No, No, Bad Dog: Dogs in the Bible
Israelite attitudes toward dogs
Dogs in the Bible were not well loved. To be called a dog was to be associated with evil and low status. Therefore it is surprising that Caleb, one of the great Hebrew spies, means “dog” in Hebrew. Pictured is a stone relief created in 1958 by sculptor Ferdinand Heseding. The relief, which appears on a fountain in Dusseldorf, Germany, depicts the Biblical spies Joshua and Caleb carrying a cluster of grapes back from the Promised Land (Numbers 13:1-33).
Everyone loves dogs—don’t they? Dogs—or celeb in Hebrew—are humanity’s best friends. We welcome them into our homes, we walk them, feed them, clean up after them and excuse their bad behavior. But in ancient Israel, people had an entirely different view of dogs.
Of the more than 400 breeds of dogs around today, all came from the same ancestor—ancient wolves. Dogs were first domesticated perhaps as far back as 12,000 years ago. Because dogs are the only animals with the ability to bark, they became useful for hunting and herding. Dogs in the Bible were used for these purposes (Isaiah 56:11; Job 30:1).
There is evidence in the Bible that physical violence toward dogs was considered acceptable (1 Samuel 17:43; Proverbs 26:17). To compare a human to a dog or to call them a dog was to imply that they were of very low status (2 Kings 8:13; Exodus 22:31; Deuteronomy 23:18; 2 Samuel 3:8; Proverbs 26:11; Ecclesiastes 9:4; 2 Samuel 9:8; 1 Samuel 24:14). In the New Testament, calling a human a dog meant that the person was considered evil (Philemon 3:2; Revelation 22:15).
FREE eBook: Life in the Ancient World.
Craft centers in Jerusalem, family structure across Israel and ancient practices—from dining to makeup—through the Mediterranean world.
Some scholars hypothesize that the negative feelings expressed in the ancient Near East toward dogs was because in those days, dogs often ran wild and usually in packs. Dogs in the Bible exhibited predatory behavior in their quest for survival, which included the eating of dead bodies (1 Kings 14:11; 16:4; 21:19, 23-24; 22:38; 2 Kings 9:10, 36; 1 Kings 21:23).
There is archaeological evidence, such as figurines, pictures and even collars, that demonstrates that Israel’s neighbors kept dogs as pets, but from the skeletal remains found within the Levant, the domestication of dogs did not happen until the Persian and Hellenistic periods within Israel.
The word for dog in Hebrew is celeb, from which the name Caleb derives. Due to the negative attribution of dogs for the ancient Israelites, it is surprising that one of the great Hebrew spies bears this name. As the Israelites were preparing to enter the land of Canaan, Moses called a chieftain from each tribe to go before them and scout the land. Caleb was the representative of the tribe of Judah. When these spies returned, they reported that the land surpassed expectation but that the people who live there would be mighty foes. The Israelites did not want to go and face the peoples of Canaan, but Caleb stepped forward and urged them to proceed. After more exhortation from Moses, Aaron and Joshua, the people relented. Caleb was rewarded for his faith: Joshua gave him Hebron as an inheritance (Numbers 14:24; Joshua 14:14).
Ellen White, Ph.D. (Hebrew Bible, University of St. Michael’s College), was the senior editor at the Biblical Archaeology Society. She has taught at five universities across the U.S. and Canada and spent research leaves in Germany and Romania. She has also been actively involved in digs at various sites in Israel.
Related reading in Bible History Daily
All-Access members, read more in the BAS Library
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on January 26, 2015.
Related Posts
Must-Read Free eBooks
Want more Bible history?
Sign up to receive our email newsletter and never miss an update.
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Become an All-Access Member to explore the Bible's rich history. Get Biblical Archaeology Review in print, full online access, and FREE online talks. Plus, enjoy special Travel/Study discounts. Don't miss out—begin your journey today!
Neither I Samuel 17:43 nor Proverbs 26:17 are indicative of condoning violence toward dogs!
The writer doesn’t say these passages condone violence towards dogs, merely that they seem to imply that beating or otherwise being cruel to them was common practice.
(Ca′leb) [Dog].
Faithful Caleb is called “the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite.” (Nu 32:12; Jos 14:6, 14) Jephunneh could have descended from some member of the non-Israelite Kenizzites (Ge 15:18, 19) who associated with the descendants of Jacob (Israel), marrying an Israelite wife. However, more likely the name Kenizzite in his case derives from some ancestral Judean family head named Kenaz, even as Caleb’s brother was so named.—Jos 15:17; Jg 1:13; 1Ch 4:13.
Father of the Judean spy Caleb and, likely, the father of Kenaz. (Nu 13:2, 3, 6; 1Ch 4:15; Jg 1:13) Jephunneh was a Kenizzite associated with the tribe of Judah.—Jos 14:6, 14.
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200271013
. The dog’s repulsive habit of disgorging food it has gulped down and then returning to eat it again later is used to illustrate the course of those abandoning the way of righteousness and returning to their former state of defilement. (2Pe 2:20-22; Pr 26:11) Morally unclean persons are called dogs. God’s law to Israel stated: “You must not bring the hire of a harlot or the price of a dog [“male prostitute,” AT; “likely a pederast; one who practices anal intercourse, especially with a boy,” NW, ftn] into the house of Jehovah your God for any vow, because they are something detestable to Jehovah your God, even both of them.” (De 23:18) All those who, like scavenger dogs of the streets, practice disgusting things, such as sodomy, lesbianism, viciousness, and cruelty, are debarred from access to New Jerusalem.—Re 22:15;”Outside are the dogs and those who practice spiritism and those who are sexually immoral and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices lying.” see also Php 3:2″.Look out for the dogs; look out for those who cause injury; look out for those who mutilate the flesh”.
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001209#h=0:0-7:324
Don’t forget the faithful presence of Tobias’ dog in the book of Tobit. One more reason for including Tobit in the biblical canon, but that may just be the pet owner in me speaking.
There’s also the occasional derogatory term “uncircumcised dog”. Male dogs’ organs are so “out there” that they became a symbol of Israel’s enemies, some of whom did not practice circumcision. I’ve always wondered if that’s also how Caleb got his nickname. The usual explanation is that Caleb was so loyal to the Lord, he was like the Lord’s dog. What if the real joke is that the other soldiers, noticing at the latrine that Caleb hadn’t had a certain operation, decided to nickname him after the animals who obviously didn’t have that operation either? Perhaps Caleb, being in the south of Israel, and coming up through Hebron, did not participate in the mass circumcision ritual at Gilgal in Joshua 5. The text at Joshua 14 may be a harmonization, to present a unified conquest, but several things favor a 2-pronged invasion, Caleb from the south and Joshua from the east (which became the north) — the different names for God in the south and the north, the different military and cultural traditions of south and north, the eventual secession of the northern states, etc. We only hear about circumcision a few miles east of Jericho, nowhere near Caleb’s inheritance, Since the responders above mention some questions about Caleb’s ancestry, perhaps his home tribe, before he joined with Judah, did not practice circumcision. Perhaps his fellow warriors, as men will do, decided to tease him about his most obvious and embarrassing distinction.
A couple of corrections: reference to Philemon 3:2 clearly should be Philippians 3:2; also a common mistake identifying “Revelation” as “Revelations” for Revelation 22:15 reference.
I also agree with Cindy that “neither I Samuel 17:43 nor Proverbs 26:17 are indicative of condoning violence toward dogs”. 1 Samuel 17:43 merely indicates what someone might use if they were fighting dogs–not a recommendation to do so or indication this was common. Furthermore it was Goliath the pagan Philistine who said this! As far as Proverbs 26:17 is concerned, this clearly shows only the foolishness of someone (a brat child for example) who might seize a dog by its ears.
A dog has always been “Man’s best friend” – not “humanity’s best friend”. Where did that ridiculous phrase come from?
Being in a country in the Middle or Far East for any amount of time would solidify the view that dogs are not looked on with regard in these societies that still take many of their cues from the practices of ancient civilizations. The way many animals are treated in the ‘Western World’ is perverted in that people seem to give them as much or more respect and care as their neighbors, own children, spouse, or people in general. I am not for cruelty, but the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. Everything to its suited purpose.
Though dogs were probably not generally appreciated very much in Israel or Judah during OT or NT periods, Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman seems to indicate a certain degree of amenity between dogs and people. The Samaritan woman asks for help and Jesus responded that it was not appropriate for children’s bread to be given to dogs. The Samaritan woman’s response, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” seems to indicate that dogs were, at least some of the time, allowed inside and sat there at the feet of their owners, just as they often do today.