Introduction: A new perspective...
Of all the artifacts that are thought to exist or of those found over time, there is none greater than that of the Ark or the Covenant. It is the greatest prize of the archaeological world even with those who do not believe in the very writings which give testimony of it. Whenever a topic of investigation comes to me, I always want to see what the orthodox belief is, and in these times, the best way is to see what the all-knowing WIKI writers are saying… I am absolutely surprised that the word “Mythical” does not appear a dozen times or more in the wiki write-up. In the Wiki ditty you will find some of the basics concerning the Ark, and a majority of the theories as to where it may have disappeared to which are full of conjecture and mis-information.
The first photo found in the WIKI article shows a painting from 1900, a rendition depicting Moses and Joshua “bowing” before the Ark of the Covenant. The Artist I suppose just didn’t understand that Moses and Joshua would NEVER bow in worship of or to an inanimate object, not even the ark, to do so would be in violation of the FIRST of the NINE Commandments, “Ye shall not make Idols” but the Ark was not built to serve as an Idol, so why do men make it such?
The first thing to overcome if you really want truth, is to overcome and accept the fact that you have been taught to believe, taught to believe a certain way or even behave in a particular manner. Why are so many concern with what the rest of the world is believing, thinking or doing? The majority of car or truck owners buy Ford, I personally wouldn’t have one, sorry Ford owners, but I am an old school mechanic, I wouldn’t have one if I could avoid it. Another example of being taught to behave a certain way is the majority of men who cannot live without their football, baseball or basketball. Don’t get me wrong, I use to love participating in the sports, but I just don’t understand the idea of watching it and not being a part, it is like watching someone buy a Ford.
When searching for truth, one has to consider all possibilities, many would disregard certain sources just because of what they have been taught to believe.
Although I do not adhere to any current orthodox religious belief system, I consider them all because they had to start somewhere but I know without a doubt that each has been changed and tailored to satisfy the weakness of men, many of them bear little resemblance to what they began as and others are full of justifications as to why these changes are made even though it is a complete contradiction to the core belief! Anyway… maybe some of you will understand why I have brought this up.
Of all the theories regarding the Ark of the Covenant, ideas based upon conjecture, self-appointed, speculation and/or just plain poor research, a majority derive at their conclusions with or including Ignorance. Some things just don’t fit into their taught belief system, religious or academic, and without any thought it is cast out.
I am going to tell you another hypothesis of the Ark of the Covenant, one that no matter what I say, many will not consider, and frankly I don’t care.
It would seem almost everyone is in agreement that the Ark was in Jerusalem around 600 BC, a majority would also agree that it just disappeared and often blamed upon the events of 587 BC when the Babylonians laid waste to Jerusalem, as a result it is speculated that the Ark was carried away by the Babylonians, I mean, where else could it have gone? One source even states that at the same time prior to this conquest, one of their great prophets and his family just one day up and disappeared, he is identified by this source as Lehi of Beit Lehi. I don’t know how much more of a hint the historians would need. This event of the destruction of Jerusalem is where all speculations and conjecture begins. However, this hypothesis to follow involves a source which comes from a certain belief system, I strongly consider this written source not because I was taught to believe, but because of waking up and realizing many years ago that I too was taught to believe, this source material was my primary focus, with only an agenda to prove it or disprove it, I only wanted the truth, in short I’ve done the time, so with this said, let me continue.
There is a source few will consider and many will never consider and that is their right within their agency, that source is none other than what is called the book of Mormon. Within this book which is a plausible history, is a story which is told that parallels evidences being found today, just as the plausible history of the Bible.
In this book is the story which is the beginning and the basis of the entire history which follows it. This departing from Jerusalem can be read in 1st Nephi Chapter 1-4 of the Book of Mormon.
When Lehi was instructed to leave Jerusalem he was told to go to Laban, a powerful man in the city, who was in possession of what is termed as “the Brass Plates.” I don’t think anyone with knowledge would argue that the Brass Plates are the first five books of Moses. I think the reason this has gone unseen for so long is due to this name given by another people to a book mentioned in the other plausible history, the Bible. This book was called The Book of the Law of Moses which is also the first 5 books of Moses also known as the Torah. What I am suggesting is that the Brass Plates of the Mormon book and the Book of the Law of the Bible are the same book. Moses was instructed to put the “testimony” or book of the Law in the Ark and nowhere have I found where in anyone was instructed to separate the book from the Ark.
Exodus Chapter 25 16 And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee.
And later after Moses writes the Testimony of Law…
9 ¶ And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel.
25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying,
26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.
If the Brass Plates were in fact the same as the testimony or Book of the Law which was placed in the Ark, when Nephi and his brother went to get the Brass Plates they would have had to have been taken out of the Ark of the Covenant. In reading of the event you will notice that Laban, the possessor of the Plates, does not go to get the plates himself, but he sends his servant Zoram whom I would suspect was of Levitical decent.
If Nephi was instructed to obtain the plates to be taken to the Promised land for their benefit and the benefit of their posterity, why would they leave the Ark behind, KNOWING well and good that its final purpose will be here upon this land at the final gathering of Israel?
Did the Ark travel to this continent with Lehi and his sons? Let’s look a little further into the text of this plausible history.
Without checking, Lehi with his people had been here for about 35-37 years when Nephi received notice that his enemy the Lamanites were plotting to kill him. He was told to gather in his families and belongings and leave the place they were in the middle of the night. They traveled many days Northward, a journey which was about 360 miles and eventually stopped at the place that that would become the city of Nephi which today, is where the Newark earthworks, ruins or mounds are found. They had not been there long and they built a temple for a specific purpose.
12 And I, Nephi, had also brought the records which were engraven upon the aplates of brass; and also the bball, or ccompass, which was prepared for my father by the hand of the Lord, according to that which is written.
13 And it came to pass that we began to prosper exceedingly, and to multiply in the land.
14 And I, Nephi, did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many swords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people.
15 And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.
16 And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.
Now I do not know how many bible thumpers we have out there, but each of them should know one of the main reasons the Temple of Solomon was built. It was primarily built to house the Ark of the Covenant and my first question after reading the contents of 2nd Nephi chapter 5 is, why would they do this if they did not have the Ark? After this event the Mormon scriptures seem to go silent as to where the Brass plates have gone.
One of the greatest archaeologic hoaxes? But who got hoaxed?
From the all knowing WIKI:
In October 1890, James O. Scotford of Edmore, Michigan, claimed that he had found a number of artifacts, including a clay cup with strange symbols and carved tablets, with symbols that looked vaguely hieroglyphic. The find attracted interest and eager looters arrived to look for more artifacts. Many more elaborate discoveries were made in the area around Wyman in Montcalm County, Michigan following Scotford's original discovery. Scotford was a well-known digger and sign painter in the area of Wyman. He and his company "would dig until they located an artifact, and then the dignitaries who sponsored the work were invited to remove that artifact". Within the first year of Scotford's initial discovery a syndicate was formed in Montcalm County of interested parties. The syndicate purchased many of the artifacts and attempted to exploit the finds financially for the region.
By 1907, Scotford joined forces with Daniel E. Soper, former Michigan Secretary of State, and together they presented thousands of objects made of various materials, supposedly found in 16 counties across Michigan. Soper had resigned as Secretary of State for the State of Michigan after being accused of embezzlement. The objects included coins, pipes, boxes, figurines and cuneiform tablets that depicted various biblical scenes, including Moses handing out the tablets of the Ten Commandments. On November 14, 1907, the Detroit News reported that Soper and Scotford were selling copper crowns they had supposedly found on heads of prehistoric kings, and copies of Noah's diary. Scotford often arranged for a local person to witness him "unearthing" the objects.
Scotford and Soper had many trusting customers who strongly believed in the relics. In 1911, one John A. Russell published a pamphlet, "Prehistoric discoveries in Wayne County, Michigan," in which he argued for their authenticity. James Savage, former pastor of the Most Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Detroit, bought 40 of the objects. Savage believed them to be "remains relevant to the descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel," and continued to believe in the relics until his death.
It is said the artifacts were immediately deemed as a hoax by archaeologists and historians. Later it would seem that the artifacts found their way to James Talmage in about 1909 and in 1911, 3 years later he published a book rendering them to be a fraud. To this day I would like to know how Mr. Talmage was qualified to render 30,000 artifacts found over a period of nearly 300 years from over 1100 mounds as fake or was it his intent to render them as a fraud for another purpose? These were some very ambitious hoaxers indeed. What you will find on the internet today is a one sided version of the story.
It has also been reported: Latest studies of professor of anthropology Richard B. Stamps of the Michigan Historical Museum indicate that the artifacts were made with contemporary tools. My question would be: Contemporary? as in the technology has somehow changed since the time the chisels which were also found among the artifacts were made and those of today? The following image is one of the tablets found that was among the Michigan Tablets. Also is a picture of brass or copper Contemporary Tools some of many which was among the artifacts. As it would seem, no one was trying to hide the fact that these were made with “Contemporary tools.”
Ark of the Covenant?
(Notice the Modern Archaeologist Tag at the bottom on a fake artifact yet)
The next image is the reverse side of the tablet shown above.
A Temple in the manner of Solomon’s?
Interestingly enough, a very skeptical Ute friend of mine (not only skeptical of certain artifacts but also of the whole Mormon story), once asked me if I had ever wondered why he never gave me any criticisms towards these artifacts which he was accustomed to doing in several other cases. I responded with, well, now that you mentioned it, why haven’t you? Then he told me a story of when he was in his younger years he happened upon a cave somewhere in south Ouray Utah and in it he found several stones bearing the exact same inscriptions found upon the Michigan artifacts, the Burrows Stones and Brewers find in Manti Utah. Upon showing a few of them that he brought to his Grandfather his Grandfather slapped them out of his hands and scolded him and telling him to return them and never go there again! It is the cave of death! Those Hoaxers were indeed very, very busy. I knew this man very well and he was no liar.
In the next photo one might want to ask, “If these Hoaxers made these things with Contemporary tools, why would these hoaxers also manufacture ancient tools?”
Like I said, over 30,000 artifacts! Written off as a hoax, why? A few reasons as I see it, One, the whole idea lends credence to the existence of a God and is a strong evidence against the theory of Evil-ution and from certain people of the Neil Maxwell Institute, it is evidence which is STRONGLY in opposition of their Mesoamerican theory. The short of it is, PRIDE.
But the strongest reasons I see as to why so much effort was placed in rendering these artifacts as a hoax is, ONE: If these artifacts were deemed as authentic, this would give immense credibility to the Mormon story, and we just can’t have that. TWO: the most plausible reason for me is, by this time in 1890 to 1910, it was WELL known the power of Smithsonian to just make thing disappear, anything lending credence to a GOD or heaven forbid, the Mormons… would just disappear. If the Mormons sent a representative to definitively express that they too felt the artifacts were a hoax, it would saved them from being wisped away, hidden from all or even being destroyed.
As far as I am concerned what happens with these artifacts over the next 80 some odd years the handling of them etc… shows that they were much more than fake artifacts. If they were in fact fake, why didn’t they just throw them away?
Ancient Contemporary tools? Someone please show me the differences in my sledge hammer and chisel and these tools?
After James Savage died in 1927 he bequeathed his collection of the relics to the University of Notre Dame. While at Notre Dame, the relics sat dormant until the 1960s when Milton R. Hunter, president of the New World Archaeological Foundation, the research institute of the Mormon Church, uncovered the relics. Hunter spent the rest of his life attempting to use the relics to prove the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Hunter connected the relics to the "Michigan Mound Builders," which he deemed to be the Nephites from the Book of Mormon. Hunter's rhetoric and work with the Michigan Relics perpetuated pseudoarchaeology in religion, with efforts to prove pre-Columbian contact and the myth of the mound builders. Notre Dame gave Hunter the collection in the 1960s and before his death in 1975 he deeded the collection to the LDS Church. Following Hunter's death, the Church kept the collection in their museum in Salt Lake City, Utah for decades. In 2001, the Church had the relics examined by Professor of Anthropology Richard B. Stamps, of Oakland University and found that the artifacts were made with contemporary tools.
There is so much that you have not been told about these incredible finds of the Michigan Collection. The purpose of the foregoing in case you did not notice, if these artifacts are authentic, where did these mound builders ever see a rendition of the Ark of the Covenant and supposed rendition of a Temple like unto Solomon’s? Continued in....