Two main theories exist for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.
First, there is the volcanic view, which has been the consensus through most of modern times. This view is held in The Destruction of Sodom, Gomorrah, and Jericho: Geological, Climatological, and Archaeological Background. On the other hand, newer but controversial research has arisen suggesting a meteor or comet strike. And this theory isn’t limited to Sodom and Gomorrah. A crater previously believed to be volcanic in origin in Northern Arizona is now believed to be meteor-formed.
I’m not sure personally, and guess I don’t really care a lot. I do believe that something really did occur, and the story was told to explain why the dramatic event occurred. If I had to bet, I’d probably go with the airburst, even though the evidence is pretty contested at this point from my understanding. Here’s a short video of a 2013 airburst:
I agree with you. The airburst seems like a more radical and fantastic view, but it actually seems more in keeping with both the story and where science is going. Goes to show that we shouldn’t write off the seeming fantastic too soon, because sometimes new evidence comes to light.
I watched a document about archeological work in the area some years ago. It showed signs that matched the hypothesis of a space rock exploding above the area but could not prove that hypothesis.
One peculiar feature in that archeological layer (the layer of destruction) was pieces of ceramics that had partly melted. An ordinary fire, even devastating, does not produce such heat. Something extraordinary caused a temperature spike that went much above 1000 C degrees, long enough to partially melt the outsides of the ceramics but not so long that the ceramics would have melted totally.
My view is that is happened because of inhospitable behavior towards strangers/immigrants and the poor. That the towns viewed foreigners as just objects to be used and disposed of as they wanted and they were ok with allowing the poor to suffer. As far as the cities themselves, I’m under the impression that we don’t even know where they are. That there is not actual proof of a particular place.
So my theory is that well after some much older event happened, people came across the remnants of a city and local folklore and myths developed around it. Much like that happens with spooky houses or forests in a town today. Local legends. This local legend developed and eventually was so popular that a biblical author reimagined this story of divine punishment probably to
Try to encourage their fellow citizens to be more compassionate towards others.
Well in part it’s mentioned by New Testament authors and Christianity is a sect that grew out of Judaism and so it’s part of out religious history. I also think it plays a very important role as a cautionary tale of how wicked corrupt nations will fail eventually. That a good nation considers its poor and immigrants and a wicked nation does not.
What I find odd is why the omniscient Hebrew God went to all the trouble to rescue one “righteous” man from a city of wicked homosexuals only to watch that man a few hours later get drunk and have intercourse (incest) with his two daughters.
Yeah but the daughters initiated it. There was consent, alcohol fuelled disinhibition. Whereas the angels did not consent to being sodomized. The difference between being nuke-worthy or not.
Exactly. The sin of Sodom was not homosexuality. It was egregious social injustice. It must have been pretty bad, as look at what we propagate. And we ent bin nuked yet.
But the plan to destroy the cities had already been established before the angels visited the city. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were not slaughtered because of their treatment of the angels, they were slaughtered for their “wickedness” (of homosexuality).
Moral to the story: Homosexuality between consenting adults is evil and deserving of annihilation by fire. Incest between consenting adults is bad, but not bad enough to prevent the Hebrew God from considering you a “righteous” man; righteous even though he knew at the time he saved you that just a few hours later you would engage in incest with your daughters.
Nope. Their Bronze Age wickedness was not homosexuality. Ezekiel 16:49-50 Not by the standards of the Iron Age.
[And where was the consent? Lot offered his daughters to the rapists. The past is certainly another country. For early Iron Age Bronze Age story weavers. How Jesus dealt with all this sick filth in his culture I can barely imagine. Not too well as it’s still deeply embedded in Christianity somehow after two thousand years.]
For their existence? Yes – the names both appear in diplomatic and trade records from other cities.
The disaster? Not before someone figures out exactly where they were.
Huh? What city would that be?
That’s not in the text.
That’s not in the text, either – last I checked, intended rape does not qualify as consensual activity.
IIRC, at the assumed area are the remains of at least one larger ‘town’ and two smaller villages that were abandoned after something happened. If we consider a bit wider area, there may be more ruins from that era. There are no archeological findings that would tell the names of these ruins, so it is not known if the ruins were the Sodom and/or Gomorrah.
Whatever the names of the settlements (ruins) were, at least the ‘town’ is within the area that was affected by an exploding space rock - if the hypothesis of a space rock is valid. The evidence for the space rock explosion is not strong but there are some signs that make that scenario possible.
Such an explosion and devastation would probably be a source of stories that may have circulated in that region for a long time after the event.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
