Ancient stone table may hold link to the Ark of the Covenant

Article title:
Archaeologists discover table on which Ark of Covenant once sat - report

Dr. Lederman who led the dig as quoted in the article:

"This would be a rare case in which we can merge the biblical narrative with an archaeological find," says Lederman.

But he shies away from linking the stone table directly with stone mentioned in the Bible, pointing out that such a conclusion would be almost impossible to prove archaeologically.

He also points out that there are some inconsistencies between the narrative and the evidence. For one, the stone was said to have been located in a field below the town, not at the temple atop the tel.
 
Last edited:
Article title:
Archaeologists discover table on which Ark of Covenant once sat - report

Dr. Lederman who led the dig as quoted in the article:

"This would be a rare case in which we can merge the biblical narrative with an archaeological find," says Lederman.

But he shies away from linking the stone table directly with stone mentioned in the Bible, pointing out that such a conclusion would be almost impossible to prove archaeologically.

He also points out that there are some inconsistencies between the narrative and the evidence. For one, the stone was said to have been located in a field below the town, not at the temple atop the tel.

They are down playing it because they dont want any Nazis snooping around. Dont worry next they will find the holy grail.

Viral marketin for indy 5 lol
 
I love how they immediately poison-pill the discovery. Yet another archaeological discovery that might affirm events in the bible, but we wouldn't want you to walk away with the impression that the bible contains any truth.

Archeologists denied the Hittites existed until... you know... they discovered tons of evidence that they existed.
 
Guys we don't have evidence the thing we found is the thing but we will say it may have been the thing for news headlines but protect then ourselves by saying it may not be the thing because inconsistencies may make it so it's not the thing.
 
I thought the ark was housed in a little shed in some small village in Africa?
And nobody would sneak a peek? I am an ardent Christian but those claims are ridiculous. If they were really there then some religious group (Catholics, Protestants, Hebrew, Muslims, Orthodox etc.) would raid that place in an instant. If they are still around then they are either hidden in some ancient hole/mine/cave or in some super secret vault under the Vatican.
 
Last edited:
And nobody would sneak a peek? I am an ardent Christian but those claims are ridiculous. If they were really there then some religious group (Catholics, Protestants, Hebrew, Muslims, Orthodox etc.) would raid that place in an instant. If they are still around then they are either hidden in some ancient hole/mine/cave or in some super secret vault under the Vatican.
People are still claiming that it's in some remote village guarded by monks.

It's probably wise to take this story with a pinch of salt, but the US-based Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration Institute (BASE) certainly seem pretty convinced – and claim to have interviewed a monk who is the 'Guardian of the Ark'.

The BASE researchers admit that they are not '100%' sure that it's the real Ark, but claim to have spoken to some locals including the monk who is the 'Guardian of the Ark' at the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion in the city of Axum in Ethiopia.

'He said that the world would not be allowed to pollute it by looking at it. He added that he and the villagers would protect the Ark with their lives, if necessary.

But meh. If it's there, cool, if not, cool.
 
People are still claiming that it's in some remote village guarded by monks.
Yeah, I am sure a couple of monks would stop a raid by "local freedom fighters" who definitely aren't mercenaries hired by one of the big Churches. It absolutely wouldn't be the right way to go about this but it would 100% happen. And if no Church would go after it (impossible but theoretically speaking) then some Arab, Russian, American, European billionaire would try to get his hands on this absolutely priceless piece of history. It would be an absolutely slaughter.
 
Last edited:
I'm aware there is a myth that the ark is somewhere in Aksum, Ethiopia due to stories of the Queen of Sheba having relations with Solomon and their son Menelik taking it with him after visiting.

I'm personally skeptical when I hear stories about findings that may relate to biblical stories, often they are sensationalist and unproven.



"The archaeological site at a tel on the outskirts of Beit Shemesh, 20km west of Jerusalem, which has been under excavation since 2012 has now recently yielded a fascinating discovery: a stone table, which echoes Biblical narratives of a slab on which the Ark of the Covenant is said to have been placed.

The table has been found within a structure thought to be a temple thanks to its construction - the building was a perfect square, with walls 8.5m long, whose corners aligned with the cardinal points - and because it contained two large concave stones with gutters which may have been used for libation offerings, as well as a vast array of pottery and animal bones, indicative of ritual activity.

The find is significant because it ties in with the time frame of the 'large stone' the Ark of the Covenant was said to have been placed upon when brought to Beit Shemesh after being returned by the Philistines, as recounted in the book of Samuel.

According to the Bible, "Now the people of Beth Shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley; and they lifted their eyes and saw the ark, and rejoiced to see it. Then the cart [sent by the Philistines] came into the field of Joshua of Beth Shemesh, and stood there; a large stone was there. So they split the wood of the cart and offered the cows as a burnt offering to the Lord. The Levites took down the ark of the Lord and the chest that was with it, in which were the articles of gold, and put them on the large stone." (1 Samuel 6:13-15).

The era referenced in the Biblical narrative was clearly one marked by warfare between the Israelites, led by judges like Samson and Deborah, and their neighbors, the Philistines. The site bears evidence of this struggle out: not only is located just seven kilometers from Tel Batash, a Philistine settlement, but more importantly the structure itself shows evidence of having fallen foul of warring between the nations.

It is clear that at some point in the mid-12th Century B.C.E. the temple was desecrated; the pottery within it smashed to bits. When uncovering the remains, the archaeologists had to dig through a thick black layer which they initially thought was ash, but turned out to be animal dung: the site had been turned into a byre after being captured.

"This would be a rare case in which we can merge the biblical narrative with an archaeological find," says Lederman.

But he shies away from linking the stone table directly with stone mentioned in the Bible, pointing out that such a conclusion would be almost impossible to prove archaeologically.

He also points out that there are some inconsistencies between the narrative and the evidence. For one, the stone was said to have been located in a field below the town, not at the temple atop the tel."

From what I have read I see no evidence that specifically links this particular stone table to the biblical ark, and even the writer admits it would be impossible to prove so. This is a table found in a likely desecrated temple, it doesn't necessarily mean this housed the holy item. Though I can imagine all the temples weren't exactly monolithic in structure, I doubt the usage of tables were uncommon (though I could be wrong as I don't know the particulars of temple structuring). That said it is a significant link to ancient Jerusalem and such a find shouldn't be ignored.
 
After reading the Bible's Exodus it's hard not to think Moses was full of shit.

The ark made of gold, their clothes made of gold, the leader tents full of gold, nepotism all around, the rules, the tablets, the days alone on the mountain, the food/stock division, the incenses, the rituals, the family heritage of leadership,,,

Sounds a lot like modern politicians to me.
 
GAMETA GAMETA If you read all of it, you'd know that assessment is wrong. All of what you said is addressed in the text. Some of it in a very big way.

I did read all of the Genesis and Exodus. Started Leviticus but stopped right after. I still want to read the complete Bible one day, tho.

Anyway, it seems to me that Abraham and his lineage were, from the beginning, all full of shit. So were the Israelites, so was Moses, so is Israel and the "chosen people" to this day. The eternal "that what you have is mine because God said so", I mean, come'on, man...

I do believe in God, tho. Genesis 1 is beautiful, so is Noah's passage.
 
GAMETA GAMETA I'm confused. Are you saying that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the way to Moses... they all existed, but they made everything up? Is that what you're saying?
 
GAMETA GAMETA I'm confused. Are you saying that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the way to Moses... they all existed, but they made everything up? Is that what you're saying?

I don't know.. They could've been fabricated, or maybe not... They may have existed (isn't there archaeological proof of some of them?) but what I'm saying is: they weren't different than any other "monarchs" or mischievous leaders..

They used God as a mean to control and obtain power, as a mean to differentiate themselves as the chosen people (well, some were more chosen than others, it seems), as a mean to oppose the oppression only to then be oppressed by the new ruler.

I mean, it doesn't stray too far from current politics and ideologies, does it? The names change, the means are pretty much the same. One Abstract Benefactor that knows what's best for you, one Chosen Savior of flesh and bone, one mighty Enemy that oppresses you, promises of what is rightfully yours and "Believe it, it will be provided to you!", you just have to march/give/defend/follow/vote, march/give/defend/follow/vote/kill, march/give/defend/follow/vote/die and again and again and again...

Doesn't it ring any bell?
 
Last edited:
And what do you think of it?

I understand that you don't believe in the scripture and also haven't read all of it (not that you would believe after reading it, but some questions above would definitely be answered). Not much else to think about it.
 
Yeah, I am sure a couple of monks would stop a raid by "local freedom fighters" who definitely aren't mercenaries hired by one of the big Churches. It absolutely wouldn't be the right way to go about this but it would 100% happen. And if no Church would go after it (impossible but theoretically speaking) then some Arab, Russian, American, European billionaire would try to get his hands on this absolutely priceless piece of history. It would be an absolutely slaughter.

Unless it was real, then no-one dare invoke the wrath of God
 
They already have the Ark of the Covenant/Pandora's Box, they opened it up in 2012 and here we are.

Honk honk! 🤡 :messenger_ok:
 
Last edited:
john halo alreay found it. he kills aliens and doesnt afraid of anything
latest
 
Top Bottom