paxthemes.blogg.se - Sodom and gomorrah movie meteor

Merrill suggests that the 1650 BCE date for Sodom’s destruction would require a chronology that fits within something like the following framework, a framework that Dr.

The only way out of the conundrum if Hammam is Sodom is to (1) disregard the biblical figures for the ages of the patriarchs (2) jettison or greatly reduce the 215-year sojourn and (3) minimize the length of the ministries of the judges and the reign of Saul nearly to the vanishing point.ĭr.

The various judges and the reign of Saul must be compressed between 1150 and 1010, the established date of the commencement of David’s reign.

Even a 215 year Egyptian sojourn must cover the years 1415-1200, requiring the Exodus to be in 1200 and the conquest, 40 years later, in 1160-1150.

This date demands a birth date of Abraham about 1699 since he was 175 when he died, that occurred in 1524, 76 years after the destruction of Sodom.

The late Middle Bronze Age date of Sodom’s destruction, driven by archaeological considerations, must be the iron-clad standard against which the biblical chronology is ascertained.

Merrill identifies several problems with the 1650 BCE date for Sodom’s destruction: He also adopts what is considered to be an Early Date theory of when the Exodus for Egypt occurred, in the 15th century BCE. Merrill’s approach to biblical chronology is consistent with a belief in “Young Earth Creationism”, which places the creation of the world roughly 6000 years ago.

Merrill follows what might be called a strict, literal interpretation of the numbers found in much of the Old Testament, which would place the destruction of Sodom much earlier, about 2067 BCE. Archaeologist Todd Bolen, for example, argues that the location of Tall el-Hammam does not line up with the standard interpretation of Genesis 18:16, which some suggest indicates that Sodom was located nearer towards the southern end of the Dead Sea, as opposed to Tall el-Hammam’s location, north of the Dead Sea.Ī more problematic objection to the story associated with the Nature paper comes from Dallas Seminary Old Testament bible scholar Eugene Merrill, who argues that the timeline for Tall el-Hammam’s destruction in about 1650 BCE does not line up with biblical chronology. However, other Christian archaeologists and scholars are not persuaded. Some Christians have concluded from this paper that we now have strong scientific evidence, demonstrating the historical accuracy of this particular episode from the Bible. (Credit: Nature article, September 20, 2021, in Scientific Reports)