Ark of The Covenent Comment

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
1

I always have to chuckle when I hear (or read) the statement:

“As with so many other issues of contradictions within the Bible”. This one is by Cecil/Dex.

My first thought is usually “Well, I haven’t lost one yet and I ain’t gonna start now…” :slight_smile:

The response from Cecil regarded the question as to why Hebrews 9:4 says that Aaron’s staff was stated as being -in- the Ark. Cecil implied that since the NT isn’t part of the “Bible” it’s many innaccuracies are understandable.

sigh

Hebrew 9:4

“Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein [was] the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;”

The mystery is unraveled by looking at the English word in Heb 9:4 “wherein”. To us this may have an obvious meaning, but it only takes a few seconds to reveal the truth using a Greek Lexicon.

The word “wherein” replaced the Greek word “en” (phonetically) and the definition of that Greek word is:

  1. in, by, with

That’s a small change until you dig a bit deeper.

The preposition “en” is considered in the Greek to be positioned between two other Greek words.

  1. “eis” (ice phonetically) which means literaly “inside”.

and…

  1. “ek” or “ex” which means literally “outside”.

This is certainly enough information to show us that in context “wherein” or “en” means neither in nor out, but “nearby or with”. The articles mentioned in the verse “accompanied” the Ark. If true, then according to the verse the Tablets would also have been displayed nearby along with the other items.

The Bible is flawless, it’s translations are not… :smiley:

2

Sfworker, just so we all start on the same page, it is considered good policy to tell us what column you are talking about with a link. Perhaps this is the one.

And any position that includes the line, “The Bible is flawless, it’s translations are not” is likely to be challenged, as we are dedicated to fighting ignorance, not perpetuating it. Very few 2000-year-old books are flawless, no matter how much you wish it to be so.

As to your comment about Cecil’s interpretation, I’ll leave that analysis to our esteemed biblical experts, who are right behind me, jockeying for position to reply, I’m sure.

Nevertheless, welcome to SDMB!

3

And the link I meant to give, before the devil screwed up my coding, is this:

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/marc.html

4

Welcome to the SDMB Sfworker. I know you will come to meet many posters here in short order. Meanwhile, I can’t help but feel that pretty much ALL we have of the Bible is translated, if only from Old Hebrew to a more modern version (with vowels and everything). As to the existing stuff I offer this view. From here we get the quote:

I can’t help but feel that when there is talk of six hundred year old Noah or of forty years of wandering in a desert with a million people without supplies or a flood with enough water to cover all the continents for over a hundred days and a ship equipped with provisions for two of each animal that perhaps, just perhaps, some scribe that copied by hand day after day could possibly have made a mistake or that a story, passed on by mouth for hundreds of years could have been incorrectly remembered.
But that’s just me.
Again, welcome.

5

:smack: Didn’t mean to have the Moses referance in the middle of the Noah stuff.

6

[QUOTE=sfworker]
My first thought is usually “Well, I haven’t lost one yet and I ain’t gonna start now…” :slight_smile:
[/QUOTE]
One what?

7

[QUOTE=Nic2004]

[/QUOTE]
Why use a book at all? Why restrict it to folks who can read, or understand language? Why not just get the message straight to the heart in its entirety? Can we not have confidence that God can reveal his Word that way?

8

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Why use a book at all? Why restrict it to folks who can read, or understand language? Why not just get the message straight to the heart in its entirety? Can we not have confidence that God can reveal his Word that way?
[/QUOTE]

Yes, especially considering that even now, in the 21st Century, literacy is far from a universal skill. How much worse must it have been in the Middle Ages, when the vast majority of common people, unable to obtain or read God’s Word for themselves, would have had to depend on the clergy to supply and interpret for them…oh, wait. Looks as if I just answered my own question. :dubious:

9

The original Staff Report (this was written by me, not by Cecil): What happened to the ark of the covenant?

I was young in those days, and when someone raised a question, I actually addressed it in a second staff report rather than the more prudent course of (a) ignoring it or (b) answering on the Message Board: Followup: wasn’t manna placed in the Ark of the Covenant?

That generate another response and I again (stupidly) tried to put it into a new Staff Report (I was being paid by the number of reports I wrote, at $0.00 per report, so it was worth my while to write more): Followup: the New Testament says there was so manna in the Ark of the Covenant! …

And, finally, challenged yet again, we closed the book: Followup: the last you’ll ever read about the Ark of the Covenant!

I’ve learned since to just answer the question at hand. The additional follow-ups and trivia and sidelines could lead to several volumes, and that’s not what we’re about.

sfworker, we’re glad to have you with us, and your Greek comments are interesting. All the NT scholars that I checked with (since I certainly don’t claim expertise in either ancient Greek or NT) agreed with the reading of all translations, that the staff and manna were “in” the ark. All also agreed that the New Testament was written somewhere around 450 - 500 years after the ark, staff, and manna had been destroyed by the Babylonians. Whether the oral tradition had got fuzzed up, or whether it was written wrong, or whether the ancient Greek language really means that the air conditioning should be on “high” during the summer months… well, who knows? and after those four staff reports on the topic, I, for one, hardly care.

People who are going to insist that the bible is word-for-word perfect will have to also deal with such details as “the four corners of the earth” and Joshua stopping the sun from going around the earth, among other tidbits.

10

The NIV, NASB, and Young’s Literal Translation all agree with the KJV that Hebrews 9:4 has Aaron’s staff inside the Ark. (“This ark contained…Aaron’s staff”; “the ark of the covenant…in which was…Aaron’s rod”; “the ark of the covenant…in which [is]…the rod of Aaron”.) There are a lot of Bible translations and versions out there; maybe there’s one which says Aaron’s rod was just sort of leaned up against the Ark, but certainly the major English-language translations all seem to disagree with the OP about the proper way of rendering that particular Greek preposition into English in this particular passage.

11

[QUOTE=Musicat]
Sfworker, just so we all start on the same page, it is considered good policy to tell us what column you are talking about with a link. Perhaps this is the one.

And any position that includes the line, “The Bible is flawless, it’s translations are not” is likely to be challenged, as we are dedicated to fighting ignorance, not perpetuating it. Very few 2000-year-old books are flawless, no matter how much you wish it to be so.

As to your comment about Cecil’s interpretation, I’ll leave that analysis to our esteemed biblical experts, who are right behind me, jockeying for position to reply, I’m sure.

Nevertheless, welcome to SDMB!
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the welcome! Sorry about the etiquette, I should have spent some time boning up - I will.

AND! In deference to your comments on my position, I think a revised statement is in order.

IF GOD EXISTS, then the Bible is flawless. Regardless - the translations are not (that one I can prove).

12

I doubt anyone here would argue with you on the problems with translations over the millenia. It is the idea of putting unquestioning faith in a collection of Bronze Age myths handed down verbally through generations of illiterate and superstitious tribesmen; that are simply the collection or adaptation of much older myths from other cultures. The fact that there are certainly many cases of poor translation resulting in a uniformly innaccurate text make this unquestioning faith harder to understand.

13

[QUOTE=Nic2004]
Welcome to the SDMB Sfworker. I know you will come to meet many posters here in short order. Meanwhile, I can’t help but feel that pretty much ALL we have of the Bible is translated, if only from Old Hebrew to a more modern version (with vowels and everything). As to the existing stuff I offer this view. From here we get the quote:

I can’t help but feel that when there is talk of six hundred year old Noah or of forty years of wandering in a desert with a million people without supplies or a flood with enough water to cover all the continents for over a hundred days and a ship equipped with provisions for two of each animal that perhaps, just perhaps, some scribe that copied by hand day after day could possibly have made a mistake or that a story, passed on by mouth for hundreds of years could have been incorrectly remembered.
But that’s just me.
Again, welcome.
[/QUOTE]

Well, the Torah still exists so it’s not a translation. The King James translation of the OT is good, but not perfect. The same for the Septuagint. The Greek text exists in the form in which it was written and using a Lexicon makes it easy to see where the translations went wrong.

A good example is the translation of the word “hell”. In Hebrew (with vowels - only the mystics ommitted them) the words “sheol” and “olam” were replaced with the word hell in the KJV. In the NT, the KJV replaced “hades”, “gehenna” and “tartarus / tartaroo” with the word hell. These things can be verified and frankly I wouldn’t believe that either if I hadn’t looked for myself. I think that’s the key - Jeremiah 29:12-14 (Seek Me with all your heart and you will find Me).

The KJV was written in the early 1600’s and at that time the word hell meant “conceal/cover”. Sheol, olam, hades and gehenna all mean “grave”. The word hell represented “the grave” pretty well at the time, but preachers today have turned it into something else. Something unscriptural.

We certainly do have the option to “guess” at the truth, but what are the odds of getting it right (Re: Noah / Ark)? Scripture - if you believe in YHWH - should be viewed as it’s presented, if God’s Word is flawed then God is flawed and in that case He isn’t God. Logically speaking anyway.

If you can find a flaw in His Book <as it was Inspired/written>, I would be really interested in a chance to challenge it.

14

[QUOTE=Nic2004]
Welcome to the SDMB Sfworker. I know you will come to meet many posters here in short order. Meanwhile, I can’t help but feel that pretty much ALL we have of the Bible is translated, if only from Old Hebrew to a more modern version (with vowels and everything). As to the existing stuff I offer this view. From here we get the quote:

I can’t help but feel that when there is talk of six hundred year old Noah or of forty years of wandering in a desert with a million people without supplies or a flood with enough water to cover all the continents for over a hundred days and a ship equipped with provisions for two of each animal that perhaps, just perhaps, some scribe that copied by hand day after day could possibly have made a mistake or that a story, passed on by mouth for hundreds of years could have been incorrectly remembered.
But that’s just me.
Again, welcome.
[/QUOTE]

Your passage quote didn’t come through and I forgot to respond to that.

Yes, absolutely we can only understand Scripture by and through the Holy Spirit (God), but the “Church” is under “a great delusion”.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
“For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie”

This one is particularily hard to come to terms with:

Matthew 22:14
“For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

15

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
One what?
[/QUOTE]

Challenge to Scriptural error…

16

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
Why use a book at all? Why restrict it to folks who can read, or understand language? Why not just get the message straight to the heart in its entirety? Can we not have confidence that God can reveal his Word that way?
[/QUOTE]

So, what you’re saying is that everything you believe about God is true.

I don’t think any of us can say that. There is a process to everything. Learning about God is no different (except for Paul).

17

[QUOTE=OneCentStamp]
Yes, especially considering that even now, in the 21st Century, literacy is far from a universal skill. How much worse must it have been in the Middle Ages, when the vast majority of common people, unable to obtain or read God’s Word for themselves, would have had to depend on the clergy to supply and interpret for them…oh, wait. Looks as if I just answered my own question. :dubious:
[/QUOTE]

This response will create a stir, but sometimes that’s a good thing.

“It doesn’t matter”.

This can get really complicated so I’ll let it come out over a period of time (if it needs to) rather than dumping it all out at once, but…

According to Scripture “All will be saved”. God Wills it. Christ is the Savior of ALL mankind (I Tim 4:10). God’s will cannot be overcome.

18

[QUOTE=sfworker]
This response will create a stir, but sometimes that’s a good thing.

“It doesn’t matter”.

This can get really complicated so I’ll let it come out over a period of time (if it needs to) rather than dumping it all out at once, but…

According to Scripture “All will be saved”. God Wills it. Christ is the Savior of ALL mankind (I Tim 4:10). God’s will cannot be overcome.
[/QUOTE]
Then the only variable is time; and surely it would be better for everyone to be saved sooner?

Your suggestion of presenting points which “prove” the Bible is flawed is interesting. I would like to see this as a thread in GD; i’d be the first to admit i’m not an expert (or even a novice) in the Bible however, so i’d rather not be the one to start it.

19

[QUOTE=C K Dexter Haven]
The original Staff Report (this was written by me, not by Cecil): What happened to the ark of the covenant?

I was young in those days, and when someone raised a question, I actually addressed it in a second staff report rather than the more prudent course of (a) ignoring it or (b) answering on the Message Board: Followup: wasn’t manna placed in the Ark of the Covenant?

That generate another response and I again (stupidly) tried to put it into a new Staff Report (I was being paid by the number of reports I wrote, at $0.00 per report, so it was worth my while to write more): Followup: the New Testament says there was so manna in the Ark of the Covenant! …

And, finally, challenged yet again, we closed the book: Followup: the last you’ll ever read about the Ark of the Covenant!

I’ve learned since to just answer the question at hand. The additional follow-ups and trivia and sidelines could lead to several volumes, and that’s not what we’re about.

sfworker, we’re glad to have you with us, and your Greek comments are interesting. All the NT scholars that I checked with (since I certainly don’t claim expertise in either ancient Greek or NT) agreed with the reading of all translations, that the staff and manna were “in” the ark. All also agreed that the New Testament was written somewhere around 450 - 500 years after the ark, staff, and manna had been destroyed by the Babylonians. Whether the oral tradition had got fuzzed up, or whether it was written wrong, or whether the ancient Greek language really means that the air conditioning should be on “high” during the summer months… well, who knows? and after those four staff reports on the topic, I, for one, hardly care.

People who are going to insist that the bible is word-for-word perfect will have to also deal with such details as “the four corners of the earth” and Joshua stopping the sun from going around the earth, among other tidbits.
[/QUOTE]

God’s Word is infallible, not the Bible. Our Bibles are filled with inaccuracies and they don’t correctly reflect God’s Word (thus the delusion).

The “Word” means far more than the text we read. His Word can be written on our Hearts (II Cor 3:3), the Word created time and all that exists within it (John 1:3) the Word was present at the beginning (John 1:1) and the Word IS God (John 1:1) The WORD IS PERFECT, because the WORD IS GOD.

If you seek the truth you will find it. Not many do. The Torah and the Septuagint were inspired by God, all interpretations are written by man - AFTER - he created religion. Religion is imperfect because man’s imperfect and therefore translation’s are imperfect. We try but fall short.

This forum is perfect for what I’m trying to get across - the TRUTH. Some will accept it, many won’t, but that doesn’t change it and actually when all is said and done, it won’t matter because God chooses those who seek the Truth. He calls us all, but not all can accept. (Matthew 22:14) When prophecy is fulfilled it isn’t by accident. EVERYTHING is planned out.

I’m no scholar, but sometimes God will use simple people like me. Go figure. :wink:

20

[QUOTE=MEBuckner]
The NIV, NASB, and Young’s Literal Translation all agree with the KJV that Hebrews 9:4 has Aaron’s staff inside the Ark. (“This ark contained…Aaron’s staff”; “the ark of the covenant…in which was…Aaron’s rod”; “the ark of the covenant…in which [is]…the rod of Aaron”.) There are a lot of Bible translations and versions out there; maybe there’s one which says Aaron’s rod was just sort of leaned up against the Ark, but certainly the major English-language translations all seem to disagree with the OP about the proper way of rendering that particular Greek preposition into English in this particular passage.
[/QUOTE]

Forgive my boldness but they’re wrong. Don’t take my word for it, ask God and see what He says. :slight_smile: (seriously though).

I’ll throw another one out there.

Tithing is unscriptural for the “Church”. Jesus didn’t tithe. (Free will offerings are good, but tithing 10% is OT / Levitical and always “of the earth”.)