Sodom and Gomorrah: Fires Created by Ignition of Combustible Gases By
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
God's Character in the Bible and the Koran Toward a Theology of Beauty
Home :: Perspective Digest http://www.perspectivedigest.org/?issue=18-3 Perspective Digest God’s Character in the Bible and the Koran Christians and Muslims see the characteristics of God from quite different perspectives. Larry L. Lichtenwalter Toward a Theology of Beauty God intended that religion and art should be complementary expressions of His own character. Jo Ann Davidson The Trinity in the Old Testament The Hebrew Scriptures offer some telling glimpses into the nature of God. Jiří Moskala End Times and Salvation Eschatology is the anticipation of Christ’s multifaceted historical works of salvation from creation to new creation. 1 of 2 7/9/2013 1:25 PM God’s Character in the Bible and the Koran :: Perspective Digest http://www.perspectivedigest.org/article/110/archives/18-3/god-s-characte... Perspective Digest - a publication of the Adventist Theological Society Christians and Muslims see the characteristics of God from quite different perspectives. Larry L. Lichtenwalter It comes as no surprise that the Bible and the Koran create unique worldviews. Sacred writings generate worldviews in keeping with their respective meta‑narrative, reasoning, and symbolism. The assertions that each worldview both presuppose and project about God, the world, and human beings profoundly affect the adherent’s identity, spiritual experience, and ethics. There are many similarities and differences between biblical and koranic thought about the being and character of God. On the one hand, the concept of God in the Koran is significantly similar to the concept of God in the Bible. Many of the same attributes of God are asserted in both. -
The Troubling Acts of God in the Old Testament: Noah’S Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptian Firstborn, the Destruction of the Canaanites Mako A
The Troubling Acts of God in the Old Testament: Noah’s Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptian Firstborn, the Destruction of the Canaanites Mako A. Nagasawa Last modified: March 29, 2019 Introduction: Questioning the Character of God in the Old Testament In the Old Testament, God responded to certain human choices by taking human life. Those acts include the flood of Noah (Gen.7 – 8), the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.18), the slaying of the Egyptian firstborn (Ex.12), the death of Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu (Lev.10:1 – 3), the slaying of disobedient Israelites (Num.11:1 – 2), the earth opening under Korah and his rebellion (Num.16), the battle with the Midianites and Moabites (Num.22 – 25; 31), the conquest of Jericho and the Canaanites (Gen.15:16 – 21; Josh.1 – 7), and the slaying of Uzzah who touched the ark of God (2 Sam.5). I have written about God’s treatment of Israel elsewhere, so here I will limit my comments to the general category of God taking human life, especially in the flood of Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Egyptian firstborn, and the Canaanites. Any time we see human injustice and evil, we must ask, ‘What kind of god do we expect?’ What are the alternatives? There are three main options: 1. A god who does nothing and looks the other way 2. A god who is actually part of the evil and mischief, like Zeus stirring up the Trojan War 3. A god who responds to human evil and injustice by stopping it in some way In general, I would rather have a god who responds to human evil by stopping it in some way. -
Hell of Torah Part 3 of 6: Sodom & Gomorrah; Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego (Presented Around April 2015)
Hell of Torah Part 3 of 6: Sodom & Gomorrah; Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego (Presented around April 2015) The following text is based on a message from Corner Fringe Ministries that was presented by Daniel Joseph. The original presentation can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxmAaIm3Ve4 *Portions of the video message have been edited to present a written document. All the Scripture verses are from the New King James Version unless otherwise noted and are in the red text. Therefore, it is recommended that this document is printed in color. The Hebrew is to be read from right to left. We are in our third week of our series The Hell of Torah. Over the last couple weeks, we've looked at the reality of the judgment that is to come upon the entire world. We have looked at the fact that that judgment is going to be manifested through fire, and that fire is going to be Torah, the Law of God. Now, this week I want to take a closer look at the effects that this fiery judgment is going to have specifically how it's going to impact all of humanity. When you look at Scripture closely, you realize that the fiery judgment that is coming upon the earth is not just going to be something that is experienced by the wicked alone. You will find that the righteous are also going to experience the hell of Torah. However, for the righteous, the experience is going to be somewhat different compared to the wicked. -
BLE 2022 (Pdf)
THE SCHOOL OF ARCHAEOLOGY, VERITAS INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY AND THE COLLEGE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & BIBLICAL HISTORY, TRINITY SOUTHWEST UNIVERSITY Bible Land Expedition, Holy Land Tour 2022 “Discovering the Biblical World” 3 EXCITING OPTIONS! Option #1: Sodom Dig + Tour of Jordan and Israel (27 Feb–13 March 2022) Option #2: Tour of Jordan and Israel (4–13 March 2022) Option #3: Tour of Israel (6–13 March 2022) [Note: add 3 days for travel, 2 at the beginning, 1 at the end) Your Expert Teachers/Guides*: Dr Steven Collins and Dr Gary Byers OVERVIEW: BLE, and countless other churches and organizations, offer Holy Land Tours. But the title “Holy Land Tour” is where the similarity ends. The fact is, there isn’t another tour available that does, or can do, what a BLE tour does. Our guides and lecturers are expert Bible scholars and archaeologists, not local guides trained to cater to religious pilgrims as opposed to people interested in real biblical history and the archaeology that reveals it so dramatically. Not only will you experience the Holy Land’s breathtaking panoramas and biblical sites, but also you’ll see minute details illuminating biblical stories, subtleties that only expert eyes can reveal. BLE tours also balance both Old and New Testament history as it happened in both the Transjordan (Jordan) and Cisjordan (Israel). We also limit group size to a single bus (unlike many of the large tours that have multiple buses and spend more time waiting at restroom stops than actually visiting sites!), which is a real plus. The 2022 theme, “Discovering the Biblical World,” focuses on great biblical characters like Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Kings David and Solomon, Elijah, John the Baptist, and Jesus. -
Witnessing Lot's Wife
!1 Ariell Watson November 5, 2015 Lumen et Vita Symposium Witnessing Lot’s Wife: Traumatic Memory and Vicarious Trauma In Judeo-Christian popular imagination, the cities of “Sodom and Gomorrah” epitomize sinful hedonism and divine annihilation. In the midst of the apocalyptic scene of sulfur, fire, and destruction in the book of Genesis, we find a peculiar verse: “But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.”1 This paper will interpret the biblical text as a tale of traumatic memory, examine the risk of vicarious trauma to caregivers, and affirm best practices in trauma care. In order to understand the role of traumatic memory and trauma care in this story, one must first identify the disruptive experiences that may have haunted Lot’s wife. The text offers very little insight to her past; we know neither her name nor her opinion of the events that led up to the family’s hasty departure from their home. One can infer, however, that Lot’s wife had witnessed several traumatic scenes in the previous hours: a mob at the door of her house; neighbors threatening to assault her husband and break in to their home; Lot offering up their unwed daughters to the sexual appetites of the crowd; and the hasty extraction of her family. On the way to safety, Lot’s wife made her fateful mistake: she “looked back,” against the angel’s instruction. Scholarly opinions diverge regarding whether the danger of “looking back” arose from the pain of grief, or from disobedience of divine injunction. -
54. Mesozoic–Tertiary Tectonic Evolution of the Easternmost Mediterranean Area: Integration of Marine and Land Evidence1
Robertson, A.H.F., Emeis, K.-C., Richter, C., and Camerlenghi, A. (Eds.), 1998 Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Vol. 160 54. MESOZOIC–TERTIARY TECTONIC EVOLUTION OF THE EASTERNMOST MEDITERRANEAN AREA: INTEGRATION OF MARINE AND LAND EVIDENCE1 Alastair H.F. Robertson2 ABSTRACT This paper presents a synthesis of Holocene to Late Paleozoic marine and land evidence from the easternmost Mediterra- nean area, in the light of recent ODP Leg 160 drilling results from the Eratosthenes Seamount. The synthesis is founded on three key conclusions derived from marine- and land-based study over the last decade. First, the North African and Levant coastal and offshore areas represent a Mesozoic rifted continental margin of Triassic age, with the Levantine Basin being under- lain by oceanic crust. Second, Mesozoic ophiolites and related continental margin units in southern Turkey and Cyprus repre- sent tectonically emplaced remnants of a southerly Neotethyan oceanic basin and are not far-travelled units derived from a single Neotethys far to the north. Third, the present boundary of the African and Eurasian plates runs approximately east-west across the easternmost Mediterranean and is located between Cyprus and the Eratosthenes Seamount. The marine and land geology of the easternmost Mediterranean is discussed utilizing four north-south segments, followed by presentation of a plate tectonic reconstruction for the Late Permian to Holocene time. INTRODUCTION ocean (Figs. 2, 3; Le Pichon, 1982). The easternmost Mediterranean is defined as that part of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea located east ° The objective here is to integrate marine- and land-based geolog- of the Aegean (east of 28 E longitude). -
Illness and God's Will
Running head: ILLNESS AND GOD’S WILL 1 Illness and God’s Will Sickness and Healing in the Life of a Believer John Sherret A Senior Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in the Honors Program Liberty University Spring 2015 Running head: ILLNESS AND GOD’S WILL 2 Acceptance of Senior Honors Thesis This Senior Honors Thesis is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation from the Honors Program of Liberty University. ______________________________ Randall Hubbard, Ph.D. Thesis Chair ______________________________ Garth McGibbon, M.S. Committee Member ______________________________ Ed Martin, Ph.D. Committee Member ______________________________ Brenda Ayres, Ph.D. Honors Director ______________________________ Date Running head: ILLNESS AND GOD’S WILL 3 Abstract Originally, God never put sickness on people. After the fall, the early history of man as recorded in the Bible further demonstrates Him refraining to use sickness. However, once the law was instituted God began to use sickness as a punishment. In the Old Testament, sickness was always defined as a curse and never a blessing. It was used by God to curse people for disobeying the law. In the New Testament, God was seen healing the multitudes instead of cursing them. Through the atonement of Jesus, believers have been redeemed from the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13). Healing has been provided with the forgiveness of sins. There are numerous reasons why people still are not healed but it is not God’s Will for them to remain ill. Running head: ILLNESS AND GOD’S WILL 4 Illness and God’s Will In the world today there are a variety of loosely held ideas regarding sicknesses of all kinds and their relationship to God. -
Negotiations with God a D’Var Torah on Parashat Vayeira (Gen
Negotiations With God A D’var Torah on Parashat Vayeira (Gen. 18:1 – 22:24) By Arnold Shugarman “Vayeira eilav Adonai b’eiloney mam’rei.” “Adonai appeared to him near the terebinths of Mamre.” The story of Abraham and Sarah continues. Three men (angels of God) approach Abraham’s tent. Abraham extends his hospitality to the strangers. One of the strangers tells Abraham that Sarah, already 90 years old, will have a son. Sarah overhears the conversation and laughs at this idea. The three men leave for Sodom. God tells Abraham that Sodom and Gomorrah will be destroyed because of the wickedness of the inhabitants. Abraham pleads with God to save the people, but to no avail. Two of the angels come to Sodom and are greeted by Lot who offers his hospitality to them at significant risk to his life. The angels tell Lot and his family of the impending destruction of the cities and urge them to leave. The angels warn them not to look back when they flee Sodom. Lot’s wife disobeys the warning and is turned into a pillar of salt. Abraham and Sarah travel to Gerar. Abraham introduces Sarah as his sister, and King Abimelech has her brought to him. God intervenes; King Abimelech restores Sarah to Abraham and, in penance, provides Abraham with riches. Sarah becomes pregnant as God promised and gives birth to Isaac, who is circumcised on the eighth day following his birth. Later, Sarah demands that Abraham send Hagar and Ishmael, Abraham’s son, away so that Isaac would be the sole beneficiary of Abraham’s possessions. -
Do Not Neglect to Show Hospitality to Strangers, for by Doing That Some Have Entertained Angels Without Knowing It” – Sodom, Sex, and Hatred of the Other
“Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it” – Sodom, Sex, and Hatred of the Other The Genesis story of Sodom and Gomorrah is obviously a key text in any discussion of Bible and Homosexuality. It’s a shared story, not just of all the religious traditions, Samaritan, Jewish, Christian, who canonize collections of biblical texts as their Scripture, but it’s also retold and referred to frequently in the Qur’an and so forms an important narrative for Muslims, as well. From the name Sodom, we get the words sodomy and sodomite which have been used for centuries to defame and debase same sex love and eroticism. It’s not the only biblical text used against us LGBT folks, but probably because it’s a gripping disaster story, with the added frisson of divine retribution for unspeakable evil, it looms large in the imagination much more readily than the Levitical proscriptions, the sinner lists in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy, and the Gentile parody in Romans 1. However, unlike those passages, the Sodom and Gomorrah story is in many ways far easier to deal with. With Leviticus, the discussion is around the meaning of the Hebrew, what is being proscribed and why.1 With the New Testament texts, for the sinner lists so much hinges on the meaning of arsenokoitai, a word that appears for the first time ever in the Pauline corpus. What did Paul mean by it in 1 Corinthians and did it always have a “homosexual” referent or did that meaning develop over time? Likewise with Romans, what does Paul intend here and, more specifically, does he refer at all to female homoeroticism? Augustine didn’t think so and neither did Christians before him. -
Morphological and Structural Relations in the Galilee Extensional Domain, Northern Israel
Tectonophysics 371 (2003) 223–241 www.elsevier.com/locate/tecto Morphological and structural relations in the Galilee extensional domain, northern Israel A. Matmona,b,*, S. Wdowinskic, J.K. Hallb a Department of Geology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91904, Israel b Geological Survey of Israel, 30 Malkhe Yisrael Street, Jerusalem 95501, Israel c Department of Geophysics and Planetary Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 69978, Israel Received 6 December 2001; accepted 11 June 2003 Abstract The Lower Galilee and the Yizre’el Valley, northern Israel, are an extensional domain that has been developing since the Miocene, prior and contemporaneously to the development of the Dead Sea Fault (DSF). It is a fan-shaped region bounded in the east by the N–S trending main trace of the DSF, in the north by the Bet-Kerem Fault system, and in the south by the NW– SE trending Carmel Fault. The study area is characterized by high relief topography that follows fault-bounded blocks and flexures at a wavelength of tens of km. A synthesis of the morphologic–structural relations across the entire Galilee region suggests the following characteristics: (1) Blocks within the Lower Galilee tilt toward both the southern and northern boundaries, forming two asymmetrical half-graben structures, opposite facing, and oblique to one another. (2) The Lower Galilee’s neighboring blocks, which are the Upper Galilee in the north and the Carmel block in the southwest, are topographically and structurally uplifted and tilted away from the Lower Galilee. (3) The southern half-graben, along the Carmel Fault, is topographically and structurally lower than the northern one. -
Strontium and Oxygen Isotope Analyses Reveal Late Cretaceous Shark Teeth in Iron Age Strata in the Southern Levant
fevo-08-570032 December 11, 2020 Time: 20:56 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 17 December 2020 doi: 10.3389/fevo.2020.570032 Strontium and Oxygen Isotope Analyses Reveal Late Cretaceous Shark Teeth in Iron Age Strata in the Southern Levant Thomas Tütken1*, Michael Weber1, Irit Zohar2,3, Hassan Helmy4, Nicolas Bourgon5, Omri Lernau3, Klaus Peter Jochum6 and Guy Sisma-Ventura7* 1 Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany, 2 Beit Margolin, Oranim Academic College, Kiryat Tivon, Israel, 3 Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel, 4 Department of Geology, Minia University, Minia, Egypt, 5 Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany, 6 Department of Climate Geochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany, 7 Oceanographic and Limnological Research, Haifa, Israel Skeletal remains in archaeological strata are often assumed to be of similar ages. Here we show that combined Sr and O isotope analyses can serve as a powerful tool for assessing fish provenance and even for identifying fossil fish teeth in archaeological Edited by: contexts. For this purpose, we established a reference Sr and O isotope dataset of Brooke Crowley, extant fish teeth from major water bodies in the Southern Levant. Fossil shark teeth were University of Cincinnati, United States identified within Iron Age cultural layers dating to 8–9th century BCE in the City of David, Reviewed by: Jerusalem, although the reason for their presence remains unclear. Their enameloid Laszlo Kocsis, 87 86 18 Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei Sr/ Sr and d OPO4 values [0.7075 ± 0.0001 (1 SD, n = 7) and 19.6 ± 0.9 Malte Willmes, (1 SD, n = 6), respectively], are both much lower than values typical for modern marineh University of California, Santa Cruz, United States sharks from the Mediterranean Sea [0.7092 and 22.5–24.6 (n = 2), respectively]. -
Reexamining Lot
Religious Educator: Perspectives on the Restored Gospel Volume 14 Number 1 Article 6 1-2013 Reexamining Lot Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/re BYU ScholarsArchive Citation "Reexamining Lot." Religious Educator: Perspectives on the Restored Gospel 14, no. 1 (2013): 58-81. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/re/vol14/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Religious Educator: Perspectives on the Restored Gospel by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Reexamining Lot roseann benson RoseAnn Benson ([email protected]) is an adjunct professor of ancient scripture and Church history and doctrine at BYU. he story of Lot as found in the Old Testament leaves us with many unan- Tswered questions about this man and how to interpret whether he was ultimately an example of good or evil or something in between. For instance, why would the Apostle Peter call Lot a “righteous man,” considered by God to be both “godly” and “just” (2 Peter 2:7–9), in light of the fact that Lot had “pitched his tent toward Sodom” (Genesis 13:12) and then moved his family to a city known throughout scripture for its wickedness (see Genesis 19:1, 16, 29)? The Book of Abraham and the Joseph Smith Translation provide signifi- cant insights into the relationship between Lot and Abraham, but neither comments on Lot’s righteousness, because their focus is on Abraham.1 This Departure of Lot and His Family from Sodom from and His Family Departure of Lot paper examines canonical evidence and notes noncanonical statements that support Peter’s pronouncement of Lot as a righteous, godly, and just man who was comparable to Noah, “a preacher of righteousness” (2 Peter 2:5).