Genesis 13:
Jude 1:
Jude used the example of Sodom and Gomorrah to illustrate eternal fire punishment.
But then, Luke 10:
The healing was a sign or demonstrative miracle.
Jesus asserted (by "I tell you") that on the day of final judgment, the wicked people of Sodom would have more hope than the people of the town that rejected Jesus' message of the kingdom of God.
On the day of the final judgment, there is some hope for the people of Tyre and Sidon.
The LORD summarily judged the cities of Sodom, Gomorrha, Tyre, and Sidon without giving them the benefits of healing miracles and the good news. In the final judgment, Jesus would take this into consideration: some of the people from these cities will be saved. On the other hand, people from Capernaum would not have this excuse:
They saw Jesus' miracles and yet refused to believe. They had no excuse. The judgment on you depends on how much you have known and seen.
That's the solemn warning: Do not reject Jesus' good news.
=======================================================================
Appendix: FOL analysis of Jesus' hypothetical statement
Contemporary English Version, Mt 11:
Consider the compound proposition: If P, then Q where P and Q are simple propositions and
if is a first-order logical operator.
Let R = If the miracles that took place in your town had happened in Sodom, it would still be standing.
P = The miracles that took place in your town had happened in Sodom.
Q = It would still be standing.
Case 1: A usual human spoke statement R
R is a hypothetical statement. We know that historically, P did not happen. It was not true in reality. If P is false, then the truth value of Q does not matter, and R is always true, according to the FOL
truth table of the
if operator. If P is an impossible hypothetical scenario (i.e., P is false), then Q can be anything. And R is fine. E.g., if the moon is made of cheese, then Trump is God. The last material conditional is a vacuously true FOL statement.
Case 2: Jesus spoke R
He was saying this: Assume that P is true. If P is true, then Q will be true as well. Jesus asserted R to be true. In modal logic, this counterfactual is not vacuous.
You can choose not to believe in Jesus' assertion. That's up to you. Here, I have explained his assertion R in terms of FOL's
if.
Was it possible for the LORD to have performed demonstrative miracles in Sodom before he destroyed it?
Yes, all things are possible with God (Mt 19:26). But he chose not to do the miracles.
Why not?
So that Jesus could then use it as an example to illustrate eternal fire punishment and the notion that judgment on you depends on how much you have known and seen.
Does Mt 11:23b imply that God could have done demonstrative miracles in Sodom?
Yes, proof by contradiction:
Let assumption N1 = God could
not have done demonstrative miracles in Sodom.
It was impossible for God to perform positive miraculous signs in Sodom. Now, P has a truth value of F (false). Q can take on any proposition, and R will still be true. This line of reasoning does not prove anything. Trump is not God.
However, Jesus asserted that Sodom would be better off than Bethsaida on the judgment day, using Mt 11:23b to prove it. This is the contradiction that I am looking for.
Therefore N1 is false. The truth is that God could have done demonstrative miracles in Sodom.