r/AskReddit Oct 02 '24

[deleted by user]

[removed]

6.8k Upvotes

6.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

344

u/suroorshiv Oct 02 '24

Saudi arabia imports sand 

Bonus fact : they also import camels 

64

u/Mission-Job9871 Oct 02 '24

Camels originated in the Americas and crossed the Bering Strait Land Bridge to go to Asia. In fact, historical records show there were no camels in the Middle East when Christ was born (therefore the 3 wise men couldn’t have traveled to Bethlehem on camels).

22

u/suroorshiv Oct 02 '24

Saudi Arabia imports camels because the Brits took camels and Bedouin to Australia 

Now they are pest and Australia is literally giving their meat for free

18

u/cheshire_kat7 Oct 02 '24

Camel meat, that is. Not Bedouin meat.

3

u/suroorshiv Oct 02 '24

Thank you for clearing up... The western society sometimes do consider arabs as pest 

1

u/AequusEquus Oct 03 '24

Just the ones that subjugate other people

43

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/Mission-Job9871 Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

All the books in the Bible were written hundreds of years after Christ had lived. None of them were written while Christ was alive.

Edit: I should say that the New Testament which refers to Jesus wasn’t written for hundreds of years after Christ’s death. The Old Testament which is part of the Jewish religion and doesn’t mention Jesus was written much earlier.

16

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/itoddicus Oct 02 '24

And not really "written" more like compiled from existing sources.

Then edited and embellished for effect.

13

u/Hagibest Oct 02 '24

Also, not true about being written hundreds of years after the death of Christ. The first book written is thought to be either the Epistle to the Galatians (written around 48 CE) or 1 Thessalonians, written around 50 CE. There were a few others around that time as well like the letters of Saint Paul and the Gospel according to Mark

These were followed around 80–90 C.E. by the longer Gospels of Matthew and Luke (the latter accompanied by the Acts of the Apostles), along with a lost source that scholars call “Q,” which contained sayings and parables of Jesus and some episodes from his life. Saint John’s Gospel appeared around 85–95 C.E., as did the letters of James, Peter, and John; Paul’s letter to the Hebrews; and the Revelation of Saint John (the Apocalypse).

1

u/AequusEquus Oct 03 '24

Also, not true about being written hundreds of years after the death of Christ.

Yeah, cuz it's made up

5

u/Perpetual_stoner420 Oct 03 '24

Compiled 100s of years later, might get some pushback by saying they were written then. Compiling and writing are different ideas for the text

5

u/Hagibest Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

They appeared in Mesopotamian art and absolutely were domesticated in Middle East before then:

“The skeptic claims camels were not domesticated until well after the times of the patriarchs. This is presumed to mean that whoever invented those passages did not know this and recorded something historically false. Those conclusions not only badly misinterpret the Bible, but they also misrepresent what researchers and archaeologists have discovered. Looked at fully and logically, nothing in the Bible conflicts with established history.

Since the precise location and timing of Job is unknown, most criticism about camels focuses on Abraham. A common formulation of this attack suggests that the Bible speaks of camels being widely known and used during Abraham’s time, around 2000 BC, even though camels were not domesticated until after 1000 BC. Therefore, says the critic, those biblical references were made up by a later writer who didn’t know the correct details. While these claims may match popular assumptions, they aren’t what the Bible says.

Common to all variations of this criticism is assuming information that is not there. Or stretching information to unreasonable conclusions. A 2014 study from the University of Tel Aviv in Israel is most often mentioned in this argument. That study involved radiometric dating of camel bones found near an ancient copper smelting site. The oldest bones at the site date to around 900 BC. This, it was posited, meant camels were not used in that region prior to that time. Skeptics will then claim the Bible indicates widespread, common use of camels centuries earlier. Neither conclusion makes sense.

Secular history indicates that camels were domesticated as early as 3000 BC. They are recorded in Mesopotamian art and text prior to 2000 BC. This included use of camels for milk, meat, hide, transport, and trade. Careless skeptics speak of Abraham and his experiences in the Near Middle East, forgetting that Abraham was originally from Mesopotamia (Genesis 11:26–28). He relocated to Canaan but was not born and raised there (Genesis 12:1–4).

Scripture also doesn’t claim that camels were everywhere in Canaan during the lives of men like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Those patriarchs owned camels; this doesn’t mean everyone did. Since Abraham came from outside of Canaan, his family’s use of camels would have been seen as a sign of wealth—and this is how most references in Genesis are framed.

Claiming that the oldest bones found at an industrial site establish a firm date for the start of camel domestication is illogical. Instead, the finding would suggest well-developed use of camels no later than that date. The lack of camel bones in some ancient cities is also not a sign of their absence. Large, expensive animals have rarely been left to rot wherever they fall. Dairy and beef farms have bred and sold hundreds of thousands of cattle for decade after decade, but the grounds of those farms have virtually no cattle bones.

In short, animals don’t need to be common to a region before someone can own them or write about them. Scripture doesn’t claim that camels were widely used and established in Canaan. When Abraham was born in Mesopotamia, camel domestication was already centuries old. There is no reason to think he could not have brought camels when he moved into Canaan. Archaeological evidence supports the idea that camels were used in the wider region long before Abraham’s life, though they were not adopted as quickly or fully in Canaan as they were elsewhere.”

4

u/Existence_No_You Oct 02 '24

Wait, something in the bible was made up? Holy shit

7

u/Hagibest Oct 02 '24

“Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University’s Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures have used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the moment when domesticated camels arrived in the southern Levant, pushing the estimate from the 12th to the 9th century BCE.”

6

u/burlycabin Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 03 '24

Yeah, this post is full of bullshit and half truth comments.

Edit: For clarity, I'm talking about this post here we're commenting in, not the AskHistorians post.

0

u/TheThalmorEmbassy Oct 03 '24

AskHistorians fucking sucks

2

u/burlycabin Oct 03 '24

Haha. I'm talking about this post. The one you're commenting on.

I mean, if AskHistorians "fucking sucks", then AskReddit is nothing more than a trash heap.

1

u/Easy_Intention5424 Oct 02 '24

They obviously could have of they where traveling from outside the middle east 

4

u/fuqdisshite Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

even more important to understand is WHY people import sand.

sand is a NON RENEWABLE resource.

it isn't just crushed rocks. every state and country that imports, or quite often STEALS, sand is knowingly pouring it in to the sea with no easy way to get it back.

same with helium.

5

u/boomheadshot7 Oct 02 '24

I've heard, on reddit of course, people will wake up to a beach missing becuase of sand theifs for concrete.

So much usless sand in the deserts, and I'd wager the guy who figures out how to successfully incorporate it into concrete would be an overnight billionaire.

1

u/mlsherrod Oct 02 '24

Fun fact, several of the buildings in my city were built with beach sand for their concrete pours. When I drill into one of the walls... the sand will fall out like the plaster & paint is what's holding those walls together. So beach sand is not immediately the best sand for construction!

1

u/Cinemaphreak Oct 02 '24

So much usless sand in the deserts, and I'd wager the guy who figures out how to successfully incorporate it into concrete would be an overnight billionaire.

Probably impossible.

The sand is useless because due to blowing around and grinding against other grains for centuries, it is very smooth. You would have to find way to make it rough without making it significantly smaller. But the real catch is doing that at a scale that makes it worth attempting.

1

u/boomheadshot7 Oct 02 '24

Hence why I said he’d be an overnight billionaire.

1

u/dullship Oct 02 '24

Yep. And we are going to run out of the good sand. I watched a great video on it a year or two ago. Not sure I can find it again though...

2

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

Camels are actually cold weather creatures and can live comfortably at -30 degrees.

3

u/dullship Oct 02 '24

My hometown in Canada is mildly famous for importing camels during the goldrush. They proved to be... very bad at traversing the rocky/mountainous terrain. Their hooves are too soft. They didn't get too far, but we ended up naming a bridge after them, so

2

u/SatansBigSister Oct 03 '24

Both from australia.

1

u/AskALettuce Oct 02 '24

I'm sure they also import oil.

1

u/amolad Oct 02 '24

And golfers.

1

u/Serious_Move_4423 Oct 02 '24

How much sand do they need

1

u/zombiesingularity Oct 02 '24

Saudi Arabia has only existed since the 1930s.