatedly over the last century, the
truth of the matter is that skeptics and liberal theologians are unable
to cite a single piece of solid archaeological evidence in support of
their claims. As Randall Younker of Andrews University stated in March
2000 while delivering a speech in the Dominican Republic: “Clearly,
scholars who have denied the presence of domesticated camels in the 2
nd millennium B.C.
have been committing the fallacy of arguing from silence. This approach
should not be allowed to cast doubt upon the veracity of any historical
document, let alone Scripture” (2000). The burden of proof actually
should be upon skeptics to show that camels were not domesticated until
after the time of the patriarchs. Instead, they assure their listeners
of the camel’s absence in Abraham’s day—without one shred of
archaeological evidence. [Remember, for many years they also argued that
writing was unknown during the time of Moses—a conclusion based
entirely on “silence.” Now, however, they have recanted that idea,
because evidence has been found to the contrary. One might think that
such “scholars” would learn not to speak with such assurance when
arguing from silence.]
What makes their claims even more disturbing is that several pieces of
evidence do exist (and have existed for some time) that prove camels
were domesticated during (and even before) the time of Abraham (roughly
2,000 B.C.). In an article that appeared in the
Journal of Near Eastern Studies
a half-century ago, professor Joseph Free listed several instances of
Egyptian archaeological finds supporting the domestication of camels [NOTE:
The dates given for the Egyptian dynasties are from Clayton, 2001,
pp.14-68]. The earliest evidence comes from a pottery camel’s head and a
terra cotta tablet with men riding on and leading camels. According to
Free, these are both from predynastic Egypt (1944, pp. 189-190), which
according to Clayton is roughly before 3150 B.C.
Free also listed three clay camel heads and a limestone vessel in the
form of camel lying down—all dated at the First Dynasty of Egypt
(3050-2890 B.C.). He then mentioned several models of camels from the Fourth Dynasty (2613-2498 B.C.), and a petroglyph depicting a camel and a man dated at the Sixth Dynasty (2345-2184 B.C.).
Such evidence has led one respected Egyptologist to conclude that “the
extant evidence clearly indicates that the domestic camel was known [in
Egypt—EL] by 3,000 B.C.”—long before Abraham’s time (Kitchen, 1980, 1:228).
Perhaps the most convincing find in support of the early domestication
of camels in Egypt is a rope made of camel’s hair found in the Fayum (an
oasis area southwest of modern-day Cairo). The two-strand twist of
hair, measuring a little over three feet long, was found in the late
1920s, and was sent to the Natural History Museum where it was analyzed
and compared to the hair of several different animals. After
considerable testing, it was determined to be camel hair, dated (by
analyzing the layer in which it was found) to the Third or Fourth
Egyptian Dynasty (2686-2498 B.C.). In his article, Free also listed several other discoveries from around 2,000 B.C. and later, which showed camels as domestic animals (pp. 189-190).
While prolific in Egypt, finds relating to the domestication of camels are not isolated to the African continent. In his book,
Ancient Orient and the Old Testament, professor Kenneth Kitchen (retired) of the University of Liverpool reported several discoveries
made outside of Egypt proving ancient camel domestication around 2,000 B.C.
Lexical lists from Mesopotamia have been uncovered that show a
knowledge of domesticated camels as far back as this time. Camel bones
have been found in household ruins at Mari in present-day Syria that
fossilologists believe are also at least 4,000 years old. Furthermore, a
Sumerian text from the time of Abraham has been discovered in the
ancient city of Nippur (located in what is now southeastern Iraq) that
clearly implies the domestication of camels by its allusions to camels’
milk (Kitchen, 1966, p. 79).
All of these documented finds support the domestication of camels in
Egypt many years before the time of Abraham. Yet, as Younker rightly
observed, skeptics refuse to acknowledge any of this evidence.
It is interesting to note how, once an idea gets into the literature,
it can become entrenched in conventional scholarly thinking. I remember
doing research on the ancient site of Hama in Syria. As I was reading
through the excavation reports (published in French), I came across a
reference to a figurine from the 2nd millennium which the excavator
thought must be a horse, but the strange hump in the middle of its back
made one think of a camel. I looked at the photograph and the figurine
was obviously that of a camel! The scholar was so influenced by the idea
that camels were not used until the 1st millennium, that when he found a
figurine of one in the second millennium, he felt compelled to call it a
horse! This is a classic example of circular reasoning (2000,
parenthetical comment in orig.).
Finds relating to the domestication of camels are not as prevalent in the second millennium B.C.
as they are in the first millennium. This does not make the skeptics’
case any stronger, however. Just because camels were not as widely used
during Abraham’s time as they were later, does not mean that they were
entirely undomesticated. As Free commented:
Many who have rejected this reference to Abraham’s camels seem to have assumed something which the text does not state. It
should be carefully noted that the biblical reference does not
necessarily indicate that the camel was common in Egypt at that time,
nor does it evidence that the Egyptians had made any great progress in
the breeding and domestication of camels. It merely says that Abraham
had camels (1944, p. 191, emp. added).
Similarly, Younker noted:
This is not to say that domesticated camels were abundant and widely
used everywhere in the ancient Near East in the early second millennium.
However, the patriarchal narratives do not necessarily require large
numbers of camels…. The smaller amount of evidence for domestic camels
in the late third and early second millennium B.C., especially in Palestine, is in accordance with this more restricted use (1997, 42:52).
Even without the above-mentioned archaeological finds (which to the
unbiased examiner prove that camels were domesticated in the time of
Abraham), it only seems reasonable to conclude that since wild camels
have been known since the Creation, “there is no credible reason why
such an indispensable animal in desert and semi-arid lands should not
have been sporadically domesticated in patriarchal times and even
earlier” (“Animal Kingdom,” 1988). The truth is, all of the available
evidence points to one conclusion—the limited use of domesticated camels
during and before the time of Abraham did occur. The supposed
“anachronism” of domesticated camels during the time of the patriarchs
is, in fact, an actual historical reference to the use of these animals
at that time. Those who reject this conclusion cannot give one piece of
solid archaeological evidence on their behalf. They simply argue from
the “silence” of archaeology…which is silent no more!
REFERENCES
“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.
Recently
I read the statement, “Jesus was a vegetarian.” Supposedly, since Jesus
did not eat meat, neither should we. There are several problems with
this line of reasoning.