View of Tall el-Hammam. The mound is the most prominent feature on the landscape for miles around. Courtesy Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project
Posted on 09/29/2015 12:42:54 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
But based on the excavated evidence, the city’s Bronze Age heyday seems to have nevertheless come to a sudden, inexplicable end toward the end of the Middle Bronze Age—and the ancient city became a relative wasteland for 700 years, for the most part void of human habitation. The comparatively paltry or lack of Late Bronze Age material is a testament to this, with the same pattern shown in the smaller, nearby sites. A strange development, thinks Collins, for a great city-state that flourished even through the catastrophic climate changes that arguably led to the collapse of the great cities of the Levantine Early Bronze Age around 2350 BCE. Collins is hoping that further research and excavation may shed more light on this mystery.
(Excerpt) Read more at popular-archaeology.com ...
View of Tall el-Hammam. The mound is the most prominent feature on the landscape for miles around. Courtesy Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project
I wonder what was it that the Sodomites did that was so horrible that other peoples have not done through the ages?
If we’re around in a few years, God ought to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.
"A strange development, thinks Collins, for a great city-state that flourished even through the catastrophic climate changes that arguably led to the collapse of the great cities of the Levantine Early Bronze Age around 2350 BCE. Collins is hoping that further research and excavation may shed more light on this mystery."
Raining hellfire is a kind of climate change.
Didn’t Popular Archaeology used to be called Biblical Archaeology?
In the Beginning by Immanuel Velikovsky
http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm
chapters:
The Age of the Dead Sea
http://www.varchive.org/itb/deadsea.htm
The Great Rift and the Jordan
http://www.varchive.org/itb/rift.htm
[snip] Some biblical scholars argue that this was the site of “Sodom”. Other archaeologists disagree. Unlike the neighboring ruins of Numeira, Bab edh-Dhra does not appear to have been destroyed by fire. Instead, archaeological evidence suggests that the site was abandoned by its inhabitants. Other possible reasons this site may not be the biblical Sodom are because the village was too small, not in the designated geographical area and did not exist in the appropriate time period. Supporters of the Sodom theory have argued that, on closer examination to the biblical account, this does fit the geographical description of where Sodom would be located. They also argue that a set time frame for its destruction is not necessarily reliable. [/snip]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bab_edh-Dhra
There’s a Biblical Archaeology Review (BAR) which still exists. It’s on a bimonthly publishing schedule last I knew.
She hasn’t aged well.
Those damned Christians want more Biblical references in our books and the Supreme Court has forced us to include them
Well chief, why not put 'em IN, with reference points
Waddaya' mean, Ralph?
Well ... like, you know ... Sodom and Gamorrah were destroyed because of climate change .... and Jericho's wall fell because of an earthquake caused by man made global warming ..
Heyyyy ... yeah ... and how about, the parting of the Red Sea was BECAUSE the warming happened so quickly ...
Hmmmmm ... might be a little tough on that one ..
OK ... I'll work on it
Climate change....LOL!
:’)
Apparently the city ran out of righteous men, aside from Lot and his family, that up to then had spared it from destruction as per Abraham's previous pleadings to God.
Some notes on the ESV Bible translation link to sources that say the smoke from Sodom was still coming out of the earth 2000 years after it was destroyed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
