Covenants Part II: What Does Lot's Wife Teach us About the “Big Picture” of Scripture?
Published by Stephen Michael Leininger in Stephen Michael Leininger · Tuesday 03 Sep 2019 · 26:15
Tags: lot's, salt, pillar, covenant, Sodom
Tags: lot's, salt, pillar, covenant, Sodom
Covenants Part II: Lot’s Wife Who Became a Pillar of Salt
What Does Lot’s Wife Tell Us about the Meaning of Covenants?
Lot’s Wife Became a Pillar of Salt. What is the Literal Meaning?
To begin with, it would be cumbersome to continually refer to Lot’s wife as: “Lot’s wife.” So, let’s make it a little more personal. According to the Hebrew Midrash, the name of Lot’s wife was either Ado[1] or Idit (Edith).[2] We will refer to her as Idit in this blog. It is important to understand the difference between literal and literalistic when interpreting Scripture. The link above details the distinction between the two.
What this blog will show is that one who interprets Genesis 19:24-26 so that Idit became a geological, rather than human, pillar of salt (her substance was changed) is using a literalistic interpretation. One who believes the verses are phenomenological and that a proper understanding of the language of myth is required is interpreting them literally. Let’s explain phenomenology.
John Lennox writes:
Suppose, for instance, that God had intended to explain the origin of the universe and life to us in detailed scientific language. . . . If the biblical explanation were at the level, say, of twenty–second–century science, it would likely be unintelligible to everyone. . . . Rather than scientific language, the Bible often uses what is called phenomenological language—the language of appearance. It describes what anyone can see.[3]
In my writings wherein are incorporated the knowledge gained through the study of the Theology of Salt (TOS) and the application of the hermeneutic of The Science & Theology of Salt in Scripture (aka STOSS), I have gained a deeper understanding of the biological sciences that have been hidden in Scripture. There are at least thirty-four such mysteries. As a result, a compelling case can be made that the words dust, salt, and stone in Scripture are direct (and intentional, on God’s part) references to man’s DNA.
In the Bible, dust, stone, rock, salt, and sea all refer to man’s DNA. While all these terms refer to the same biological material, each possesses a particular connotation. That the Bible contains the direct links to the salt and dust of DNA can be found here.
Using the hermeneutical principles of STOSS, let’s endeavor to correctly understand the meaning of Genesis 19. Scripture tells us:
Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomor′rah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven; and he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. But Lot’s wife behind him looked back, and she became a pillar of salt” (Gen 19: 24-26).
I’m convinced God did not turn Idit into a new substance, i.e., geological salt rather than her human organic salt. That Scripture describes becoming a pillar of salt is very significant from both a scientific and theological standpoint for two reasons:
Reason 1): The science behind an organic salt as it applies to biology makes it clear that Scripture was pointing to Idit’s DNA as the content of her being a pillar of salt. Let’s begin by explaining what is a biological acid salt.According to the Encyclopedia[4] and the negative ion (anion) of an acid. The reaction between an acid and a base is called a neutralization reaction.”[5]At this point, without incorporating philosophy, a misunderstanding may occur. The DNA molecule is an acid only when its structure is taken into account. As such, the phosphate possesses a -1 charge. When DNA and its accidents are considered, it is not an acid because a sodium atom neutralizes the phosphate group.
McFarland explains a chemical acid:
This is why both DNA and RNA end with “A” for “acid,” because a negatively charged phosphate is an acid. An acid is something that has shed a positively charged hydrogen in water, leaving a negative charge behind.[6]
Put another way, only when the phosphate group of the DNA backbone bonds to a proton (i.e., hydrogen) can it be described as a functional acid. However, when it loses its hydrogen and becomes ionically bound to a sodium (Na+), it then becomes salt of DNA. Thus, when Scripture tells us Idit became a pillar of salt, it is likely referring specifically to the molecules of the DNA polymer.The Holy Spirit likely inspired the human writers to use phenomenological language to describe her as a pillar of salt. As I believe, Idit was likely encased in molten sulfur. Because this event happened near the shores of the Dead/Salt Sea, the sands were almost certainly composed of of some form of salt. As a result of the extreme environment turbulence, salt probably coated the newly created pillar. Furthermore, DNA becomes a salt after a sodium atom replaces the hydrogen. It’s not a coincidence that this event that this happened adjacent to the the Dead/Salt Sea.To put a pillar of salt into perspective, it is estimated that there are 36 trillion cells in the male and 28 trillion in the female human. If every DNA molecule within the human body, including mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), were laid end-to-end, it would stretch approximately 6.2 billion kilometers (3.85 billion miles). That is equivalent to 3.85 billion miles. More than enough to complete more than twenty-one round-trips to the sun and back.[7]
The phenomenology of Living WaterReason 2): Sulfur is an element in the Periodic Table. It is not a biological acid of salt. If, as is brought up earlier, that molten sulfur was somehow involved in the “encasing” process, it would be germane to note that science has discovered the existence of a proportional relationship between the amounts of sulfur in the cellular environment and the degree of water loss in the cell.[8]If Molten sulfur encased Idit, the resulting severe thermal and heat exposure would cause rapid water loss from tissue as a result of drying, burning, rupturing, and cell wall damage. The average cell consists of about 60% water.[9] The damage to cell membrane would deplete the water content of the cell’s cytoplasm. Furthermore, DNA would lose the ability to produce the proteins necessary for bodily function. In other words, the body ceases to live and becomes functionally dead.It is not coincidental that this event took place on the shores of the Dead Sea. From a scientific standpoint, the role of water (I like to refer to it as bio-living water) within the cell is mind-boggling. According to Nobel Laureate Albert Szent-Gyorgyi:
We are able to begin to see water as really alive and moving. He characterizes life as “water dancing [SML] to the tune of macromolecules.[10] . . . a sort of quantum jazz which is both, always being improvised in response to its environment and is also coherent beyond our wildest imaginings. Our body is a liquid crystalline [liquid stone] organism that is, in fact, quantum coherent.”[11]
Note that water and light interact in ordered biological function. The Holy Spirit hovered over the waters. Genesis reads:
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light (Gen 1:2-3).
While these two passage likely refer to the creation of spirits, when incorporated with other passages, it is easy to see that it aligns with organic beings like us. Recall that man was made from mud and clay. Without water, light, and primordial matter, life would not come to be.
The Meaning of Became
Let us return, for a moment, the significance of Scripture was use of the word “became” as a description of a change in her substance, but to denote a change in the state/condition of her substance. The word used for “became” in Genesis 19:26 is hyh or hāyâ. It means to happen, fall out, occur, take place, come about, come to pass. None of them refer to the annihilation of one nature to then be replaced by another nature—in the same being. Hyh could be a description of a change in appearance, e.g., to decay. Becoming encased in molten sulfur would count as decay.
What is the context of the words “she became” as it is used in other passages? In Gen 24:67, she (Rebecca) became Isaac’s wife. In Ruth 4:13, she (Ruth) became Bo′az’s wife. In 1 Kgs 1:14, she (Ab′ishag) became the Kings nurse. What do all these have in common? The word designates a change in state, but not substance.
Options for Interpreting the Genesis Account of Idit’s Death
Option A): Idit was encased by raining brimstone (sulfur liquefied by extreme heat), causing her to become a pillar of the salt of DNA, and her DNA was the only salt present;Option B): Idit was miraculously transformed into a non-organic salt, replacing her salt of DNA. I don’t view this as likely, and it can be proven through Aquinas’ discussion on annihilation;Option C): A chemical reaction occurred within the falling sulfur, causing it to become a salt. Sulfur could, for example, become a sulfide salt through a change in the number of electrons in the ion. This option is not likely considering that which is written in Deut 29:22-23. These passages specifically separate the presence of the chemical salt from the elemental brimstone in its description of a burnt-out wasteland (i.e., Sodom and Gomorrah, among others); and finally,Option D): Idit was likely encased by molten sulfur and then dusted with geological salt from the turbulent environment surrounding the Dead/Salt Sea. The environmental salt was used by God as a phenomenological sign pointing to the biological truth to which it points, i.e., the salt pillar is the salt of DNA of her lifeless body.Thus, both chemical and biological organic salt could have been present. One as a sign, the other as the biological/scientific truth.
If we ignore Option B, the remaining three options leave us with a critical question needing an answer. All three of the remaining options involve scenarios involving multiple materials. In Option A: sulfur and salt of DNA. In Option C: sulfur that had possibly become a sulfide, together with the salt of DNA. In Option D: the salt of DNA, sulfur, and geological salt.
So, the question is this: if multiple materials were involved, why did God only mention salt as a description of Idit’s state immediately after her demise? Why focus on salt? I believe God intended to use Idit’s salt of DNA as a map legend. Whenever salt is used in Scripture relative to man’s body, we would know to interpret it as a direct or indirect reference to the salt of DNA.
More About the Pillar
Any option involving encasement should not be classified as a pillar of salt. Were the bodies encased during the eruption of Pompeii no longer human? Was their substance changed to lava. In both events, it would be a violation of the tenets of Philosophy. For example, if I want to construct a pillar, I would need to use a substance capable of meeting the philosophical requirements of a substantial pillar. A pillar is “an upright shaft or structure, of stone, brick, or other material, relatively slender in proportion to its height, and of any shape in section, used as a building support, or standing alone, as for a monument.”[12]
Genesis informs us of what the pillar is made, i.e., salt. Something that coats a substance would be an philosophical accident—not the substance. Both the molten sulfur (not a salt) and the salt dust stirred up by the event’s violence surrounding the shores of the Salt/Dead Sea. As a result, the salt dust coating over the molten sulfur would be described as a philosophical accident to the salt pillar, not the substance of a pillar.
Of the four options, I believe Option D is not just the most probable but also the only one possible, given the precise wording used in Scripture. Historically speaking, the science of DNA and the knowledge that man’s substance includes a body made of organic salt didn’t become available until recently. Thus the necessity for phenomenological language until the science caught up to the literal meaning of Scripture.Idit is another example of Paul’s use of a linguistic tool known as parallelism-with-contrast (E.g., 1 Cor. 15:45, 47).
In Genesis, Jacob came to a certain place, put a stone under his head, and dreamt of angels ascending and descending a ladder. Upon awakening, Jacob “took the stone which he had put under his head and set it up for a “pillar” and poured oil [Jesus was anointed] on the top. He called the place—the pillar—Bethel [House of God]” (Genesis 28:10–22).[13] The pillar was a symbol of Jesus’ body.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem, a Hebrew word meaning house of bread. Jesus was laid in a manger, which was used as a feeding trough. What did Melchiz′edek, king of Salem, bring as a blessing to Abram after his victory? It was bread and wine because “he was priest of God Most High” (Genesis 14:17-18).
John tells us that when Jesus said he would rebuild the stone temple in three days, he was explicitly referring to his dust-to-stone, resurrected, glorified, but no longer mortal, body (John 2:19-21), which was prophesied by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 47:1-12). In referencing Jesus, stone in Scripture stands for unchangeable Truth.
In contrast, Idit became a pillar of disobedience salt. Jesus, who is perfectly obedient to the Father’s will, became a pillar of obedient stone.
In Scripture, Idit became a scriptural map legend, identifying the meaning of salt in Scripture. A symbol of the consequences of breaking a covenant of salt. No material described in Genesis 19:24-26 can be classified as an organic salt—except Idit. Brimstone/sulfur? No!
The geological (as opposed to organic) salt-dust was employed as a phenomenological sign. According to Bernard Batto, Hebrew literature features recurring themes, including the primordial material from which creation is said to originate. Materials such as chaotic waters (Genesis 1:1-2), deserts (Genesis 2:4-5), humanity’s unique creation from clay with divine essence (Genesis 2:7), or created through a divine command (Genesis 1:26-28).[14]
WHY Was Molten Sulfur Falling in the First Place???
To fully understand the significance of the events surrounding Idit’s death, we must consider why molten sulfur was falling, in the first place. What caused God to render such a judgement?
Almost every passage in Scripture that directly or indirectly deals with unfruitfulness, also equates dire consequences as a result of God’s justice, resulting from it. Why? Short answer: We are in the image and likeness of an unceasingly fruitful God. He requires us to be fruitful and multiply (there is a big difference between multiplying and adding to, as we will see in Part III) as well. The case of Sodom and Gomorrah provides an extreme example of those grave consequences.
The story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is found in Genesis 19. Let us start by quoting a couple of passages from Chapter 19, then extrapolate on them to obtain a better picture of the hows and whys of the destruction of these cities. Two angels (traveling under the appearance of men) were sent to investigate the cries received by God concerning the sins of these cities. God sent them to determine whether these cries were justified. If they were, the angels would destroy the city. After meeting Lot at the entrance to Sodom, Lot took the angels to his house to rest for the night.
Then we learn,
The men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them’ ” (Gen 19:4-5).
Earlier, Abraham bargaining with the angels about destroying Sodom. His last question to the angels was this: Would you destroy the city if there were only ten just men in the city? To which they replied, no. In v. 19:4, we learn that every man in the village, “to the last man,” came to Lot’s door with sinful intentions. What was the sinful intention? To know Lot’s visitors. One of the common interpretations of the word “know” in Scripture is to know them through intimate sexual union.
An example is in Gen. 4:1, where it is written, “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, ‘I have gotten a man from the LORD’” (Gen 4:1). Was the correct interpretation of the intentions of all the men who came to Lot’s door to engage in unnatural sex? In v.8, we read, “Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please” (Gen 19:8). That did not satisfy the evildoers. It is obvious from this previous passage that the men of Sodom wanted to have sex with the two visitors. More precisely, they wanted to have unnatural sex with them. They wanted unfruitful sex with them.
Notice that Scripture makes sure to describe the specific sin the men were seeking to commit; the same sin to which this unnatural act is given its name, i.e., the city that was destroyed because of the commission of that horrendous sin. I am fairly certain that many other grievous sins were regularly committed by the people of the five cities of the plains. So the question arises, would the same fate have occurred if all the men were committing, for example, adultery instead of the unnatural sin? Most definitely not.
What does God tell us in answer to this question? Quoting God Himself, St. Catherine of Siena writes:
[The sins of Sodom were] not simply [committed] with the sort of impurity and weakness to which you are all naturally inclined because of your weak nature . . . No, these wretches not only do not restrain their weakness; they make it worse by committing that cursed unnatural sin. . . . they do not recognize what miserable filth they are wallowing in. The stench reaches even up to me, supreme Purity, and is so hateful to me that for this sin alone [emphasis SML] five cities were struck down by my divine judgment. For my divine justice could no longer tolerate it, so despicable to me is this abominable sin.[15]
Adding to that, God told St. Catherine:
You who were created kin to the angels have made ugly beasts of yourselves! You have stooped so low that even the demons whose friends and servants you have become cannot stand the sight of such indecency. . . . It is true that it was they who in the beginning shot the poisoned arrows of concupiscence, but when it comes to the sinful act itself they run away.[16]
Genesis 19 mentions only two cities (Sodom and Gomorrah), but Wisdom 10:6 tells us there were five cities altogether destroyed that day. The others were Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar (see Dt. 29:23 and Gen. 19:29). The unnatural act is so horrendous to God because it is impossible for it to be a fruitful, natural act. It takes the likeness out of our being created in the image and likeness of God. The key takeaway is that all sin, especially sins against sexual impurity, generates ripples that affect one’s neighbors.
Unfruitfulness is the same reason the Old Covenant Temple of stone was destroyed—the Jewish people rejected the Messiah and became unfruitful relative to those, through Baptism, becoming members of the Mystical Body of Christ.[17]
Idit is a confirmation of the existence of covenants of salt. Her disobedience was a direct correlation to the destruction of Sodom as a result of their inherently fruitless sexual behavior. An intact covenant of salt with God requires openness to children, as per Genesis 1:28. In fact, God commands all organic life created on the 5th and 6th days to reproduce, thus reproducing the perfection of their creation to succeeding generations. No record exists of God’s revocation of that command. Man sins because only man is capable of entering into a covenantal one-flesh nuptial union between a man and a woman.
Furthermore, her sin demonstrates that all sins affect our neighbors and our children. Like pebbles dropped into water, the sins of Sodom spread to the other four cities of the plains. Thus, God destroyed them all.What Does Lot’s wife (pillar of salt) Tell us About the Big Picture?
Scripture makes reference to a “covenant of salt”? Nowhere in Scripture can a passage be found in which God is cited as establishing a covenant with man that is specifically referred to as a salt covenant. Yet, we know that salt covenants exist. There are three passages that refer to them (2 Chron 13:4-5, Lev 2:12-14, Num 18:18-20). Furthermore, there is also no specific text in Scripture directly defining a covenant of salt.
Due to their eternal nature (among other reasons, as well), all covenants are also salt covenants.[18] In Scripture we read, “Do you not know that the Lord God of Israel gave the kingship over Israel forever to David and his sons by a covenant of salt” (2 Chron 13:5)? This generational handing down of kingship occurred through a covenant of salt. In other words, this kingship involved the salt of DNA. All multi-generational covenants involve, by definition, the salt of DNA. Who was the final recipient of this salt covenant? Jesus, whose body (salt/stone of DNA) is the rebuilt/resurrected temple (John 2:19-21) whose ancestors were Adam and Eve.
Interestingly, inside the Ark of the Covenant was: 1) Aaron/Moses’ staff. While Hebrews 9:4 tells us that Aaron’s staff had budded, historian Flavius Josephus (37-100 AD) described Moses/Aaron’s rod as growing new branches upon which were also growing almonds and that this phenomenon had occured over the span of one night[19]; 2) the two stone tablets which were written by the finger of God, i.e. the Holy Spirit; and 3) a gold urn containing some of the manna from heaven (Heb. 9:4).
Idit’s disobedience is a sign of the gravity of disobedience to God’s commandments. Understanding death is directly linked to the disobedience of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. Every act disobedience leads, in one way or another, to fruitlessness, depriving God of children who would belonging to the Mystical Body of His Son.
What Does Lot’s wife (pillar of salt) Tell us About the Big Picture?
Considering everything we have discussed so far, what does Lot’s wife becoming a pillar of salt tell us about covenants between God and man? While God made a covenant with Abraham, he didn’t give him a manual to describe what that means. Or did He? The events described in this multi-part blog are, I believe, an integral part of that manual.
In other words, Scripture is telling us that Lot’s wife’s death was not only physical, it was also symbolic of the following fact: By disobedience to God’s covenant, man would lose forever the Living Water of the Holy Spirit. We were being shown the drastic consequences of disobeying God and breaking the covenant. Scripture tells us, “Evidence of their wickedness still remains: a continually smoking wasteland, plants bearing fruit that does not ripen, and a pillar of salt standing as a monument to an unbelieving soul” (Wisdom 10:7).
St. Clement of Rome writes:
On account of his hospitality and godliness, Lot was saved out of Sodom when all the country round was punished by means of fire and brimstone, the Lord thus making it manifest that He does not forsake those that hope in Him, but gives up such as depart from Him to punishment and torture. (Genesis xix; cf. 2 Peter 2:6-9) For Lot’s wife, who went forth with him, being of a different mind from himself, and not continuing in agreement with him [as to the command which had been given them], was made an example of, so as to be a pillar of salt unto this day. This was done that all might know that those who are of a double mind, and who distrust the power of God, bring down judgment on themselves and become a sign to all succeeding generations.[20]
In the next part of this blog series, we will be discussing how the Dead Sea and Sodom and Gomorrah contribute to a deeper understanding of the meaning of covenants in Scripture. We will learn why the usage and connotation of salt in the Old Testament/Covenant is drastically different than in the New testament/Covenant.
Part I of this blog series can be found here.
Part III can be found here.
Part IV can be found here.
Too see a list of all bogs and articles with descriptions and links, go here: https://www.stossbooks.com/index.php
Updated: 04/03/2026
ENDNOTES:
[1]. Book of Jasher, Chapter 19, #52, http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/19.htm, accessed 7/6/2019.
[2]. Kadari, Tamar. "Lot's Wife: Midrash and Aggadah." Jewish Women: A Comprehensive Historical Encyclopedia. February 27, 2009. Jewish Women's Archive. (accessed July 12, 2019) https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/lots-wife-midrash-and-aggadah.
[3]. John Lennox, Seven Days That Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 26.]
[4]. According to Britannica: “In chemistry, a base is any substance that in water solution is slippery to the touch, tastes bitter, changes the colour [sic] of indicators (e.g., turns red litmus paper blue), reacts with acids to form salts, and promotes certain chemical reactions (base catalysis). Examples of bases are the hydroxides of the alkali and alkaline earth metals (sodium, calcium, etc.).” ; Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia, “base,” Encyclopedia Britannica, January 19, 2024: https://www.britannica.com/science/base-chemical-compound.
[5].The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, “Salt,” Encyclopedia Britannica (March 13, 2024): https://www.britannica.com/science/salt-acid-base-reactions.]
[6]. Ben McFarland, A World From Dust: How the Periodic Table Shaped Life (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2016), Kindle Edition, 12, eISBN: 978–0–19–027503–7.
[7]. Allison Piovesan, Maria Chiara Pelleri, Francesca Antonaros, Pierluigi Strippoli, Maria Caracausi, & Lorenzo Vitale, “On the length, weight and GC content of the human genome,” BMC research notes 12, no. 106 (2019): 2, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4137-z.
[8]. Christine L. Haskin, Gary D. Fullerton, and Ivan L. Cameron, “Molecular Basis of Articular Disk Biomechanics: Fluid Flow and Water Content in the Temporamandibular Disk as Related to Distribution of Sulfur,” Water and the Cell, Pollack, Gerald H., Cameron, Ivan L., Wheatly, Denys N (The Netherlands: Springer, 2006), pp. 53-69 ; cf. Detamore, M. S., J. G. Orfanos, A. J. lmarza, M. M. French, M. E. Wong, & K. A. Athanasiou, “Quantitative analysis and comparative regional investigation of the extracellular matrix of the porcine temporomandibular joint disc,” Matrix biology : journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology 24, no. 1 (2005): 45–57, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matbio.2004.11.006.
[9]. Lee, J., & R. K. Shields, “Extracellular to Intracellular Body Water and Cognitive Function among Healthy Older and Younger Adults,” Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology 7, no. 1 (2022): 18, https://doi.org/10.3390/jfmk7010018.
[10]. Gerald H. Pollack; Ivan L. Cameron; Denys N. Wheatley, Water and the Cell (The Netherlands: Springer, 2006), viii.
[11]. Mae-Wan Ho, Zhou Yu-Ming, Julian Haffegee and others, "The Liquid Cyrstalline Organism and Biological Water,” Water and the Cell, eds. Gerald H. Pollack, Ivan L. Cameron, Denys N. Wheatly (The Netherlands: Springer, 2006), 220-221 ; Mae-Wan Ho, The Rainbow and the Worm, The Physics of Organisms, (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, 1993, 2nd ed 1998; reprinted 2000; 2001, 2003), pps. 37, 40, 52, 130, 164, 169.
[13]. John Hardon, “Bethlehem” in Modern Catholic Dictionary, (Bardstown: Eternal Life Publishing, 2008), 63.
[14]. Bernard F. Batto, In the Beginning: Essays on Creation Motifs in the Ancient Near East and the Bible, (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 44.
[15]. St. Catherine of Sienna, The Dialogue, trans Suzanne Noffke, O.P (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1980), p 237, ISBN: 0-8091-2233-2.
[16]. St. Catherine of Sienna, The Dialogue, trans Suzanne Noffke, O.P (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1980), pps. 74, 237.
[17]. Emmett O’Regan, Unveiling the Apocalypse: Prophecy in Catholic Tradition (Belfast, Ireland: Seraphim Press, 2011), Kindle Edition, Locations 759-787, ISBN: 978–0–9569558–0–7.
[18]. Rabbi Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky, “Children of Salt,” (Davenport: Hebraic Heritage Ministries International, 2010), http://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/0209/0209b.html.
[19]. Flavius Josephus, Josephus: The Complete Works, trans. William Whiston, (Hawthorne, CA: BN Publishing, 2010), Kindle Edition, p. 457.
[20]. Translated by John Keith. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 9. Edited by Allan Menzies. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1896.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm.
