English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This seems like an important detail.

2007-04-06 08:43:13 · 4 answers · asked by Janne 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

He isn't named in the bible. Why not?

2007-04-06 23:44:39 · update #1

4 answers

Apparently it wasn't necessary to name him.

2007-04-06 08:54:06 · answer #1 · answered by LineDancer 7 · 0 0

Perhaps by not naming him it continues to be an insult.

But in fairness I believe it was Ramses II

2007-04-06 15:51:07 · answer #2 · answered by nycguy10002 7 · 0 0

You mean Ramses the Great?

2007-04-06 15:51:39 · answer #3 · answered by Princess of the Realm 6 · 0 0

He is. He was Ramses II.

2007-04-06 16:03:11 · answer #4 · answered by Luv&Rockets 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers