Genesis 13: 9: Sodom's Location
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:20 pm
Genesis 13: 9: Sodom’s Location
100% of university scholars who have opined in writing on the subject say that when Abram and Lot separate in chapter 13 of Genesis, b-o-t-h Lot and Abram go south of Bethel. Yet that universal scholarly assertion is directly contradicted by what Genesis 13: 9 says. Here is the JPS1987 translation of the relevant verses:
1From Egypt, Abram went up into the Negeb, with his wife and all that he possessed, together with Lot. …3 And he proceeded by stages from the Negeb as far as Bethel, to the place where his tent had been formerly, between Bethel and Hai…. 8 Abram said to Lot [at Bethel],… 9Is not the whole land [of Canaan] before you? Let us separate: if you go north, I will go south; and if you go south, I will go north. …12 Lot settled in the cities of the Plain, pitching his tents near Sodom. …18 And Abram moved his tent, and came to dwell at the terebinthes of Mamre, which are in Hebron…. Genesis 13: 1, 3, 8-9, 12, 18
What that above text says is that if and only if Lot were to go north of Bethel (the opposite direction from the Dead Sea), then Abram would go south of Bethel; and that Abram indeed does go south of Bethel -- to sojourn at the Patriarchs’ Hebron (south of Bethel). The necessary consequence of that is that Lot must have gone n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, when Lot and Abram separate at Bethel in chapter 13 of Genesis, in which case Sodom is not located anywhere near the Dead Sea.
The KJV version of Genesis 13: 9 is a more literal translation:
9 Is not the whole land [of Canaan] before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
In ancient Canaan, when giving directions, it was assumed that the speaker was facing east (toward the rising sun). That is why the Mediterranean Sea is sometimes referred to in the Bible as being the “utmost sea” or the “hindmost sea”. Here is Gordon Wenham’s apt description of what Abram says at Genesis 13: 9: “Abram invites Lot to share the promised land with him, either to ‘take the right’, often used of the south, or ‘the left’, i.e. the northern part of the country.” Wenham, “Genesis 1-15”, p. 297.
And here is Larry Helyer’s considered opinion of this issue, as reported approvingly by R. Christopher Heard at p. 37 of “Dynamics of Diselection”: “The first matter which should be addressed is the precise nature of the choice which Abram offered Lot; in order to understand this, we must remind ourselves of the Hebrew perspective on directions. Hebrew directions are east-oriented; that is, one is assumed to be facing east, qedem or panim. From this perspective one’s right, yamin, is south and one’s left, semol, is north. And behind one, ahor or yam, is the west. With this as background we can now reconstruct Lot’s choice. Abram and Lot were between Bethel and Ai, perhaps at modern Jebel et-Tawil. Abram permits Lot to decide which portion of the ‘whole land’ (kol ha’ares) he desires. For Abram the ‘whole land’ is the land of Canaan (’eres-kena‘an).”
So what Abram says at Genesis 13: 9 is as follows. Lot can choose the northern 2/3 of Canaan (all of Canaan proper/the Promised Land north of Bethel), in which case Abram will sojourn south of Bethel; or Lot can choose the southern 1/3 of Canaan (all of Canaan proper/the Promised Land south of Bethel), in which case Abram will sojourn north of Bethel.
We know that Abram sojourns south of Bethel. So if Abram meant what he said to Lot at Genesis 13: 9, and if neither man double-crossed the other (of which there is no indication in the text, nor would that make sense), then per Genesis 13: 9, and contra the unanimous view of university scholars, Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, nowhere in the general vicinity of the Dead Sea area, as scholars would have it.
Given what Genesis 13: 9 says, isn’t it surprising, and indeed disturbing, that no university scholar has ever asked in print whether Lot went north of Bethel, when Lot and Abram separated? Why are 100% of university scholars 100% convinced that Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located in the Dead Sea area, when (i) that view is directly contradicted by Genesis 13: 9, and in addition (ii) that view makes no logical sense whatsoever, since the soft city life that Lot desired was readily available north of Bethel, in the lush Jezreel Valley (part of the greater Jordan River Valley) through which Lot and Abram had recently passed, whereas soft city life was not possible in the Dead Sea area?
Since most university scholars insist that chapters 13, 14 and 19 of Genesis (all of which refer to Sodom) have no historicity, why then are all university scholars so completely unwilling even to a-s-k if there is any possibility that Genesis 13: 9 means what it says? Per Genesis 13: 9, Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, in the lush Jezreel Valley which was ideal for Lot’s desire to live a soft city life.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
100% of university scholars who have opined in writing on the subject say that when Abram and Lot separate in chapter 13 of Genesis, b-o-t-h Lot and Abram go south of Bethel. Yet that universal scholarly assertion is directly contradicted by what Genesis 13: 9 says. Here is the JPS1987 translation of the relevant verses:
1From Egypt, Abram went up into the Negeb, with his wife and all that he possessed, together with Lot. …3 And he proceeded by stages from the Negeb as far as Bethel, to the place where his tent had been formerly, between Bethel and Hai…. 8 Abram said to Lot [at Bethel],… 9Is not the whole land [of Canaan] before you? Let us separate: if you go north, I will go south; and if you go south, I will go north. …12 Lot settled in the cities of the Plain, pitching his tents near Sodom. …18 And Abram moved his tent, and came to dwell at the terebinthes of Mamre, which are in Hebron…. Genesis 13: 1, 3, 8-9, 12, 18
What that above text says is that if and only if Lot were to go north of Bethel (the opposite direction from the Dead Sea), then Abram would go south of Bethel; and that Abram indeed does go south of Bethel -- to sojourn at the Patriarchs’ Hebron (south of Bethel). The necessary consequence of that is that Lot must have gone n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, when Lot and Abram separate at Bethel in chapter 13 of Genesis, in which case Sodom is not located anywhere near the Dead Sea.
The KJV version of Genesis 13: 9 is a more literal translation:
9 Is not the whole land [of Canaan] before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left.
In ancient Canaan, when giving directions, it was assumed that the speaker was facing east (toward the rising sun). That is why the Mediterranean Sea is sometimes referred to in the Bible as being the “utmost sea” or the “hindmost sea”. Here is Gordon Wenham’s apt description of what Abram says at Genesis 13: 9: “Abram invites Lot to share the promised land with him, either to ‘take the right’, often used of the south, or ‘the left’, i.e. the northern part of the country.” Wenham, “Genesis 1-15”, p. 297.
And here is Larry Helyer’s considered opinion of this issue, as reported approvingly by R. Christopher Heard at p. 37 of “Dynamics of Diselection”: “The first matter which should be addressed is the precise nature of the choice which Abram offered Lot; in order to understand this, we must remind ourselves of the Hebrew perspective on directions. Hebrew directions are east-oriented; that is, one is assumed to be facing east, qedem or panim. From this perspective one’s right, yamin, is south and one’s left, semol, is north. And behind one, ahor or yam, is the west. With this as background we can now reconstruct Lot’s choice. Abram and Lot were between Bethel and Ai, perhaps at modern Jebel et-Tawil. Abram permits Lot to decide which portion of the ‘whole land’ (kol ha’ares) he desires. For Abram the ‘whole land’ is the land of Canaan (’eres-kena‘an).”
So what Abram says at Genesis 13: 9 is as follows. Lot can choose the northern 2/3 of Canaan (all of Canaan proper/the Promised Land north of Bethel), in which case Abram will sojourn south of Bethel; or Lot can choose the southern 1/3 of Canaan (all of Canaan proper/the Promised Land south of Bethel), in which case Abram will sojourn north of Bethel.
We know that Abram sojourns south of Bethel. So if Abram meant what he said to Lot at Genesis 13: 9, and if neither man double-crossed the other (of which there is no indication in the text, nor would that make sense), then per Genesis 13: 9, and contra the unanimous view of university scholars, Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, nowhere in the general vicinity of the Dead Sea area, as scholars would have it.
Given what Genesis 13: 9 says, isn’t it surprising, and indeed disturbing, that no university scholar has ever asked in print whether Lot went north of Bethel, when Lot and Abram separated? Why are 100% of university scholars 100% convinced that Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located in the Dead Sea area, when (i) that view is directly contradicted by Genesis 13: 9, and in addition (ii) that view makes no logical sense whatsoever, since the soft city life that Lot desired was readily available north of Bethel, in the lush Jezreel Valley (part of the greater Jordan River Valley) through which Lot and Abram had recently passed, whereas soft city life was not possible in the Dead Sea area?
Since most university scholars insist that chapters 13, 14 and 19 of Genesis (all of which refer to Sodom) have no historicity, why then are all university scholars so completely unwilling even to a-s-k if there is any possibility that Genesis 13: 9 means what it says? Per Genesis 13: 9, Lot’s adopted homeland of Sodom is located n-o-r-t-h of Bethel, in the lush Jezreel Valley which was ideal for Lot’s desire to live a soft city life.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois