Ark of the Covenant

Always interesting to hear about a new theory, and I look forward to that History Channel special.

The last one I saw on the Ark focused on the theory it's held here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_of_the_Covenant#Ethiopian_Orthodox_Church

I dont belive any group telling they have the Ark until I´ve seen it with my own eyes, and the age of it has been proved to be thousands of years old. There are at least 10 groups who say they have it, but nobody even wants to show it to the people. They just want to make themselves important, I guess.

ditto. that church won't let anyone see it because they say it killed a man, and while I believe it has that power, I just don't buy it. Maybe they think they have it, but I don't think they do. I don't think anyone does.

in all likleyhood there are prolly several arks that have been modified and changed throughout the ages to fit different cultures as they moved throughout the land.

Mabye there was an original that many people replicated to keep within their local temple, like the cross of christ, as there are many wooden boards nailed together

Even they had found the original, it would be rather difficult to prove that it is in fact, the original

It is definatley a great mystery that hopefully will never be solved, because if we found all of the ancient mythical artifacts, archaeology would then become boring

The Ark of the Covenant is not lost but hidden. If it does exsist, it is something man is not ready to desturb.

I heard that the Ark is infact hidden in Ethiopia in a small temple intentionaly based at the edge of the jungle protected 24/7 by virgin monks who cannot leave the site until they die. No outsiders are allowed in-NEVER.

Humanity is truely not ready to uncover the Ark. There may be a day when all that changes but for now its best that it is "lost"...

Lost Tribe of Israel - and the real technology of the Ark

Here's something I picked up today; short recap of a couple of articles follow:

British scholar Tudor Parfitt has been researching the question of the Lost Tribes of Israel for years -- and it seems pretty sure he's found one of them: The Lemba of Zimbabwe. This is far more concrete than hearsay, metaphysics and old tales: they have more than coincidental number of the same, specific genetic markers in the Y chromosome that Jews have. To top it: they also have relevant stories and traditions that coincide with Jewish tradition.

Now the Lemba have an object they call a ngoma lungundu: The ngoma, according to the Lemba, was near-divine, used to store ritual objects, and borne on poles inserted into rings. It was too holy to touch the ground or to be touched by non-priests, and it emitted a "Fire of God" that killed enemies and, occasionally, Lemba. A Lemba elder told Parfitt, "[It] came from the temple in Jerusalem. We carried it down here through Africa."

The best news: The aforementioned Parfitt thinks he may have found the prototype of or the Ark of the Covenant -- and that the Ark was really (hold on to your chair): a gunpowder-powered spirit drum bazooka , or to be a little more specific: it's a combination of reliquary, drum and primitive weapon - fueled with a somewhat unpredictable proto-gunpowder.

No kidding!!! There's real science behind this. And: Parfitt will be on History Channel presenting the Lemba, the Jewish connection and the ngoma on March 2.

Sources:
PBS on Tudor Parfitt: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/israel/parfitt.html
A Cohen of the American Variety meets his Bantu kinsman: http://www.slate.com/id/79372/
Overview article by paleoanthropologist John Hawks: http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/race/genetic_ancestry/lemba-lost-ark-parfitt-2008.html

Interesting. One of the theories is that the Ark was smuggled out of the Temple underground when Babylon attacked. It could have been hidden there. Then again, it could be just another group of people claiming they have the lost Ark. As for the Ark being an ancient bazooka- come on. If you've read anything about the Ark and believe it you'll know that no ancient bazooka could have killed over 50,000 people in one go.

The Ark is in Ethiopia today.

http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=12920

In the wrong section (this has nothing to do with Indiana Jones) and there's already a topic on it...

...Search, people.

The ark find in Ethiopia is mentioned in the articles listed under Sources in my original posting.

I did a search and obviously missed. Apologies for the erroneous contribution. Apologies for all errors made.

Don't think I'll be posting on the Raven again. There's no fun in being here and something's always mostly wrong whatever you do. This is no place for a proper on-the-subject discussion. Moderator: Please delete my id and password from the member's register.

Maybe there was no ark?

From the TIME article:

"It seems highly unlikely to me," says Shimon Gibson, a noted biblical archaeologist to whom Parfitt has described his project. "You have to make tremendous leaps."

Click to expand...

***

In fact, the ark may have never existed in the first place. It's a good possibility.

The ark appears in the part of the Hebrew Bible that is generally considered by most modern scholars to be non-historical (mythical, in other words). Most of these scholars think that the first 12 books of the Bible arose from four independent documents (whose writers they refer to as the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and the Priestly source) that were composed between 900-550 BCE, and later revised around 450 BCE.

The Deuteronomist's tale begins at the Ten Commandments, detailing the the vast Deuteronomistic law code all the way through to the history of the Kings of Israel and Judah. According to 2 Kings, Josiah's high priest Hilkiah finds a long lost part of the Torah in the Temple. Scholars allege that the text was actually written at Josiah's instigation and "found" to justify his actions, particularly since the text claims Moses had left it next to the Ark of the Covenant in the Tabernacle.

These scholars further allege that the Deuteronomistic law code was written to support the king and a centralized religion. A history of rulers was created, their actions judged according to the code, culminating in Josiah (the current monarch) who is singularly compared to Moses himself.

And the rest, is as they say, history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical-critical_method
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuteronomist

If you're a biblical archaeologist and you believe what the bible says then there was an ark.

Perhilion said:

If you're a biblical archaeologist and you believe what the bible says then there was an ark.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, said archaeologist would simply be asserting or assuming that the Bible is true instead of actually demonstrating that there was an ark. That's not good archeology.

Goodbye Grethe. No hard feelings. Anyway, I am an atheist and I believe all the stories about the ark's mystical powers are just metaphor at best. The Bible was not really meant to be an historical record even though it could be used in part that way. The Ark's power lay in symbolism and in the meaning in conferred in ritual to those following the religion that surrounded it. Sorry to sound so dry about it, though the power-of-God display in the movie certainly made for good escapist entertainment.

That's right Playmount. The Bible was not meant to be an accurate historical record although it may be used to try to establish historical record in part. What is important about the Ark, whether it existed or not or exists today or not, is its symbolism which was all-important in Jewish ritual ceremony for manipulating the mass consciousness. If the followers believed in the great powers of the Ark, then people outside (including enemies) might also end up doing the same. It's all about 'Team'!

It's no use even thinking that the one that the Ethiopians claim to have is The Ark. There might have been several arks around just to keep everyone happy. There were 12 tribes of Israel, weren't there? They probably had a production line for it! Seriously though, unless scientists from the west could analyze their ark with carbon dating (providing they even have one), we're only fumbling in the dark. Strange how everyone wants it, isn't it? Here we have a christian sect laying claim to ownership of an ancient jewish relic which has already passed through how many hands through the millenia (if it even exists or existed) and if it were to be around today there would be all types of contention for it. I wish it were found just so that we all could see that it has no mystical powers but is just a relic from an ancient race and that it held only symbolic power.

Now that the actual show has aired, maybe somebody should say the show said.

I guess I could.

After watching the show, I see no evidence that the Lemba (a drum whose only use as a weapon was scaring people according to Tudor) is what the Ark looked like.

According to the Bible (which I don't expect people to look upon as infallible but rather at least somewhat accurate) the Ark was of gilded wood and held the new Stone Tablets. Thus, we know that the Ark was not a drum, but instead a sacred container similar to the Anubis chest found in Tutankamen's tomb.

The very fact that this exists implies that the Ark was most likely a chest. The Hebrews could have been mimicking the Egyptians, or vice versa.

Tudor said that the Ark most likely was not gilded because of a lack of gold, even though one of the archaeologists he interviewed gave the possibility some credit: it could have been covered with (stolen) Egyptian gold.

The description of the Ark always is that of a box, not a covered bowl or drum. I do not deny that the Lemba could be a Jewish drum, but it I don't see any evidence that it is the actual Ark. The Ark may indeed not have been gilded, but it was almost definitely a box/chest.

WillKill4Food said:

The description of the Ark always is that of a box, not a covered bowl or drum. I do not deny that the Lemba could be a Jewish drum, but it I don't see any evidence that it is the actual Ark. The Ark may indeed not have been gilded, but it was almost definitely a box/chest.

Click to expand...

I agree, even though I found it interesting to hear about the similarities between the two artifacts I'm inclined to believe that the ark was more of a box/chest. Although It's nice to see somebody thinking outside of the box.( No pun intended)

I knew that Lemba thing was a bunch of horse radish.

well, in the english translation its called a box, which has some very large differences from the originals
maybe in the original hebrew the 'box' might have a broader meaning, like container