Looking at this commentary we see a different opinion.
"
2 Samuel 10:18
And the Syrians fled before Israel…
After an obstinate and bloody fight between them:
and David slew [the men of] seven hundred chariots of the Syrians;
the word "men" is rightly supplied, for chariots could not be said to be slain, but the men in them; in (
1 Chronicles 19:17) , they are said to be seven thousand, here seven hundred; which
may be reconciled by observing, that here the chariots that held the men are numbered, there the number of the men that were in the chariots given, and reckoning ten men in a chariot, seven hundred chariots held just seven thousand men; though Kimchi takes another way of reconciling the two places, by observing that here only the choicest chariots are mentioned, there all of them, but the former way seems best:
and forty thousand horsemen;
in (
1 Chronicles 19:17) ; it is forty thousand "footmen", and so Josephus
F3; and the same may be called both horse and foot, be cause though they might come into the field of battle on horseback, yet might dismount and fight on foot; and so one historian calls them horsemen, and the other footmen; or the whole number of the slain, horse and foot mixed together, were forty thousand; Kimchi makes use of another way of removing this difficulty, and which perhaps is the best, that here only the horsemen are numbered that were slain, and there the footmen only, and both true; an equal number of each being slain, in all eighty thousand, besides the seven thousand in the chariots:"
2 Samuel - Chapter 10 - Verse 18 - The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible on StudyLight.org
Once again it seems thar some people prefer to give doubt itself the benefit of the doubt. The error here seems to be in assuming there was an error.
This commentary disagrees.
"
4. the camel--It does to a certain extent divide the hoof, for the foot consists of two large parts, but the
division is not complete; the toes rest upon an elastic pad on which the animal goes; as a beast of burden its flesh is tough. An additional reason for its prohibition might be to keep the Israelites apart from the descendants of Ishmael."
Leviticus - Chapter 11 - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Commentary on StudyLight.org
And in wiki we see this..
"Animals that
both chew their
cud (
ruminate, i.e.
regurgitate partly digested food from a specialised multi-chambered stomach back to the mouth to be chewed for a second time as part of their ordinary digestive process) and have split true cloven hooves (a hoof being hard or rubbery sole and a hard wall formed by a thick nail) are allowed (
kosher, lit. "fit") for Jewish consumption. Those animals that have neither of these two characteristics, or only one of the characteristics, are considered
unclean animals (
treif, not fit for Jewish consumption) and Jews are
forbidden to eat them. This rule
thus excludes the camel from the list of kosher animals because although the camel does ruminate, it does not possess true "hooves" – it walks on soft toes which have little more than a nail merely giving an appearance of a "hoof".
Cloven hoof - Wikipedia
Both your examples then are shot down in flames.
How sweet it is.
