Posted on 04/28/2015 3:33:45 PM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
Or we just haven't figured out how to detect them yet. Recall that just a few years ago satellite mounted ground penetrating radar was able to find several Egyptian cities that had been lost up until this time.
I imagine as technology progresses then even more legendary places (maybe even Atlantis) will be discovered and found to be real places.
“Given that Jericho was contemporary with Sodom it stands to reason that Sodom was also a real place.”
I believe that scripture is inerrant and that Sodom WAS a real place just as described in Genesis. However, I need to point out that Sodom and Jericho were separated by a very long period of time. Jericho was mentioned in scripture during the Exodus....many, many years after Abraham and Lot and the Sodom and Gomorah accounts of Genesis.
Personally, I believe what is left of Sodom is under the Dead Sea. However, finding Jericho doesn’t validate the existence of Sodom....Although as I said, I do believe it existed just as the Bible said. I don’t need proof otherwise. It would be nice to help convince unbelievers...but I wonder if it would? God told the rich man in torment that letting him warm his still living but unbelieving brothers would not change them. They have the scripture is what God said. If they didn’t believe it, they would not believe even if one were to come back from the dead.
Unless you've got some evidence I am unaware of?
A "smoking gun"?
:)
Modern archaeologists date the first settlements at Jericho as far back as 10,000 B.C. which means the city was absolutely contemporary with Sodom which secular archaeologists believe was destroyed between 2100 and 1900 B.C.
Secular archaeologists place Sodom on the plains above the Dead Sea. Given that they have a vested bias against the Bible I have a tendency to believe them when they grudgingly acknowledge that the Word of God is true.
Also under her reasoning, NY and NJ would be required to recognize Colorado and Texas CCW permits.
We’re not going to find out what marriage is from the Supreme Court. We already know that. The laws of nature and nature’s God are not going to change. No. What we’re going to find out is if a majority on the court are insane.
Ipso facto...
Ancient societies weren’t without morals - they simply had different ones. And in their societies, free men of the tribe had the highest status, free women and children in the next level, slaves in the next ring out, foreigners in the outside.
In Greek and Roman society, they distinguished between the penetrator and penetrated. The penetrator had to be a man, but the penetrated could be male or female, free or slave.
It was considered unacceptable for a free man to be penetrated. It was a violation of his status. However, he could penetrate anyone outside.
When the boy was elevated to the inner circle as an adult male, being penetrated then became an act of dishonor and disgrace.
Conversely, in ancient Rome, this meant the only way upper class homosexuality was allowed was if the man was a pedophile penetrator but never the receiver.
The real story is not this case, but that we have a judicial class of law school educated, elitist non-productive citizens who are undertaking a remaking of society. They are ignoring thousands of years of civilization.
How did we get to this point? We the people have no say in this matter. Our society is being transformed by these jurists. Oh, the arrogance!
All bets are off now. All of them.
PLEASE!
verbatum...
Common-law marriage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage
History
In ancient Greek and Roman civilization, marriages were private agreements between individuals and families. Community recognition of a marriage was largely what qualified it as a marriage. The state had only limited interests in assessing the legitimacy of marriages. Normally civil and religious officials took no part in marriage ceremonies, nor did they keep registries. There were several more or less formal ceremonies to choose from (partly interchangeable, but sometimes with different legal ramifications) as well as informal arrangements. (you ended the "quote" there, but here is the rest) It was relatively common for couples to cohabit with no ceremony; cohabiting for a moderate period of time was sufficient to make it a marriage. Cohabiting for the purpose of marriage carried with it no social stigma.[
I wonder if the liberals on the court realize that a Roe-vs-Wade ruling led to a 40 year pro-life movement, and a similar absolute ruling on same-sex marriage will lead to a similar grass roots level uprising.
Where is his argument from that case?
Bears repeating!
Uhm, okay. I wasn’t trying to deceive anyone. I honestly didn’t remember. I copied that at least 3 years ago.
The glowing articles about the fantasy Thai homosexual men three-some wedding, the lesbian “throuple” in the UK, the two lesbians on the West coast who added a guy and advertise it as so great that each baby has both a mommy and daddy.
Keep praying.
Heavenly Father, we acknowledge that our battle is not against flesh and blood but against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. We know that Satan hates all that you are and stand for, and that the attack on marriage and the family comes ultimately from him.
We know he is a deceiver, a liar and the father of all lies, and we know that many in our culture have believed his lies about sexuality, including members of our Supreme Court. We pray that your Spirit will reveal to each of these justices every lie they have believed, whether that lie comes from the world, their own flesh, or the devil himself.
Wherever any of them have given you any access to their minds and hearts, we pray that your Spirit will take full advantage and speak to their souls with power and conviction. We pray in the name of Jesus that you by your mighty power will restrain the voice of the evil one, if only for a moment, so that in the supernatural quiet you create they may each hear your still small voice speaking truth to them and warning them of the consequences of ignoring your voice. Urge them, we pray, to honor you and the institution of marriage you have created for our own good. Amen.
And there were no variation of this, ever? We’re talking about human beings here, where one perversion is never enough. Even so, the ancient Greeks and Romans had to know, or at least strongly suspect, that such a scheme as homosexual marriage would have wrecked their whole societies. And even their “constrained” proclivities likely had something to do with their overall downfalls anyway.
Scalia’s mention of this was the same argument I made to T’s HS class, what was that?...two years ago.
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.
