Comments on: Hammurapi ยง209-210 http://benabuya.com/2006/12/04/hammurapi-%c2%a7209-210/ looking for alternative explanations Mon, 30 Aug 2010 04:14:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Simon Holloway http://benabuya.com/2006/12/04/hammurapi-%c2%a7209-210/#comment-111 Simon Holloway Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:09:24 +0000 http://deba.wordpress.com/2006/12/04/hammurapi-%c2%a7209-210/#comment-111 I'm not familiar with that theory. Whose is it? My personal opinion is that this is just another of those theories that attempts to view the entire world within the Torah. If we find evidence of somebody from the same supposed period, then surely they must have been mentioned in the Bible as well. Mind you, I'm saying this without having read anything about this particular theory. Maybe some scholars feel that it has something going for it? I’m not familiar with that theory. Whose is it? My personal opinion is that this is just another of those theories that attempts to view the entire world within the Torah. If we find evidence of somebody from the same supposed period, then surely they must have been mentioned in the Bible as well.

Mind you, I’m saying this without having read anything about this particular theory. Maybe some scholars feel that it has something going for it?

]]> By: Feivel http://benabuya.com/2006/12/04/hammurapi-%c2%a7209-210/#comment-109 Feivel Thu, 07 Dec 2006 05:15:29 +0000 http://deba.wordpress.com/2006/12/04/hammurapi-%c2%a7209-210/#comment-109 Any comments to the theory (expressed in The Living Torah's footnotes) that Hammurabi was Amraphel (who, some say, was Nimrod)? Any comments to the theory (expressed in The Living Torah’s footnotes) that Hammurabi was Amraphel (who, some say, was Nimrod)?

]]>