Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

According to prof. John Huddleston there is no historical evidence of Abraham from The Genesis. Here is the video. He spokes about it in the first 2-3 minutes: http://youtu.be/21NoQuKTB8Q

Is that true?

share|improve this question
    
In this past week's covenant and conversation, -- chiefrabbi.org/2013/06/17/… -- Rabbi Sacks says "A plaster inscription on the wall of a temple at Deir Alla in Jordan was found to make reference to the night vision of a seer called Bilaam – the earliest reference in archaeological sources to a named individual in the Torah. Thus, though the story itself contains elements of parable, it belongs to a definite context in time and place." –  Menachem Jun 23 '13 at 1:50
    
As far as I am aware there is indeed no archaeological evidence of Avraham's life. –  yitznewton Jun 23 '13 at 2:32
    
Why the downvotes? Even Double AA said that it's true and there is no historical evidence for Abraham. Except of the Genesis itself, of course. –  Derfder Jun 23 '13 at 9:05
    
are you asking whether there is extra-biblical corroboration for the existence of personages mentioned in the bible? If so, why focus just on Abraham -- are you saying that there is such corroboration for other people just not Abraham? –  Danno Jun 23 '13 at 13:26
    
@Danno the vidoe-part is important part of my question. Please, watch it (at least first 3 minutes that are crucial) and only after that give me the answer. Thank you. –  Derfder Jun 23 '13 at 13:28
show 2 more comments

2 Answers

Yes, it is true. I watched the first 3 minutes (I don't particularly recommend others do so) and can confirm that the person self-identifying as John Huddleston said there is no historical evidence of Abraham from the biblical book of Genesis.

share|improve this answer
    
"I don't particularly recommend others do so" Why not? Are they historically incorrect? –  Derfder Jun 22 '13 at 19:52
2  
@Derfder I don't find watching people declare things to be all that interesting. –  Double AA Jun 22 '13 at 19:53
    
So, it's just your personal subjective advise to other users? Am I correct? Or did you objectively find something what they said to be wrong? If so, what exactly you don't agree? –  Derfder Jun 22 '13 at 20:14
    
@Derfder The parenthetical remark is just my personal advice. –  Double AA Jun 22 '13 at 20:15
    
DoubleAA your advice is appreciated. –  Hacham Gabriel Jun 25 '13 at 4:10
add comment

Absolutely false. There is lots of historical evidence, from Genesis, of Abraham, as even a cursory read of Genesis will reveal.

share|improve this answer
    
I am asking for historical evidence. Not Genesis itself. It's obvious that Genesis has this information, because it's from there ;D. –  Derfder Jun 23 '13 at 9:03
    
You said "historical evidence of Abraham from The Genesis". –  msh210 Jun 23 '13 at 13:16
    
I also said: "Here is the video. He spokes about it in the first 2-3 minutes: youtu.be/21NoQuKTB8Q ". The video-part is importent part of my question. –  Derfder Jun 23 '13 at 13:25
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.