Since I was a boy, I've heard that nobody knows what happened to the Ark. Indiana Jones, documentaries, historians, biblical scholars, treasure hunters, and conspiracy theorists always repeat a variation of the same thing: that the Bible simply stops mentioning the Ark just before the Babylonian destruction of Solomon's Temple, and that we don't know, therefore, whether Nebuchadnezzar carried it away, or whether the priests hid it under the Temple Mount, or whether the refugees carried it to Egypt whence it eventually ended up in Axum, Ethiopia, or whether Pharaoh had already captured it a few years before, when King Josiah went out to fight him against the warning of God, and then hidden it in Tanis.
What I can't fathom is that none of these scholars or seekers ever seemed to have done something so simple as to read the Orthodox Bible, or the Septuagint. Because it's right there, plain and simple, in black and white:
"They took all the large and small holy vessels of the Lord, the ark of the Lord, and the king's possessions, and carried them off to Babylon." -- 1 Ezra 1:51
This was at the final sack of Jerusalem, after they had rebelled several times against Nebuchadnezzar.
So the Ark was carried off to Babylon and then lost to history, right? Wrong. After Babylon had fallen to the Persians, first Cyrus, then Darius sent the Jewish exiles back to Judea, along with the things from the Babylonian treasury which had been taken from Jerusalem. First, under Cyrus, there is a shipment of sacred vessels, with an inventory, handed over to Sheshbazzar and the initial group of returning exiles. but the Ark is not among them (1 Ezra 2:7-11). Then, under Darius, there is another, given to Zerubbabel, but whose specific contents are not given. But:
"Then he sent forth from Babylon all the vessels Cyrus had removed; and everything Cyrus said to do, he also commanded to be done [that is, rebuild the temple --ed.], and he sent them forth to Jerusalem." -- 1 Ezra 4:57 (emphasis mine)
Now that's very intriguing, but not conclusive. This, however, is:
"One finds in the records, as it is noted, that Jeremiah the prophet ordered those migrating to take some of the fire. . . . It was also written that the prophet received an oracle and ordered that the tabernacle and the ark should accompany him when he went to the mountain where Moses had gone up and had seen the inheritance of God. So when Jeremiah went there and found a cave, he brought the tabernacle, the ark, and the altar of incense, and then sealed up the entrance. Some who followed him came to mark the way, but they were unable to find it. Now when Jeremiah learned of this, he rebuked them and said, 'The place shall be unknown until God gathers His people again and shows His mercy. Then the Lord will disclose these things, and the Glory of the Lord and the cloud will be seen, as they were shown to Moses, and as Solomon deemed it worthy that the place should be specially consecrated.'" -- 2 Maccabees 2:1, 4-8
So, at some point, whether it was at the time mentioned in 1 Ezra 4, under Darius (and Jeremiah lived to be a very old man), or at some previous time, the Ark was returned to Judea. And Jeremiah hid it in a cave on Mount Nebo. That's not a theory: that's scripture, and therefore, true.
Now, I've never been sure that when end-times prophecies mention the Temple, that they mean the literal, physical Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, in the spot where the Al-Aqsa mosque now stands. Most Evangelicals would say definitely yes, most Catholics and Orthodox would say definitely no, and most liberal and modernist biblical scholars would simply scoff. But my mind is open and not made up on the matter.
Recent discoveries I've made, however, have me presently leaning toward the literal interpretation. The above is one. Especially when considered in light of the other: that is, that among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the largest and most complete one found was called the Temple Scroll. This is a detailed set of instructions, written as a direct revelation from God to Moses, on how to build the Temple. Why does that make me lean toward the literal rebuilding? Because this scroll, along with the others, lay hidden and forgotten for two thousand years. Think about that. That's a phrase we hear a lot, but think for a moment about how long that really is. Think about some place from your childhood, that you revisited twenty years later, and how much it changed, and how much was lost. Then think about two thousand. So this scroll is completely unique: there are no copies or transcripts of it anywhere else in the world--its contents were completely unknown to the world until--1947--the same year Israel became a nation for the first time since A.D. 70. Coincidence?
Now, think of all that in light of the passage from 2 Maccabees quoted above: "The place shall be unknown until God gathers His people again and shows His mercy." Sound familiar? Yes, it's true that the Ark hasn't been found yet (that we know of). But that's because it isn't God's time yet. When will it be found? My guess is when the scroll that He provided has been put to use, and the Temple has been rebuilt. Then its location will be revealed, along with the Tabernacle (the original tent made under Moses' direction in the wilderness), and probably some of the other essential vessels and things, like the sacred anointing oil for the priests, which cannot be made any more because no one is sure of the correct interpretation (or current availability) of one of its ingredients.
Also interesting on this topic is the Copper Scroll, whose origin no one knows, but which is written in ancient (not 1st century) Hebrew. Did Jeremiah make it, and entrust it to his disciples? Did he hide other temple treasures in other locations? So far none of the treasures listed has been found. But maybe it's just not God's time for that either.
**Update**
I came across this in my further reading:
"'And because of all this, we make a sure covenant and write it; and all our rulers, our Levites, and our priests seal it.' Those who sealed it were: Nehemiah the son of Hacaliah, and Zedekiah, Seraiah, Azariah, Jeremiah, Pashur, Amariah, Malchijah, Hattush, Shebaniah, Malluch, Harim, Meremoth, Obadiah, Daniel, Gennethon, Baruch, Meshullam, Abijah, Mijamin, Maaziah, Bilgai, and Shemaiah. These were the priests." --Nehemiah 9:38-10:27
When I saw this, I asked myself, "Wait; are those the same men who wrote the books of those names? Was Jeremiah a priest? And Daniel?" So I did some research, and indeed Jeremiah was, and Daniel probably was too. As for Obadiah and Baruch, there is nothing in the scripture either way, but that means they could have been, and that it is very possible that these are those prophets. Credence is lent to this by the fact that both Jeremiah and Baruch are listed, Baruch being Jeremiah's scribe and loyal disciple. Scholarly opinion allows that the Daniel listed may well be the great Daniel of the exile (http://biblehub.com/daniel/1-6.htm). So this, considered along with the evidence I wrote about above, seems to lead to the conclusion that both Daniel and Jeremiah were present at the restoration of Judah. I consulted some biblical timelines, and even if Jeremiah was 21 when he received his call (the scripture doesn't give his age, but he refers to himself as "a youth"), he would have been 113 when Artaxerxes returned the exiles--very old, but very possible: many people have lived that long, and Jeremiah was, after all, highly favored by God. He could conceivably been as old as 30 and still called himself a "youth", which would put the outside of his age at 122. But he could have been much younger too, and 'only' in his nineties at the return. Either way, it makes possible the hiding of the Ark by him, as told in Maccabees, plausible, either sometime during, or at the end of the exile, when all the articles of the other Temple furnishings were returned.
No comments:
Post a Comment