Tall el-Hammam is Not Sodom
$2.50
Related products
-
Rethinking the Location of Zoar
$2.50Rethinking the Location of Zoar
by Steven Collins PhD
Zoar is typically located near the southern tip of the Dead Sea. However, a careful analysis of key biblical passages signals that it must be outside the territories of Moab and Edom, which makes the southern Dead Sea location questionable. Zoar is designated as the southern boundary of the Reuben tribal allotment, and, therefore, should be placed somewhere near the Arnon Gorge, north of the Moabite Kingdom boundary.
$2.50 -
Reassessing the Term hakikkar in Nehemiah as Bearing on the Location of the Cities of the Plain
$2.50Reassessing the Term hakikkar in Nehemiah as Bearing on the Location of the Cities of the Plain
by Steven Collins PhD
In this paper I demonstrate that in no instance in the OT does kikkar refer to a geographical-topographical feature other than the southern Jordan Valley, north of the Dead Sea, and areas contiguous with it.
$2.50 -
Tall el-Hammam Is Sodom: Billington’s Heshbon Identification Suffers from Numerous Fatal Flaws
$2.50Tall el-Hammam Is Sodom: Billington’s Heshbon Identification Suffers from Numerous Fatal Flaws
by Steven Collins PhD
In this article, S. Collins responds to an article by C.E. Billington published in the Spring 2012 issue of Artifax magazine titled “Tall el-Hammam is Not Sodom.” Billington rejects Collins’ identification of Tall el-Hammam as Sodom because the date of its destruction is too late (between 1750 and 1650 BCE) to conform to Billington’s early placement of Abr(ah)am, ca. 2166-1991 BCE. He also attempts to support a more southern location for Sodom via textual geography. Finally, Billington suggests that Tall el- Hammam is perhaps a ‘western’ Heshbon. Collins refutes these ideas as categorically untenable.
$2.50
