The Remains of Sodom & Gomorrah Found

[arnisador]

[video=youtube_share;eJlN9jdQFSc]http://youtu.be/eJlN9jdQFSc[/video]

PeaceWithGod.net

I'm not quite sure what the video clip, or the link, proves about S&G having been found.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Thousands of years is very patient in my opinion for the final judgement of all mankind.

That is not an answer. People do not live for thousands of years. A child in Sodom being burned alive is not addressed in "the judgement of all mankind." And even that is done on an individual basis.

Also, the idea of God ordering the Israelite warriors to take the Caananite women as plunder.... well, doing that is itself sinful. Rape is rape. Jesus illustrates that everyone is your neighbor. Jesus commands us to love our enemies. The God of the OT directs us to shun our enemies. He directed the Israelites to go into a land that they did not posess and commit genocide.

Let's not forget that the Promised Land was not forcibly taken from the Israelites; per the Biblical record, they left of their own accord and went to Egypt because it wasn't economically depressed. Also per the Biblical record, the Israelites didn't leave a land that they posessed; they left a land where they dwelt. It was very clear from Genesis that the land of Israel was not a nation ruled by the Hebrews, but was a region where they happened to live along side other cultural groups.

Prior to the Israelites arriving in Caanan, the Caananites weren't their enemies.

I'm not going to debate the justness or unjustness of a God leading his chosen people in a campaign of invasion and genocide, only to get upset with them later and subject them to invasion and scatter them. I will only say that this portrayal of God is inconsistent with that of the NT and that the very things that God commands (invading a nation that has not attacked you is mass murder, which breaks the commandment of though shalt not kill).

For the record, I'm not criticizing the Israelites; the Irish have a similar account of a leader from the Iberian Penninsula (Milesius) leading the Milesians into Ireland and conquering the land, wresting it from the Tuatha de Danan, who agreed to give up the land in exchange for worship, and who then retreated into the Sidhe mounds. Populations shifted, moved, conquered and displaced, and established themselves. I don't judge ancient people by modern standards. I am only pointing out that the God is definitely operating under a different set of parameters from the God of the OT.

So, "Is this really the same guy??"

Not of God is eternal and unchanging.

"And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it." ~ Luke 17:26-33 KJV

"And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me." ~ Luke 24:44 KJV

If you're interested in having an actual discussion, please discuss. Don't spout scripture at me. I can spout it right back. That isn't a discussion; that is one upsmanship through Bible quotes. I took the time to watch the video and to give you a thoughtful response. If you are not interested in actual discussion but only in issuing warnings of God's judgement, that is fine and I can respect that, but it does place you in violation of the terms of services.

Nothing in your post above addresses anything (not a single thing) in the post of mine which you quoted. That includes Christ's reference of a commonly known tale of the destruction of Sodom. Until the twentieth century, nobody questioned whether or not Sodom existed or that it had been destroyed, and many cautionary tales have been told over the years using the destruction of Sodom and Gomorah. Even if the cities never existed (I believe that they did), it doesn't diminish the value of the cautionary tale. Do we not reference characters from fables and literature when making analogies? This is done frequently. The point Jesus was making was in no way dependent upon God actually being the destructive agent, or even upon the cities actual existence.

The idea that we should turn away from sin and wrongdoing and never look back is well illustrated in Luke 17:26-33, but as you well know, this is an ideal. Christians look back at, and indeed often fall back into, the sins of their old life. It is the very reason for God's forgiveness, something beautifully illustrated in the NT. However, if God is eternal and unchanging, then the question arises as to whether the portrayal of God in the OT is accurate, as that God is definitely different from the God of the NT.

In any case, this debate between you and I is academic; I believe that Sodom and Gomorah existed, am not disputing that Ron Wyatt found the cities, believe that Jesus existed, died for the salvation of all, and that he was divine and rose from the dead on the third day. So in that regard, you're preaching to the converted.

If you wish to evangelize people who deny the need for Jesus, then I would suggest a better starting point than Sodom and Gomorah. I would also suggest that you look at all of the things that people have said in response to your efforts. You have to be able to connect the Gospel you preach to the needs of the people you preach to. If you think otherwise, look at Paul's letters. He put a great deal of thought into making a case for Christ, being convincing, and addressing issues that were of importance to his audience. If he didn't, his letters would have been simple regurgitations of existing scripture along with a paragraph or two of him telling you to believe it just because it's scripture.

Incidentally, Paul also challenged his readers to evaluate what he said in light of scripture and to subject his words to critical thinking. He specifically asked the reader to use their brain and not to simply take his word for it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

[video=youtube_share;eJlN9jdQFSc]http://youtu.be/eJlN9jdQFSc[/video]

PeaceWithGod.net

Good song. I also liked Elvis' rendition.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Here's the king singing Run on:

 

[Xue Sheng]

 

[arnisador]

Speaking of which, just how is Vegas escaping judgment?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Speaking of which, just how is Vegas escaping judgment?

The Angel of Death got comped a room at the Rampart because he's an old friend of Sam Braun?

 

[Xue Sheng]

The Angel of Death got comped a room at the Rampart because he's an old friend of Sam Braun?

And don't forget the gambling debts at the Black Jack table

 

[elder999]

View attachment $las-vegas-diablos.jpgLas Vegas??Las Vegas is de Debbil!!! :lfao:

 

[arnisador]

You know, apart from the tail...I mean, I'm just saying...

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Speaking of which, just how is Vegas escaping judgment?

Judgement comes in many forms. Paul refers to handing a hardened sinner over to satan. The idea being that such a person is left to sin and the hope is that the misery they experience because of their sinful actions will cause them to turn back to God. This is also illustrated in the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Remember that the NT portrays judgement very differently. Calamity, illness, injury, etc. are no longer considered to be the end result of sin in one's life, while wealth and good fortune are not considered the just rewards of righteousness.

With the exception of the book of Revelation, there is very little in the way of external judgement in the NT. People live their lives and give an accounting after they're finished, leading to reward or punishment. In fact, you even have a shift from that as the NT progresses. Jesus exhorts his audience to charitable deeds, good works, and to love others, be they friend or foe, family or no, or even the same cultural group or no. As you get past the gospels and Acts, you see some of the writers emphasize good works, all of them emphasize love.

Then you get to Paul, who takes things a step further. It is no longer just good enough to do good. You must also be good. He argues that this is impossible without the grace of Christ. There are many interpretations of Paul's theology.

Calvin argued that nobody can be saved, and nobody can even come to God of their own free will, so God will elect a finite number of people to be saved, while the rest, regardless of how they believe or act, will perish. The logic is that if God didn't do this, then nobody would be saved at all.

Most mainline Protestant and Evangelical theology involve acceptance of Christ, with the Holy Spirit calling all, but only some choosing to answer. All who are found to be "in Christ" at the final judgement are saved, while all others perish.

Catholic theology teaches that everything good that anyone does is due to the Holy Spirit and God, and that there is a basic element of God's commands ingrained in all. Those who are Catholic are sanctified through belief in Christ and through the sacraments of the church, which is Christ's means of dispensing his grace. Those who are outside of the Catholic Church can still be saved, but will face greater challenge, as they do not have the Papal-GPS to guide them. With the doctrine of Purgatory, one who has died not fully sanctified can have that work finished in Purgatory through the grace of Christ and enter Heaven (the doctrine of Purgatory is one of the doctrines that caused the reformation; aside from being inherenly unscriptural, it also was connected to the sale of indulgences).

There are other variations besides these as well. One factor is that most of the Bibilical support for the various doctrines on salvation are primarilly found in Paul's letters. Given that Paul wrote the bulk of the NT, one could argue that Christianity as a formal religion was actually formulated and codified, and indeed invented by Paul.