Sodom & Gomorrah

[Huckleberry3911948]

i disagree. a city in denial. the true sins were complete blindness to their own wrong path in life, hedonism. and a utter deafness to clear warnings.

[Mike555]

Originally Posted by whoppers

I'll combine these two.

"God's Word" and the "Canon"

I asked earlier what Canon you were using for a reason, for it determines how one views what IS and what is NOT "God's Word".
The history of what books were used by the various groups of jews and christians is a long and interesting one. There have been different canons throughout history. Just so you have a quick reference to a source available to you, I'll quote Wikipedia's definition of "Biblical Canon":

A biblical canon, or canon of scripture, is a list of books considered to be authoritative sripture by a particular religious community.
(From Biblical Canon)

Now, you will notice that this means there can be, and has been, multiple canons - dependent on the "particular religious community". Each commuinity had either "closed" canons (list was made, no more books added) or an "unclosed cannon" (God is still able to engage in further revelation, if need be). A short list of various canons, (from Wikipedia since I've already linked to it, as well as from other sources), and when they were closed:

1. Jewish Canon - 70 AD - did not include the "apocyrphal" books of the Septuagint
2. Samaritan Canon - 722 BC? - the Torah
3. Septuagint - 300 - 132 BC - this included "apocryphal" books used by the 1st Century Christians, and from which they quoted in the NT
4. The Muratorian Canon - 2nd Century AD, Oldest NT Canon - included 22 books, excluded Hebrews, James, I and II Peter, and III John. Included Wisdom of Solomon, Apocalpyse of Peter. Shepherd of Hermes declared okay for reading, but not Scripture.
5. Marcion's Canon - 140 AD - 10 epistles of Paul, a different version of Gospel of Luke (now known as Gospel of Marcion).
6. Irenaeus - fixed the number of Gospels as only 4 (there were more gospels), but for a strange reason: because there are 4 winds, 4 quarters of the earth. Odd - but most people followed this advice (as we now see today in our Bibles)
7. Canon of Origen - 3rd Century - excluded James, II Peter, II and III John. Included Shephered, and Hebrew - but insisted that Paul did not write Hebrews.
8. Eusebius
9. Athanasius
10. 3rd Synod of Carthage - derived from previous Synods, as well (accepted what is known as The Canon of Trent), later used by the Vulgate Translation
11. Canon of Martin Luther - 1500s - tried to remove Hebrew, James, Jude and Revelation, was unsuccessful, but he moved them to the end of the Bible - where they remain last in Luther Bible. He also relegated what became known as the "apocrypha" to a separate section.
12. Evengelical-Protestant Canon - accepted the Jewish Canon cocnerning "apocrypha", but not the Septuagint Canon.

This list is far from exhaustive, and it is very incomplete.
I won't even go into the various canons of the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament. But this should show you that the idea of an authoritative, God-decided Canon is a fluid idea, and you are accepting one of these canons as your own, and denying the authenticity of previous canons. It's obvious that you accept number 12 in the above list. Am I correct?

Therefore, you are basing your idea of "The Word of God" on a canon that took a long time to establish - it's not as simple as you may think. I would reccomend Bruce Metzger's very good book on the topic.

Therefore - I maintain that the "apocryphal" books were considered to be "God's Word" by many 1st Century Christians, and many Jews, as well. Canons to this day accept them as Canonical. AS I said - the New Testament makes many references to the "apocrypha", and Jesus quotes the books, as well. Much of the angelic ideas and "Son of Man" imagery comes from the Book of Enoch, for example.

"God-Breathed"
That reference to "Scripture" is to the Septuagint, as an authoritative translation - NOT to some future canon that was yet to be completed, since the NT hadn't even been completed yet. This has been shown many times in this forum, and is easily available by considering the context of the sentence, and the environment. So - technically, every single book in the Septaugint Canon (the Canon the 1st Century Christians used!) is "God-Breathed".

My Religious Beliefs
Thank you for asking, but that's a private question that I prefer not to get twisted out of a misunderstanding. Jesus taught to not display your religion in public, and I follow that suggestion.

Besides - my religious beliefs should not (and can not) have any bearing on the history of the various "Biblical Canons" and what different books were considered "Scripture" through the ages, and what Canon is authoritative to us today, or whether the Canon is even closed. Some of these latter points cannot be decided, I think. The Canon is seen differently by Eastern Churches, Western Churches - and in the latter, the Catholic and Protestant Canons. The question about whether I believe "this or that" is offtopic, as far as I'm concerned. It leads to an ad hominem attack - which you have already made against me several times, and had some deleted. Are you gunning to achieve that again? We can have a civil discussion without slinging one's religious preferences at each other. I hope.

Whoppers, let me put this as simply as possible. Forget that I used the word 'Canon.' I use the word 'canonical' only with referrence to those books which are God-breathed. I am telling you straight out that none of the Apocryphal books were ever a part of the word of God. They were never a part of the Hebrew Bible. The Wisdom of Solomon is Apocrypha. And I told you that the fact that some people CONSIDERED some particular book to be the word of God does not mean that it WAS the word of God. I used the Shephard of Hermes as an example. Now I am simply going to refer you to this link and leave it at that. This is not the topic of the Thread. Here is the link -->What is the Wisdom of Solomon?

I asked you if you are a believer because you have very little uderstanding of the things you are talking about. If you indeed are not a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ then this is nothing but academics to you and the Bible nothing but literature. If you are an unbeliever then you can have no spiritual understanding of these things.

But this is as far as I am going to go in discussing this with you anyway.

With regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, as I said in post #81, When you combine Ezekiel 16:49-50 with Genesis chapter 19 and Jude 1:6-7, you get a very clear picture of why those cities were destroyed.

And this also is as much as I am going to say about the matter.

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by Mike555

Whoppers, let me put this as simply as possible. Forget that I used the word 'Canon.' I use the word 'canonical' only with referrence to those books which are God-breathed. I am telling you straight out that none of the Apocryphal books were ever a part of the word of God. They were never a part of the Hebrew Bible. The Wisdom of Solomon is Apocrypha. And I told you that the fact that some people CONSIDERED some particular book to be the word of God does not mean that it WAS the word of God. I used the Shephard of Hermes as an example. Now I am simply going to refer you to this link and leave it at that. This is not the topic of the Thread. Here is the link -->What is the Wisdom of Solomon?

I asked you if you are a believer because you have very little uderstanding of the things you are talking about. If you indeed are not a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ then this is nothing but academics to you and the Bible nothing but literature. If you are an unbeliever then you can have no spiritual understanding of these things.

But this is as far as I am going to go in discussing this with you anyway.

With regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, as I said in post #81, When you combine Ezekiel 16:49-50 with Genesis chapter 19 and Jude 1:6-7, you get a very clear picture of why those cities were destroyed.

And this also is as much as I am going to say about the matter.

Well, then I guess I'll have the last word then! Perfect...

Stop claiming things you don't like are "off-topic" - this is very ON-topic. You just think it's Off-topic because you don't agree that the Wisdom of Solomon is applicable as a witness of God's Word. Your personal bias determines what is and what isn't ontopic? Nice...

Just as the Christian Bible had many different versions, so did the "Hebrew Bible" before 70 AD and the "Pharasaic" Canon was finalized. The first translation of the Hebrew Bible into another language was the Septuagint - and it included - GASP - the so-called "apocrypha". Jews wrote them, Jesus used them, but you dismis them because the Phrarisees (who did not consider anything written in Greek to be inspired) rejected them. Okay....

I find it strange that Protestants reject Jewish Pharisaic Tradition and their rejection of anything written in Greek - but DO accept their Pharisaic "Canon" of the Hebrew Bible from 70 AD - after you claim the Jews rejected Christ. But the Septuagint, which the Gospel writers quote quite extensively (the NT is, after all, in Greek) - that's not valuable at all as a witness to what books were considered Scripture. So how can one accept an anti-Greek Jewish Canon, but reject the Greek Canon or the NT which used the Greek Septuagint?

And there ya' have it folks.

Anyways - despite what Mike claims, many millions of Christians and Jews did, and still DO, consider the so-called "apocrypha" the "Word of God". The Protestant Canon doesn't, but that is only one canon out of many.

So, relying on the Wisdom of Solomon (among others) is still using the "Word of God". Sorry, Mike. I think you're biased on this subject, and haven't properly studied how the Bible changed from a collection of books into a library called "the Bible" that appears in various different forms to different denominations.

[Mike555]

Originally Posted by whoppers

Well, then I guess I'll have the last word then! Perfect...

Stop claiming things you don't like are "off-topic" - this is very ON-topic. You just think it's Off-topic because you don't agree that the Wisdom of Solomon is applicable as a witness of God's Word. Your personal bias determines what is and what isn't ontopic? Nice...

Just as the Christian Bible had many different versions, so did the "Hebrew Bible" before 70 AD and the "Pharasaic" Canon was finalized. The first translation of the Hebrew Bible into another language was the Septuagint - and it included - GASP - the so-called "apocrypha". Jews wrote them, Jesus used them, but you dismis them because the Phrarisees (who did not consider anything written in Greek to be inspired) rejected them. Okay....

I find it strange that Protestants reject Jewish Pharisaic Tradition and their rejection of anything written in Greek - but DO accept their Pharisaic "Canon" of the Hebrew Bible from 70 AD - after you claim the Jews rejected Christ. But the Septuagint, which the Gospel writers quote quite extensively (the NT is, after all, in Greek) - that's not valuable at all as a witness to what books were considered Scripture. So how can one accept an anti-Greek Jewish Canon, but reject the Greek Canon or the NT which used the Greek Septuagint?

And there ya' have it folks.

Anyways - despite what Mike claims, many millions of Christians and Jews did, and still DO, consider the so-called "apocrypha" the "Word of God". The Protestant Canon doesn't, but that is only one canon out of many.

So, relying on the Wisdom of Solomon (among others) is still using the "Word of God". Sorry, Mike. I think you're biased on this subject, and haven't properly studied how the Bible changed from a collection of books into a library called "the Bible" that appears in various different forms to different denominations.

The discussion is closed. But I do have to comment that the Septuagint is only a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. The Hebrew Scriptures never contained the Apocrypha. The Apocryphal books were written during the so-called, and I emphasize 'so called' 400 silent years between the Testaments. There were no prophets during that time to write Scripture. God was not talking to the Jews during that time.

Jesus did not use the aprocrypha.

Your understanding of these things is very poor. You need to some honest research.

You have no concept of what the word of God is.

And I noticed yet again that you fail to distinquish between something being the word of God, and something being mistakenly considered to be the word of God. Despite the fact that I brought it to your attention twice now.

I seem to remember someone saying somewhere that you don't believe that Jesus is the Messiah. If that is the case, it is no wonder then that you don't understand these things.

[Mike555]

Originally Posted by Mike555

Hi Finn and CM. Yes people do indeed dance around the truth. I haven't read any of this thread except for the last few posts, so I don't know if this has mentioned already, but Jude 6-7 also makes clear that the reason that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrrah was because of their gross immorality and going after strange flesh, meaning that which is contrary to nature. Jude 7 compares Sodom's sins with the sin of the rebellious angels (Jude 6) who did not keep their own estate, but went after strange flesh (human females), which is recorded in Genesis chapter 6 and which produced the Nephilim for which reason God brought the flood.

In the case of Sodom, the strange flesh is a reference to homosexual sex. All anyone has to do is look at Genesis 19:5-8 to understand that the men of Sodom wanted to have homosexual relations with the angels they thought to be men.

Originally Posted by Mike555

Hi Saved. As you said, God would not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for inhospitality alone. When you combine Ezekiel 16:49-50 with Genesis chapter 19 and Jude 1:6-7, you get a very clear picture of why those cities were destroyed.

You do not get a complete picture of why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah unless you look at all the passages which speak to the subject. As I posted above you need to look at Genesis chapter 19, Ezekiel 16:49-50, and Jude 1:6-7 to get that picture. Gen 18:20 says that Sodom's sin was exceedingly grave. There were not even ten righteous men within the city (Gen 18:32).

One poster tried to dismiss Jude as irrelevent which is inexcusable. The cities which were destroyed were guilty of all manner of gross immorality and going after strange flesh, with homosexuality being addressed in Genesis 19.

In Ezekiel 16:50 the word 'toebah' - abomination - something which is morally disgusting is the same word used in Lev 18:22 which speaks of homosexuality.

Ezekiel 16:49 '"Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. 50] "Thus they were haughty and committed abominations (toebah - morally disgusting) before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.


Lev 18:22 ''You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination (toebah - morally disgusting)

Jude 1:6 'And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, 7] just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire .


Excerpt:
Those who attempt to explain away the biblical condemnations of homosexuality claim that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality.
What was the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

[Jerwade]

Hatred is an abomination, including that of excessive or blind adoration.

Nothing compares to that of Angelic Idolatry or with a persons obsession.
Messengers' have missed the mark for centuries, burning their children in the open flames of bigotry.

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by Mike555

I seem to remember someone saying somewhere that you don't believe that Jesus is the Messiah. If that is the case, it is no wonder then that you don't understand these things.

His scholarship about Sodom and Gomorrah is superior to anything you have presented, Mike . . . and your constant attempts at ad hominem are a violation of the TOS. Trying to discredit his scholarship by invoking the lame belief that if he does not believe the ancient ignorance you profess . . . he must not be Christian or is an agent of Satan. You need to follow the TOS and abandon your ad hominem attempts (and your superstitious beliefs).

[Mike555]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

His scholarship about Sodom and Gomorrah is superior to anything you have presented, Mike . . . and your constant attempts at ad hominem are a violation of the TOS. Trying to discredit his scholarship by invoking the lame belief that if he does not believe the ancient ignorance you profess . . . he must not be Christian or is an agent of Satan. You need to follow the TOS and abandon your ad hominem attempts (and your superstitious beliefs).

What I've said and haven't said on this thread can be seen in posts 72, 75, 80, 81, 85, 90, 95, 96, 102, 104, and 105.

In post #96 I asked him if he is a believer because I wanted to find out if he considered the Bible only as literature rather than being the word of God.

I've told him that I am not interested in liberal views. I am conservative.

I've told him that he does not understand what the word of God is because he keeps insisting that the Apocrypha is the word of God, and it is not.

The reason for Sodom and Gomorrah's destruction has been given in post # 105.