# Why does Wikapedia say that the main Old Testament characters were not historical?



## Anglicanorthodoxy (Oct 8, 2016)

This has always bothered me with wki. Whenever you look up an important Old Testament figure on Wikapedia, (Noah, Abraham, Mosses, etc)it'll always say something like this
"The historical/archeological consensus is that X was not an historical figure."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses
According to Wikapedia, Noah was a mythical figure.
Why does Wikapedia say this about these people? How could archaeology prove or disprove someone's existence? I don't understand the reasoning that's used on Wki.


----------



## Jake (Oct 8, 2016)

They won't say this about all of the figures in the OT, but certainly the earlier ones. I think it's more that, outside of the Bible, there is not enough to be found about them to prove or disprove them. Then you have certain things in archaeology, which are very scattered, which seem to contradict the Bible taken by themselves. Other figures do you have more archaeological evidence behind them or mentions in other documents, like David. It's about the mainstream opinion of scholars, not that there are no scholars who do believe in them as historical figures. 

You see similar doubt about the historicity of other figures we don't know much about like Homer.


----------

