Originally posted by Kbertsche
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Archeology 201 Guidelines
If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.
Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?
Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.
Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.
Forum Rules: Here
Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?
Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.
Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Camels in Genesis
Collapse
X
-
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.
1 Corinthians 16:13
"...he [Doherty] is no historian and he is not even conversant with the historical discussions of the very matters he wants to pontificate on."
-Ben Witherington III
-
Originally posted by Kbertsche View PostAlso, don't ignore or overlook the paper that I recommended on page 2:
http://moodle.tau.ac.il/pluginfile.p...tion%20ANE.pdf
I don't know who wrote it, but it is well footnoted and seems to have a good bibliography.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Kbertsche View PostAlso, don't ignore or overlook the paper that I recommended on page 2:
http://moodle.tau.ac.il/pluginfile.p...tion%20ANE.pdf
I don't know who wrote it, but it is well footnoted and seems to have a good bibliography.Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette
Comment
-
Originally posted by Outis View PostYou would be in error. Perhaps asking instead of assuming is a better course of action?-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostMiller presented the same thing through the use of scholars I think. Didn't you call them selective?
More to the point, the article did present the contrary evidence. The author of the article emphasized some things that I might have deprecated, but in the end, he or she came to his own conclusion.
You see, QW, it bothers me not one bit if someone looks at all the evidence and interprets it differently than I do, provided their interpretation is honest. I can be honestly right, or honestly wrong, as well as the next guy. What bothers me is rejection of evidence.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Outis View PostThere is a difference between "selective" and "biased."
Ok what is the difference between selective and Biased? Why is Miller selective but not biased?
Originally posted by Outis View PostMore to the point, the article did present the contrary evidence. The author of the article emphasized some things that I might have deprecated, but in the end, he or she came to his own conclusion.
Both of them did talk about how certain scholars support the late domestication theory (in fact, they mention, more or less the same set of scholars). The only "contrary evidence" I read was
Quote "It could be argued that the riders are gods, not humans, possibly indicating that the artist believed humans could not ride the camel at that time, but this is merely an assumption." and Miller (it seems) doesn't even reference this one.
The others are presented without any contrary evidence. And Miller does have a reference to evidence which is said to be disputed as well as Bulliet saying certain things taken as evidence are doubtfully camelline or not necessarily domestic. So I don't think this is a good point of comparison at all. Interestingly, they both come to similar conclusions.
Originally posted by Outis View PostYou see, QW, it bothers me not one bit if someone looks at all the evidence and interprets it differently than I do, provided their interpretation is honest. I can be honestly right, or honestly wrong, as well as the next guy. What bothers me is rejection of evidence.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostOk what is the difference between selective and Biased? Why is Miller selective but not biased?
And Miller rejected evidence?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Outis View PostFor me to attribute bias in an academic context, I have to know the mind of the person. I've never met Miller.
So what does selective mean then? Can you define these terms? I'm somewhat confused
Originally posted by Outis View PostA considerable amount. Far more than I can list in a single post, or even a series of posts. This is why I recommended getting that book.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kbertsche View PostAnd here is a more scholarly article that supports the same thing. To summarize: evidence from inscriptions, drawings, and figurines show that camels had been domesticated in the ancient near east (ANE) by 2000 BC. Domesticated camels were known in Iran, Turkmenistan, and Egypt by this time. It is reasonable to assume that they would have been used on the major E-W trade routes that passed through Palestine. If so, it is reasonable that the Patriarchs could have purchased domesticated camels from these traders, even if there were no camel breeding and domestication efforts in Palestine itself. The Patriarchs were few in number and were nomadic, so there is no expectation that we would find archaeological evidence of camel use specifically from them.
Hat tip to cre8id at CARM
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Outis View PostThere is a difference between "selective" and "biased."
More to the point, the article did present the contrary evidence. The author of the article emphasized some things that I might have deprecated, but in the end, he or she came to his own conclusion.
You see, QW, it bothers me not one bit if someone looks at all the evidence and interprets it differently than I do, provided their interpretation is honest. I can be honestly right, or honestly wrong, as well as the next guy. What bothers me is rejection of evidence.
1) it tries to give an honest, unbiased account of the history of the issue
2) it tries to fairly represent all major sides of the issue
3) it documents these points with references to peer-reviewed publications or published books
The author may or may not go on to argue for a particular interpretation of the evidence. But if he does and has done a good job of the above points, the reader can feel confident to decide for himself whether or not the author's evidence is persuasive. The author has presented and discussed the evidence which is contrary to his position.
On the other hand, if the author suppresses and excludes contrary evidence, he only convinces the naive. Anyone else senses that he is hiding something, and he loses trust and respect. If his position is strong and well reasoned, he should not shirk from presenting contrary evidence."Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." – Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kbertsche View PostFYI, the hallmarks of a scholarly article include the following:
1) it tries to give an honest, unbiased account of the history of the issue
2) it tries to fairly represent all major sides of the issue
3) it documents these points with references to peer-reviewed publications or published books
The author may or may not go on to argue for a particular interpretation of the evidence. But if he does and has done a good job of the above points, the reader can feel confident to decide for himself whether or not the author's evidence is persuasive. The author has presented and discussed the evidence which is contrary to his position.
On the other hand, if the author suppresses and excludes contrary evidence, he only convinces the naive. Anyone else senses that he is hiding something, and he loses trust and respect. If his position is strong and well reasoned, he should not shirk from presenting contrary evidence.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post[url]
... a scientific report establishing that camels, the basic mode of transportation for the biblical patriarchs, weren’t domesticated in Israel until hundreds of years after Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are said to have wandered the earth.Last edited by Paprika; 02-13-2014, 12:39 AM.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 05:38 AM
|
0 responses
11 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-26-2024, 05:38 AM |
Comment