Sodom, Gomorrah and Pompeii

[robtex]

[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=+1]I think Aqualung has a point. a) who knows where to look ? b) how far below the present day surface could the ruins be ?; if sodom and gomorrah had been built on a fault line, and there had been a cataclysmic earthquake, would there be any trace ?[/size][/font]

The bible says that sodom and gomorrah were buried in sulfer not swallowed by an earthquake. As such it makes no sense why we can know and find pompeii but not the mythological cities of sodom and gomorrah. It certainly as we have both shown, not been from a lack of effort. Where do you propose they look and why? Do you think either of the cities ever existed and why?

 

[robtex]

Okay, so your logic isn't consistent? Cool, as long as we both understand this.

I never made any assessment on evolution. This thread is on the assessment of the validity of the existance of sodom and gomorrah. But since you are introducing logic 101 go to this site and read up on

1) strawman arguement
2) attacking the person (ad hominem is the most common term for this)
3) non sequitur

[size=-1]http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm[/size]

 

[Fatmop]

Did the Torah have an account of Sodom and Gomorra? Was that a Jewish myth before the appearance of Christianity?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's in Genesis ...

 

[Scott1]

However, Pompeii was discovered and proven to exist. Sodom and Gomorrah are speculated and not proven to exist.

I don't know how reliable these are, but some people seem to think they've found it. http://www.archaeology.org/9607/newsbriefs/sodom.html

http://www.bibleplus.org/discoveries/sodomfound.htm

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a007.html

http://www.wyattarchaeology.com/sodom.htm

 

[michel]

The bible says that sodom and gomorrah were buried in sulfer not swallowed by an earthquake. As such it makes no sense why we can know and find pompeii but not the mythological cities of sodom and gomorrah. It certainly as we have both shown, not been from a lack of effort. Where do you propose they look and why? Do you think either of the cities ever existed and why?

Who says that there has not been an immense earthquake since the writing of the Bible ?(I am merely playing devil's advocate - I have no particular view either way.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

http://www.wyattarchaeology.com/sodom.htm

Wyatt is a joke.

 

[Fluffy]

I was under the impression that Sodom at least had been found. I don't know a huge amount about the actual places since I'm more interested in the Biblical passages but a quick search on Google seems to suggest that there are plenty of likely contenders for either of these cities.

I don't think what you are suggesting is comparable to Pompeii. The Bible gives a vague description of 5 cities and calls them by obviously false names. If the only thing we had about Pompeii was a Roman mythology book that vaguely described the event under a different name, then the two situations would be similar. I don't think that anyone is suggesting that they should be treated as comparatively likely.

 

[lilithu]

Did the Torah have an account of Sodom and Gomorra? Was that a Jewish myth before the appearance of Christianity?

The Torah's account of Sodom and Gomorrah is the Christian account. The Christian bible's "Old Testament" is the Hewbrew Tanakh, albeit with the order of some of the books rearranged in order to emphasize prophesy of the Messiah, and some differences in translation. All the stories that we associate with the "Old Testament" are Jewish stories.

 

[lilithu]

Pompeii was buried in the ashes of mount Vesuvius in 79 a.d. Reseachers have found the city and so much information about it. We know its exact location, what much of its culture is like and how it was buried. 79 AD it is important to note is the time the new testiment was being written.

In Genesis 19:24 (niv version) it says,

"Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens."
(source biblegateway.com)

And so the Bible says Sodom and Gomorrah were buried in ash in much the same way pompeii was. Irregardless if God magically made sulfur in the sky or made a volocano blow its top the end of the two cities is the same in this story as pompeii.

However, Pompeii was discovered and proven to exist. Sodom and Gomorrah are speculated and not proven to exist.

Sodom and Gomorrah would have been significantly older - thousands of years older - than Pompeii. Finding Pompeii while not finding the other two in no way suggests that they did not exist.

Robtex, you know I don't believe that everything in the bible literally happened, but I don't understand your reasoning for focusing on evidence for the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah. It doesn't prove anything either way. If we don't find evidence, it isn't proof that they did not exist (and thus the story did not happen). AND if we DO find evidence, that is still not proof that the story happened the way it is depicted in scripture.

My guess is that the story is based on actual events. Some volcano blew and burried one or two great cities and people interpreted that as being God's wrath upon that city(s) for their sin, just as some people interpreted Katrina as being God's wrath on New Orleans. And then the destruction got tied in with the Abraham story. It's easier for me to believe that than to believe that someone made the entire story up de novo.

 

[Solon]

http://www.classics.cam.ac.uk/Everyone/pompeii/pompeii.html
[font=Times New Roman, Times, serif][size=+1]I think Aqualung has a point. a) who knows where to look ? b) how far below the present day surface could the ruins be ?; if sodom and gomorrah had been built on a fault line, and there had been a cataclysmic earthquake, would there be any trace ?[/size][/font]

I do recall a TV special on the subject of Sodom and Gomorah, it was thought that they may be been located in the dead sea area, and perhaps suffered some disaster, and that they may lay under the bottom of the dead sea, but so far nothing has been found. Perhaps if anybody knows the date the dead sea was formed, it may have some relevance, I'm not sure, it's not really my subject.

 

[Scott1]

Wyatt is a joke.

Helpful... as usual.

 

[nutshell]

It's entirely possible that God utterly destroyed these two cities leaving no trace behind. The ancient Israelites were sometimes commanded to destroy EVERYTHING when warring with a wicked city because if any trace of the evil remained it could tempt the Israelites.

 

[robtex]

It's entirely possible that God utterly destroyed these two cities leaving no trace behind. The ancient Israelites were sometimes commanded to destroy EVERYTHING when warring with a wicked city because if any trace of the evil remained it could tempt the Israelites.

It is inprobably and I would say impossible. Go back and read the scripture. God rained down sulpher like a volcano. That was the specific reason I brought up Pompeii. The cities haven't been found because they never existed. Furthermore it is academically dishonest to present them as fictional when the entire merit of the the actuality of their existance should rest on the discovery of them. Until they are discovered they are a myth and the story behind them a fairytale.

 

[Scott1]

Until they are discovered they are a myth and the story behind them a fairytale.

Forgetting the many people who do say they have "discovered" these ancient cities, I'm curious:

How much does it matter to you if they are myth or fairytale?

Should it to me (your opinion please)?

 

[Pah]

...How much does it matter to you if they are myth or fairytale? ...

Really nothing to me. There can be great truths in myth. However, in this case there seems to be a myth about the myth.

 

[robtex]

Scott1 the implications of the city as accepted as a ficitonal account and non-fiction have two bearings on the theism debate in large:

1) As non-fiction the account is proof that God preforms mircles and divine interaction. If theists could do two things

1) discover the biblical cities of sodom and gomorrah
2) assess with strong validity that the act of sulphur raining down was a divine act (by either finding no volcano's near it or volcano not bury it in ash) a strong arguement for God as dipicted by the Jews, Christians Muslims and Bahi would exist



As non-fiction it could be used to positon why "bad things happen to cities" Many a christians like the baptist pastor F Phelps have used the story of sodom and gomorrah to explain the tsumanis that hit shri lanka and thailand the the destruction of new orleans.

The non fiction becomes a thing of pointless debate however evidence of god destroying a city for sinning would shed a new light on "natural distators" of today.

As far as your question "how much does it myth or fariytale " not a whole lot. I find it interesting as a topic of debate because of the similarity of the dimise of pompeii to the biblical cities and the contrast on both

1) how information is assessed as real for both
2) the direction of archologists vs theologican researchers in terms of gathering evidence.

In short as fiction it is an allegory and thus subjective, as non-fiction it would be more objectivve in interpretation which holds the most signifigance to me from a metaphysical point of view.

Last footnote, the cities have not been found. Read the links everyone has pitched in, including the ones I put in the opening post. Quite a group of interesting reads.

 

[Scott1]

1) As non-fiction the account is proof that God preforms mircles and divine interaction.

As always, I appreciate your opinon.... but even is S&G were "found" it would have no more bearing (positive or negative) on my faith. I don't need the supernatural (miracles) to believe in God.

The non fiction becomes a thing of pointless debate however evidence of god destroying a city for sinning would shed a new light on "natural distators" of today.

I do think it would be a "pointless debate" even if they were found... one would have nothing to do with the other.

I guess I'm still missing the relevance... oh well... thanks for the chat.