GENESIS 24:10-11; 31:24 CAMELS IN THE BIBLE

One often cited objection to the historical accuracy of the Bible states that the mention of certain Jewish patriarchs having domesticated camels is an error because archeologists haven't found widespread evidence in that area until centuries later. Generally, all they are able to prove is that the use of camels was not widespread until later, but that doesn't exclude the domestication of some camels by a few wealthy people of the time, such as the patriarchs.

Here is part of a more detailed rebuttal from the New Bible Commentary (pp. 181-182): “The mention of camels in the Pentateuch, especially in Genesis, has been often and persistently dismissed as anachronistic. The truth appears to be as follows. From the 12^th century BC the camel becomes a regular feature of the biblical world (other than Egypt, where it remains rare). Though limited and imperfect, the extant evidence clearly indicates that the domesticated camel was known by 3000 BC; and continued in limited use as a slow-moving burden-carrier down through the second millennium BC.” Evidence: Syrian cuneiform tablet, Ugaritic text, Byblos drawing, camel remains in Middle Bronze Age tombs (1900-1550 BC) and in Egypt (2000-1400 BC), 13th cent. BC picture from Egypt.

Similarly, Mark W. Chavalas (Biblical Archaeology Review, Nov/Dec 2018, p. 52) cites the fact that Abraham did not come from Israel, but from Mesopotamia where archaeological evidence for the use of camels long before Abraham's time was known. Two-humped camels are pictured on a sherd from eastern Iran dating from the 4^th millennium BC. Skeletal remains date from the 3^rd millennium. A Sumerian list of animals from 2400 BC lists camels as part of their caravans.

Most of the historical objections to the Bible by past and present critics follows this same pattern: making deductions before all the evidence is in. So keep in mind this general principle: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” And since in archeology, the evidence is never all in, we should be rightly suspicious of any absolute statements from that quarter that deny the historical accuracy of the Bible.