Electric                    Astral               Pre-historical
Universe              Catastrophism        Reconstruction


Articles & Products Supporting the Pre-historical Reconstruction and Plasma Cosmology
 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store       used books        contact

Site Section Links

Introduction Material
The Third Story

Cosmology, Origins
The Nature of Time
Nature of Time video
The Nature of Space
The Neutrino Aether
Nature of Force Fields
Relativity Theory

Geophysical Material
Origin of Modern Geology
Niagara Falls Issues
Climate Change Model
Climate Change Questions

Philosophy Material
Philosophy Links

Reconstruction &
Mythology Material
Modern Mythology Material
Language/Symbol Development
1994 Velikovsky Symposium
Horus Journals TOC
Kronos Journals TOC
Pensee Journals TOC
Velikovskian Journals TOC
Selected Velikovskian Article

Miscellaneous Material
Modern Mythology
State of Religious Diversity
PDF Download Files
Open letter to science editors





Copyright (C) 1982 by Dwardu Cardona

12. The Cataclysm

According to Jewish legend, the destruction of the cities of the plain did not come without warning. For quite a few years prior to the calamity, the land had been shaken by earthquakes.

"For fifty-two years God had warned the godless; He had made mountains to quake and tremble."(161)

A few days before - or possibly even the very morning of - the catastrophe, (162) the day turned "exceedingly hot", for god, it is said, "had bored a hole in hell, so that its heat might reach as far as the earth".(163) On the sixteenth day of Nisan, precisely at dawn, the worst came to pass.(164) A sudden tremor overturned the cities while "the rain that was streaming down upon [them] was changed into brimstone". (165)

In Genesis it is stated:

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven;

"And He overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground."(166)

The Book of Jubilees adds very little to the account:

"And in this month the Lord executed His judgements on Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Zeboim, and all the region of the Jordan, and He burned them with fire and brimstone, and destroyed them until this day."(167)

The version given by Flavius Josephus is even shorter but it introduces a new element:

"God then cast a thunderbolt upon the city [Sodom], and set it on fire, with its inhabitants, and laid waste the country with the like burning."(168)

According to Philo, "lightnings poured out of heaven".(169) Tacitus also reported that the cities were "struck by lightning and consumed".(170)

13. The Aftermath

Lot, Abraham's kinsman, was still in Sodom at the time of the destruction or just prior to it. Not wishing to desert the land he had adopted, he moved into Bela/Zoar (also called Segor) the only city in the plain which, although "encompassed with the fire", (171) was not itself consumed.(172) Lot's wife, as is well known, succumbed to the catastrophe even though the exact nature of her fate - to be discussed later - remains a matter of some mystery.

According to Josephus, Lot and his two daughters remained in Zoar where "he lived a miserable life, on account of his having no company, and his want of provisions".(173) Genesis, on the other hand, states that Lot and his daughters did not remain long in Zoar but left to reside in a cave in the mountains.(174) The same account seems to indicate - and Josephus substantiates it - that Lot's daughters believed themselves and their father to be the only survivors of the catastrophe.(175)

Zoar itself continued to exist until much later times. In his invective against Moab, Jeremiah was still mentioning Zoar as if it existed in his day.(176) Chances are that, although the city survived, its inhabitants fled and dispersed. This would account for Lot's lack of "company" during his period of shelter within the city. Once the danger was over - although this could have been years later - the city could have been reinhabited. Jewish legend has it that the city was destroyed by a different agent in a much later time.(177)

That the destruction under present discussion affected more than just the cities of the plain is indicated by the reports, already cited, which claim that "all the plain" was destroyed, that the entire country was "laid waste", and "all the region of the Jordan". The fact that Lot's family believed themselves to be the only survivors also indicates that the devastation was anything but local. This explains why Lot's daughters thought it necessary to commit incest with their father, as this appeared to them to be the only way in which they could perpetuate their race.

Hebron, where Abraham was then residing, was in the same general area. Having seen the smoke rise from the burning cities in the distance, (178) he too fled. Like Lot, he sought the relative safety of the mountains.

"And in this month Abraham moved from Hebron, and departed and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur in the mountains of Gerar."(179)

All traffic came to a standstill in the region, (180) while the smoke from the cities continued to rise for many days after the event.(181)

14. The Sources

Did the catastrophe really occur?

Edward Robertson once stated:

"The element of history in the narrative of the 'cities of the plain' is as difficult to assess as the sites are to determine." (182)

As Isaac Asimov pointed out:

"It is only fair to say . . . that no extra-Biblical evidence of such a catastrophe is known . . ."(183)

This argument had been earlier raised by Sarna:

"Unfortunately, no parallels to our story from extrabiblical Palestinian sources have yet turned up. It is unthinkable, however, that a devastating calamity such as overtook the 'cities of the Plain' did not leave its impress upon the local Canaanite traditions. In fact, the existence of a more extensive popular version or, perhaps, several versions, of the saga in ancient times may be deduced from the scattered and fragmentary biblical citations which differ in some respects from the Genesis recension in the names of the cities involved and in the details of the description of the disaster."(184)

What Sarna meant is that while, in Genesis, the account singles out Sodom and Gomorrah as the victims of the catastrophe, other sources favored or included one or more of the other cities. Josephus, for instance, mentioned only Sodom, while Jubilees includes Zeboim along with both Sodom and Gomorrah. Deuteronomy adds Admah to Zeboim(185) while Hoseah mentions only these last two.(186) Tacitus, on the other hand, did not mention the cities by name at all. He merely reported that, according to tradition, the plain was once the "site of great cities".(187) So also in Moslem sources where the cities, referred to as the Mu 'tafikah, (188) or the "Ruined Cities"(189) - with their inhabitants known simply as the people or compatriots of Lot(190) - remain unnamed.

As Sarna also pointed out, the nature of the catastrophe is not identical in all sources. As we have already seen, while some accounts specify a rain of fire and brimstone, others blame the destruction on a thunderbolt. Deuteronomy not only speaks of the soil of the area being devastated by sulfur (which is the same as brimstone) but also by salt.(191) The Qoran again differs by blaming the destruction on a "stone-charged whirlwind"(192) and/or a rain of "brickstones".(193)

What all this indicates is that the fragments of the story as we now have them are not slavish copies of one single original but relics of extinct but independent narratives.

15. The Desolation

That four independent cities out of five in an adjoining area should suffer the same calamity not only indicates a common source for the destruction but also points to a cataclysm of far-reaching consequences. Such a catastrophe should have affected not only the cities but the entire face of the surrounding region. This is precisely what we find.

Genesis records that, previous to the destruction, the valley of the Jordan was a fertile land. When, earlier, Lot separated from Abram with his people, he chose to reside in the city of Sodom for that very reason.

"And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt . . ."(194)

Following the catastrophe, Sodom and Gomorrah became the very symbol of devastation. In his farewell speech, generations later, Moses admonished his people to heed the Covenant lest god were to turn the land they were about to inhabit into a desolation with "all its soil devastated by sulphur and salt, beyond sowing and producing, no grass growing in it, just like the upheaval of Sodom and Gomorrah".(195) Zephaniah, who even later prophesied against Moab and Ammon, used similar words:

"Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation."(196)

This ruin could not always have existed for such a land would hardly have seduced Lot and his people to choose it for their domicile. Nor would populous cities have been built in such a desolation. "Certainly the shores of the Dead Sea are bleakly in fertile now, " wrote Asimov, "but conceivably that might have been the result of the very catastrophe described . ."(197)

Recent environmental surveys have revealed that the land around the southern end of the Dead Sea was more fertile in the third millennium B.C. It seems there was enough fresh water in the region to support a sizeable agricultural civilization.(198) The present desolation is not, therefore, the result of millions of years of slow erosion and climatic change - and it is quite possible that neither is the origin of the Dead Sea itself.(199)

16. Bab edh-Dhra'

What of the pentapolis itself? Where did these five infamous cities disappear to? Recently, J. L. Gardner summarized the belief of two thousand years in the following words:

"Writing at about the time of Jesus, the Jewish historian Josephus noted that it was possible to see the remains of ancient cities south of the Dead Sea. Since at least the 1st century B.C., historians have placed the biblical Cities of the Plain . . . in that region. Later scholars speculated that earthquakes destroyed the cities and their remains lay beneath the shallow waters of the southern Dead Sea."(200)

In 1973, Dorothy B. Vitaliano could still write:

"The ruins of these cities have never been found. According to J. P. Harland, the evidence from the Bible and from later Greek and Latin writers indicates that they must have been located in a fertile area around the southern end of the Dead Sea. Since the level of the Dead Sea has risen in past centuries, the area, the biblical Vale of Siddim, is now submerged . . ."(201)

Two years earlier, Asimov had also intimated that, following the catastrophe - or in conjunction with it(202) - the cities were inundated.(203) But he also stated that

". . . there are no reports of any remains of civilization under the waters of the southern end of the Dead Sea."(204)

Let us now shift our attention to 1924 when a large fortified site was discovered at Bab edh-Dhra', 550 feet above the eastern shore at the south end of the Dead Sea facing the Lisan Peninsula in East Jordan. Although this discovery is usually credited to W. F. Albright - who was heading a survey of the Jordan Valley when the site came to light - the actual honor belongs to Alexis Mallon.(205) This site was in that region somewhere within which the Cities of the Plain had always, as we have seen, been suspected to have existed. But, despite published descriptions of potsherds picked up at the surface, the site remained archaeologically unexplored for forty more years.

In 1965, Paul W. Lapp and Siegfried Mittmann followed a trail of contraband pottery which led from Jerusalem to the discovery of a vast burial ground at the same Bab edh-Dhra'. According to their estimate, the cemetery contained something like twenty thousand tombs.(206) Some of these tombs were opened, their contents examined, and their artifacts removed and studied. But, despite the fact that such a vast ossuary bespoke a populous past somewhere in the area, ten more years were to pass before any actual excavation and stratigraphical exploration was to be conducted.

The fortified area that Mallon and Albright had first discovered was, meanwhile, believed to have been an open-air sanctuary. In 1966, a year following the discovery of the Bab edh-Dhra' cemetery, Sarna could still write that

"Strangely enough, there is no sign of any permanent settlement in the entire region.

"The stone pillars, the open-air hearths, and the implements and pottery [discovered at the site] all point to one conclusion. The place must have been a great open air sanctuary, a place of pilgrimage for people who lived in the valley down below . . . In other words, the material relics all presuppose the existence of a local civilization of which not a trace has remained. Bab edh-Dhra' must have been sustained by the populace of cities which once were situated in what is now the southern embayment of the Dead Sea "(207)

Albright had long speculated that the shallow southern end of the Dead Sea had once been dry land and that the Cities of the Plain had been located there.(208) Lapp, having discovered the Bab edh-Dhra' cemetery, should have been wiser but he, too, favored the "submerged" hypothesis.(209)

It turned out not to be so. Actually, Genesis does inform us that the Vale of Siddim, in time, became the Salt (or Dead) Sea, (210) but it is not there, or anywhere, stated that the Cities of the Plain were likewise inundated. Some had argued that the submergence had occurred later - perhaps even after the time of Josephus. But when, during the summer of 1979, a large portion of the Dead Sea's southern extremity exposed itself due to water drainage further north, an examination of the uncovered sea bottom revealed no signs of habitation. The conclusion was reached that

"The south end (of the Dead Sea) could not have contained cities at any time during the historical period, at least from 3000 B.C. onwards."(211)

"This area would have been not only an improbable, but also an impossible area in which to establish a city."(212)

But a city did come to light - at the very spot where all the indications had dictated it should be discovered - at the very site of Bab edh-Dhra' itself.

17. The Cities

Had the archaeologists who had previously scratched around this region kept in mind that most Early Bronze towns are known to have been built on high areas, the controversial cities would not have been sought on the plain below. The site first discovered by Mallon and Albright, 550 feet above the Dead Sea, should at once have been suspected of harboring such a city. The honor now belongs to Walter E. Rast and R. Thomas Schaub.

The discovered city was surrounded by a wall with a large tower. The habitations consisted mostly of mud-brick structures. A temple and an altar have also been identified.(213)

"The archaeologists found the charred remains of one large wooden pillar resting on a flat stone pedestal . . . Some of the wooden ceiling beams [of the temple] were also found. The building had been destroyed by fire at the end of Early Bronze III."(214)

"The town of Bab edh-Dhra' was destroyed . . . The foundations of some of the buildings were buried under tons of rubble. Beneath the rubble, there is clear evidence of a fiery conflagration."(215)

While surveying the area around Bab edh-Dhra', in 1973, Rast and Schaub discovered another ruined city, seven miles south, at Numeira. The remains of a tower, similar to that of Bab edh-Dhra', as well as domestic installations and signs of local industry, including winemaking, have been identified. A large batch of grapes, complete with skins, was also unearthed.(216) Next to the town is a vast cemetery, again similar to the one at Bab edh-Dhra', which stretches "almost a mile in either direction".(217)

Numeira is "a mere two-acre site" which is believed to have been inhabited for "a brief 100 year period".(218)

"The town was then consumed in a fiery destruction, the remains of which can still be seen on the site."(219)

"Even without excavation, the archaeologists could see that the site had been burned. Spongy charcoal was all over the ground and could be scooped up by hand."(220)

And there was more. Continuing their systematic survey of the region, Rast and Schaub were not long in discovering three other sites - at Safi, Feifa, and Khanazir - all strung south of Numeira and of each other.

Like Numeira and Bab edh-Dhra', Safi is also surrounded by a vast cemetery.(221) Like Numeira and Bab edh-Dhra', Feifa was also destroyed by fire.

". . . surface evidence [at Feifa] reflects the fact that the city was [also] destroyed in a fiery disaster. [As at Numeira] Spongy charcoal can still be scooped from the surface by hand . . "(222)

As Hershel Shanks, the editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, so aptly put it:

"That there are five and only five sites located in the Dead Sea area - each located near a flowing spring; that all five date to the same archaeological period - the Early Bronze Age; and that there is no other evidence of occupation in the area until the Roman period over 2000 years later is not without significance."(223)

What is of high interest is the fact that the town of Safi is indicated on a mosaic map which was found in the ruins of a Byzantine church at Medeba (or Madaba), some thirty miles north of Bab edh-Dhra'. Believed to have been constructed in "about A.D. 560", and labelled in Greek, (224) this map identifies Safi as Zoar(225) - the only city of the Biblical pentapolis which, although "encompassed with fire", was said to have escaped immediate destruction. Discovered in 1884, and still touted as "the earliest-known cartographic representation of the Holy Land", (226) the map has been famous since the time of its recovery. With such a decisive pointer to show the way, one wonders why it took another 90 years for the city to be unearthed.

In 1980, Rast and Schaub stated:

"We are in the process of proposing that these Early Bronze sites may indeed represent the remains of the ancient [Biblical] cities [of the plain]."(227)

We would like to note in passing that this identification met with at least one dissenter. Without mentioning any names, Shanks did well to inform his readers that "one prominent scholar" threatened to withdraw his support of a grant if Rast and Schaub were to insist in identifying the sites as the Biblical pentapolis.(228)

"There is a segment of the scholarly community which regards it as unscholarly to focus on possible connections between archaeological evidence and the Biblical record, because the evidence is often so tentative. Yet the most far-fetched speculation is permitted in other areas of archaeological scholarship."(229)

I, for one, do not regard the identification of these cities that tentative. They correspond to the correct number and the proper location; their fiery destruction tallies with the Biblical record; and the identification of Safe as Zoar seems to have been retained at least until Byzantine times. By 1981, the identifications were just about taken for granted:

"Excavations at Bab edh-Dhra' and Numeira have led Rast and Schaub to propose that these might be two of the biblical cities . . . Bab edh-Dhra', the largest of them, most likely served as the major city in relation to the others. It could well contain the ruins of ancient Sodom, with the ruins of the neighboring city of Gomorrah possibly being at Numeira."(230)

18 The Millennium

Twenty years after Mallon and Albright had discovered the site of Bab edh-Dhra', the latter published a short paper on some of the potsherds he had collected from the area. In it he concluded:

"The latest possible date for any Bab edh-Dhra' pottery is . . . the 21st century B.C., and its maximum scope is 23rd-21st century B.C. I am inclined, moreover, to date most of it about the 22nd century B.C."(231)

Writing twenty-three years later, Lapp was of the opinion that

"This dating still seems entirely sound for the city's surface sherds and the cairn burial involved."(232)

As to the cemetery itself, Lapp's conclusion was:

"In the light of . . . evidence and the overlapping of Early Bronze I and II typology . . . I would assign these tombs to the late fourth and the early third millennia B.C."(233)

It is now believed that the earliest burials at Bab edh-Dhra' date to around 3200 B.C., "even before the town was built". It is held that the first permanent settlement in the area was established "in about 3100 B.C.". Bab edh-Dhra' seems to have been destroyed "about 2300 B.C.", Numeira at about 2350 B.C.(234) Thus a discordant note seems to creep between the archaeological discoveries and the currently accepted date of the Patriarchal Age. As Gardner put it:

"Both sites [Bab edh-Dhra' and Numeira] met a violent end about 2350 B.C. - nearly four centuries before the earliest date currently suggested for the life of Abraham."(235)

For long, scholars had widely disagreed as to which time-slot the Patriarchal Age should be allotted to. Albright, together with Nelson Glueck, had placed this age in Middle Bronze I, between the 21st and 19th centuries B.C. This date was later lowered by others to Middle Bronze II, between the 19th and 16th centuries B.C.(236)

"However, a number of other dates, both later and earlier, have also been defended, and two important books have recently suggested that there was no Patriarchal Age, that the stories were composed during the Israelite monarchy or even the exilic period without reference to historical fact."(237)

Similar views have been expressed by others:

"Such a memorable event as the sudden destruction of these cities would have become firmly lodged in the traditions of the area and could have found its way into the Abraham narrative."(238)

It seems odd that when the cities were believed to have been lost, the historicity of the Biblical narrative was upheld, while now that the cities have been found, the story in Genesis is suggested to have been a grafted fabrication.

The debate in question is actually outside the scope of the present paper but it should be noted that the idea of a third millennium B.C. placement for the life of Abraham is slowly gaining acceptance.(239) In any case, "Muslim scholars have long held that Abraham's epic journey occurred about 2300 B.C.".(240) This would tally well with our acceptance that Abraham's migration into Canaan was part of the greater movement of peoples, namely Amorites, who drove into the country "shortly before the year 2000 B.C.".(241) Rast and Schaub have themselves suggested that the first settlers at Bab edh-Dhra' were descendants of a pastoral and nomadic horde.(242)

Although, personally, I would not want to commit myself to an exactitude, I must admit that a third millennium Early Bronze date for Abraham seems to fit the facts best.

19. The Agent

What caused the destruction of these cities?

As we noted at the very beginning of this series, Velikovsky was of the opinion that an interplanetary discharge from the planet Jupiter - in close conjunction with Earth - hit somewhere in the plain and caused the conflagration.(243) Others have also attributed the destruction to planetary interaction. James E. Strickling, while stressing Jupiter's activity during this period, left the issue undecided in that he did not reach a definite conclusion as to whether the discharge originated from Jupiter, or the much smaller Venus.(244) Martin Sieff believed the destruction was caused by Venus.(245) Brendan O'Gheoghan followed Sieff.(246) Patten, et al. blamed it all on Mars.(247) Alfred de Grazia has even implied that Mercury was the cause.(248) But before we decide which of these various hypotheses is the most probable, I would like to ask: Is cosmic intervention even implied?

While some aspects of the Biblical narrative have for long been doubted, the actual destruction of the cities seems always to have been vouched for. Thus, long before the recovery of the cities, Robertson could feel safe in stating that "a scientific explanation of the catastrophe is not excluded".(249) Even Vitaliano, at a time when no physical evidence was yet at hand, had no qualms in assuring her readers that

". . . there is another tradition which possibly is based in part on an earthquake and which is indubitably authentic - the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah."(250)

In 1936, Frederick G. Clapp proposed an explanation that is not entirely without merit.(251) It is well known that bitumen seeps from under the water of the Dead Sea. The region abounds in bituminous rock. Oil seepages also abound. Noxious gases were often reported by ancient travellers. The lightning that Philo described could easily have set fire to these seepages.

As Vitaliano pointed out:

". . . it does not seem likely that a bolt of lightning alone could have produced a fire so uncontrollable that it devoured four separate cities."(253)

Asimov has stated that "the description of the catastrophe could match that of a volcanic eruption, combined with an earthquake".(253) Geologic evidence, however, has ruled out the possibility of a volcanic eruption in the area(254) - at least during the time period with which we are involved(255) - although not, apparently, that of an earthquake. Sarna, for instance, has drawn attention to the word translated as "annihilated" or "overthrew" as it appears in the Genesis (19:25) account and stated that, in Hebrew, this word "suggests the effects of an earthquake". (256)

This, also, tallies with both ancient legend and modern discovery. We have already seen that, according to Jewish lore, the land had quaked and trembled for fifty-two years prior to the destruction. And at Bab edh-Dhra', the inhabitants seem to have taken precautions against such tremors.

"The town wall was built in distinct segments between 50 and 75 feet long so that an earthquake would be less likely to destroy the entire wall."(257)

A combination of earthquake, lightning, and bituminous fires has therefore been suggested. It is, of course, well known that the Jordan Valley is part of the Great Rift system that stretches from Syria to East Africa. Sarna has stated that

". . . the whole tenor of the Sodom story suggests some unnatural and extraordinary happening, swift and sudden in its visitation.

We are most likely, then, dealing with a description of one of the last earthquakes that shaped the lower Jordan Valley area. As is frequently the case, the earthquake was accompanied by lightning which ignited the natural gases and seepages of bitumen or asphalt and probably also petroleum, causing a terrible conflagration."(258)

So also Vitaliano:

"A disastrous earthquake shook the Vale of Siddim . . . releasing large quantities of natural gases and bitumens which were ignited by scattered hearth fires [sic]. The resulting conflagration wiped out Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim; the fifth city, Zoar, was spared due to some accident of its location . . . Lightning may or may not have been partly responsible for starting the fires . . ." (259)

Could this not be explanation enough? Need one introduce planetary confrontations and discharges to explain the catastrophe?

Normally one need not but, if we are to believe the ancient sources, which have proven correct on so many other points, "fire and brimstone" rained from above; they did not spring from below. The "fire", it is true, could very well have been a reference to the lightning. As Vitaliano stated, "it would need only to have been seen in the sky at the time of the catastrophe to create the impression that the destruction came from the heavens".(260) But why do the accounts introduce a rain of brimstone, or sulfur, out of heaven?

Vitaliano answers this question also:

"Ancient writers also mentioned foul odors emanating from the Dead Sea waters, and an 'invisible soot' that would tarnish metals - presumably sulfur gases . . .

"Brimstone, of course, is just another name for sulfur, and the penetrating odor of burning sulfur could easily have been noticeable among the other smells of burning."(261)

In view of everything else, we would accept this explanation were it not for the odd fact that the ancients associated the smell of sulfur - or brimstone - with certain thunderbolts which they insistently stated to have originated from the planets.(262)

This description of a destruction from the sky has even led Asimov, one of Velikovsky's and cosmic catastrophism's staunchest critics, to suggest that the cities might "conceivably" have been hit by "a large meteorite".(263) A meteorite, or meteoric shower, would compare well with the cause of the destruction as described in the Qoran where the visitation from heaven is called "a stone-charged whirlwind". Even the description of a rain of "brick-stones" might conceal such a half-forgotten and/or misunderstood meteorological phenomenon.

With this in mind, it behooves us to examine the various cosmic hypotheses outlined above.

. . . to be continued.


161. L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia, 5728/1968), Vol. I, p. 253.
162. Legend records that this took place on the third day following Abraham's circumcision which, some sources affirm, occurred on the 10th day of Tishri (Ibid., p. 240). "In older sources [however], the thirteenth or fifteenth of Nisan is the day on which Abraham's circumcision took place" (Ibid ., Vol. V, p. 233).
163. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 240.
164. Ibid., p. 256.
165. Ibid., p. 255.
166. Genesis 19:24-25.
167. Jubilees 16:5-11.
168. Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews (also known as The Jewish Antiquities), I, 11, 4.
169. Philo, Moses, II, 53 ff.
170. P. Cornelius Tacitus, The Histories, V, 7.
171. Flavius Josephus, loc. cit.
172. Genesis 19:15-23. (NOTE: For Zoar or Bela as Segor, see Douay version).
173. Flavius Josephus, loc. cit.
174. Genesis 19:29-30.
175. Ibid., 19:31; Flavius Josephus, loc. cit.
176. Jeremiah 48:33-34.
177. L. Ginzberg, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 242.
178. Genesis 19:27-28.
179. Jubilees, loc. cit.
180. L. Ginzberg, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 269.
181. Ibid., p. 260.
182. E. Robertson, "Sodom and Gomorrah," Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition), Vol . 20, p. 923.
183. I. Asimov, Asimov's Guide to the Bible (N.Y., 1971), Vol. I, p. 83.
184. N. M. Sarna, Understanding Genesis (N.Y., 1976), p. 143.
185. Deuteronomy 29:22
186. Hoseah II:8
187. Tacitus, loc. cit
188. The Qoran, sura 53.
189. Ibid., sura 69.
190. Ibid., suras 54 and 50.
191. Deuteronomy, loc. cit.
192. The Qoran, sura 54.
193. Ibid., suras 11 and 15
194. Genesis 13:10.
195. Deuteronomy, loc. cit.
196. Zephaniah 2:9.
197. I. Asimov, op. cit, p. 82.
198. J. L. Gardner (ed.), Atlas of the Bible (N.Y ., 1981), p. 60.
199. I. Velikovsky, "The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, " KRONOS VI:4 (Summer 1981), pp. 4046.
200. J. L. Gardner, loc. cit.
201. D. B. Vitaliano, Legends of the Earth (Bloomington, 1973), p. 89; J. P. Harland, "Sodom and Gomorrah," The Biblical Archeologist Reader (Chicago, 1961), pp. 41-75.
202. On this point, Asimov's intent (see next reference) is not quite clear.
203. I. Asimov, op. cit., p. 83.
204. Ibid.
205. H. Shanks, "Have Sodom and Gomorrah Been Found?" Biblical Archaeology Review VI:5 (Sept./Oct. 1980), p. 28.
206. P. W. Lapp, "The Cemetery at Bab edh-Dhra', Jordan," Archaeological Discoveries in the Holy Land (N.Y., 1967), p. 40.
207. N. M. Sarna, op. cit., p. 141.
208. H. Shanks, op. cit., pp. 29-33.
209. Ibid.
210. Genesis 14:3.
211. H. Shanks, op. cit, p. 33.
212. Ibid.
213. Ibid.
214. Ibid. (emphasis added).
215. Ibid. (emphasis added)
216. Ibid., p. 29.
217. Ibid., p. 36.
218. Ibid., p. 29.
219. Ibid. (emphasis added).
220. Ibid. (emphasis added).
221. Ibid., p. 36.
222. Ibid. (emphasis added).
223. Ibid., p. 29 (emphasis added).
224. J. L. Gardner, op. cit., p. 30.
225. Ibid.; H. Shanks, op. cit, p. 36.
226. J. L. Gardner, loc. cit.
227. W. E. Rast and R. T. Schaub, "Are These Sites Sodom and Gomorrah?" Newsletter of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 8 (June 1980).
228. H. Shanks, "On the New Site Identifications for Sodom and Gomorrah," Biblical Archaeology Review VII: 1 (Jan./Feb. 1981), p. 18.
229. Ibid
230. J. L. Gardner, op. cit., p. 60.
231. W. F. Albright, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 95 (1944), pp. 3-11.
232. P. W. Lapp, op. cit., p. 36.
233. Ibid., p. 40.
234. H. Shanks (see reference 205), pp. 29, 33.
235. J. L. Gardner, loc. cit. (emphasis added).
236. Z. Herzog, "Beer-Sheba of the Patriarchs," Biblical Archaeology Review VI:6 (Nov./Dec. 1980), pp. 13-14.
237. Ibid., p. 14 (emphasis added). NOTE: The two books cited are: J. van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven, 1975); T. L. Thompson, The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (N.Y., 1974).
238. J. L. Gardner, loc. cit. (emphasis added).
239. H. Shanks, op. cit., p. 36.
240. H. la Fay, "Ebla: Splendor of an Unknown Empire," National Geographic (Dec. 1978), p. 736.
241. D. Cardona, "Jupiter - God of Abraham, " Part 1, KRONOS VII:1 (Fall 1981), p. 75 (emphasis this time).
242. H. Shanks, op. cit., p. 33.
243. I. Velikovsky, op. cit., p. 47.
244. J. E. Strickling, "Sodom and Gomorrah," SIS Workshop 2:4 (April 1980), p. 5.
245. M. Sieff, "Two Faces of Venus," SISR I:4 (Spring 1977), p. 22.
246. B. O'Gheoghan, "War Stars," SISR IV:1 (Autumn 1979), p. 7.
247. D. W. Patten, et al., The Long Day of Joshua and Six Other Catastrophes (Seattle, 1973), pp. 251-257.
248. A. de Grazia, Chaos and Creation (Bombay, 1981), p. 211.
249. E. Robertson, loc. cit.
250. D. B. Vitaliano, op. cit., pp. 88-89 (emphasis added).
251. F. G. Clapp, "Geology and Bitumens of the Dead Sea Area, Palestine and Trans-jordan " Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Vol. 20 (1936), pp. 881-909.
252. D. B. Vitaliano, op. cit., p. 90.
253. I. Asimov, op. cit., p. 82.
254. N. M. Sarna, op. cit., p. 142; D. B. Vitaliano, loc. cit. 255. The ground of the Dead Sea rift is actually covered with coagulated lava. But the eruptions which forced this lava up from fissures has been dated to the second interglacial period (M. Blanckenhorn as cited by I. Velikovsky, op. cit., p. 42.).
256. N. M. Sarna, loc. cit.
257. H. Shanks, loc. cit.
258. N. M. Sarna, loc. cit.
259. D.B.Vitaliano, op. cit., p. 91.
260. Ibid.
261. Ibid., p. 90.
262. I. Velikovsky, op. cit., p. 51, where other sources are cited.
263. I. Asimov, loc. cit

 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store        policies        contact
Mikamar Publishing, 16871 SE 80th Pl,  Portland  OR  97267       503-974-9665