The fate of the Ark of the Covenant is mentioned in the Bible...

[Moses]

One more interesting observation about Shishak is that he is not called Pharaoh but a King of Egypt.

Usually King of Egypt are called the King of HigKsos who ruled the lower Egypt.
Some would go and speculated that king to be a Hebrew.

Usually Pharaoh would be a king of all Egypt or Upper Egypt.
All HiKsos - Shepherds Kings are called KIng and not Pharaoh. This is very interesting angle.

As we know there was a Temple in Egypt and one theory was that Manalec carried the Ark from Temple in Egypt to Africa - Sheba.
I'm if the view still that the Ark was taken to Heaven.

But think it is interesting why Shishak is called King of Egypt and not Pharaoh, there is a reason

[Irishman]

What's probably more likely is that Shishak was not a ruler of Upper and Lower Egypt, just lower. This would not be the f irst nor last time the country was divided - carved out - between multiple rulers.

[Elijah]

An ark in heaven does not mean the same ark. It means that what is physical is replaced with better. The ark was to preserve the truth of written Bible, and that bible became so vast in copies that it nullified a need for an ark. This assured that salvation will not come thru an idol, because if the ark remained it would be just that, another idol.

All that I can see is that at first I thought it good argument that Shishak took it to Egypt, until I read that all could have referred to the Holy room only, and until I read that all had been taken again and again in the years of other kings afterward. In which case, I then ask, you know that Noah's ark is so big that it couldn't have moved from where it is at. And this little ark of worship is a symbol of that ark, and yet you want to chase around that ark instead of go for the original ark. You seek the gnat and means nothing to ignore the camel.

[Moses]

An ark in heaven does not mean the same ark. It means that what is physical is replaced with better. The ark was to preserve the truth of written Bible, and that bible became so vast in copies that it nullified a need for an ark. This assured that salvation will not come thru an idol, because if the ark remained it would be just that, another idol.

All that I can see is that at first I thought it good argument that Shishak took it to Egypt, until I read that all could have referred to the Holy room only, and until I read that all had been taken again and again in the years of other kings afterward. In which case, I then ask, you know that Noah's ark is so big that it couldn't have moved from where it is at. And this little ark of worship is a symbol of that ark, and yet you want to chase around that ark instead of go for the original ark. You seek the gnat and means nothing to ignore the camel.

I disagree, the name for Ark of the covenant has special meaning, there is no doubt that its the same ark moses had to build and place in the  Tent and later David brought it to Jerusalem. It wasn't a replacement ark but the same one as it was the covenant "witness" a holy artifact.
A replica or a different object will be meaningless to the biblical account.

[Elijah]

I never said the ark of Moses had a replica, rather it is a replica of the greater thing that saved life, that of Noah's. Worship with blood sacrifice is only a symbol of real blood (your own) you should be willing to surrender. This doesnt mean kill your self, it just means dont be afraid to bleed in a little hard work for others, and much less if its for yourself.

That ark only carries the humans with faith thru the millenia (3520 years) of short life so that truth will survive to our day when that ark is no longer needed. Jesus ended that ark sooner. As well as Nebuchadnezzar. The expression going back to eat vomit is not just one of going back to eat what has been discarded or found to be disgusting, but also the fact that better has come along to teach what is even holier yet. Do not ignore that lesson, or you go back, you regress. Regression does exist.

[Moses]

The ark of covenant is called in Hebrew "Aron HaBrit"

What Noah built was Teibah - Hebrew world for a container.

The English translation calls them both Ark but in Hebrew bible they are 2 separate objects. One is used to safe life of selected species during the flood, the other is a special artifact that keeps the stones of 10 commandments and
secret object, sit of mercy.

[notalent]

The ark of covenant is called in Hebrew "Aron HaBrit"

What Noah built was Teibah - Hebrew world for a container.

Your namesake just got it wrong.  Put your BHS on the shelf.  Just read the bulletins with the latest info from the post-modern prophet Elijah.  He didn't need to understand Hebrew nuances to figure out they were talking about the same thing, because you know, in English, they are the same word.  English is all you need to know, Moshe.  Only luddites try to learn Hebrew and Greek to get closer to the meanings, even though that's really just counter-productive, since how it gets translated into English is what really counts.

[Elijah]

I stand not corrected, but correct.
Though Hebrew differs, the meaning is the same.
It is like you arguing that of two persons one called it dawn and the other called it sunrise , and still another morning.

You falsely accuse the English language of being the destroyer of the two words, but this English that descends from the Hitites of Turkey includes the Greek word kibotos which is used for both Hebrew words arohn and tevah. And since Genesis 50:26 says this arohn (ark of covenant) is a coffin, and 2 Kings 12:10 says that this arohn (ark of covenant) is a chest, I stand correct.

Egyptian mythology referring to both the ark on the waters (2370 BC Nov 17 to 2369 BC Jan 6) for 40 days, and also is reference to the 40 days of Noah's death (2021 BC Dec 24 to 2020 BC Feb 2) says that Osiris lay dead in his coffin, "trapped in his coffin" suffocating for 40 days upon the waters until the rain stopped and the sky cleared to awake him to rise up. Osiris means reborn. This likens a rebirth (whether it be sun or) most probably the Osiris moon in 40 days after floating in a chest or coffin on the waters. The Hebrew word for chest and coffin is the same as that of the ark of the covenant (arohn). And yet we have Egypt using this arohn coffin and arohn chest to denote an event on water that the world (Noah) went thru for 40 days, and is seen as the death of Man. How so?

THEN we have the life of Jacob from 1858-1711 BC where upon Jacob was embalmed for 40 days at death to honor this poem in Egypt , and this being 117 years before Moses was born in 1594 BC (when 300-year Babylon fell) and Moses was then placed in the tevah (ark) like Noah's tevah (ark). I ask you, was Moses put in a baby house boat with roof and bow and stern and rutter, some stairs, and a roof window for breathing, or light? Wow Miriam had fun steering it. No, a box. He was in a box, and nothing says it was a straw basket. The connection of tevah and arohn as a chest, a box, a coffin, a cedar chest, is very clear and distinct. And I agree that melancholy sadness is not the same as depression, but it is also wrong to take the difference, and make that one foot gap, as one of a mile. My Lord Christ taught me that just one law turns into 90 sub-laws by those picking gnats and allowing a camel. I stand by my Lord on this one. I do not think ark or tevah or arohn or chest or coffin should be turned into a 40-inch volume squeezed between the encyclopedia set. (ok ok blushes, yeh i know, dont say it, youre thinking my posts are that; my brother says i explain things 40 different ways)

So you see, I do not think the Hitites, Greeks, Anglo are wrong for equating them both as a kibotos. Though I do wonder whether the word ark is better, because I am wondering if    ki.BOTOS  is our word for boat, which i dislike.
One fact is true, that Noah who built a 6x1 box to float, then after his wife died, took up the art of teaching descendents across the sea how to build 6x1 boats. Gilgamesh crossed these waters to get to him.

[notalent]

I stand not corrected, but correct.
Though Hebrew differs, the meaning is the same.
It is like you arguing that of two persons one called it dawn and the other called it sunrise , and still another morning.

Their names are different, and one is an ocean-going vessel, the other a small coffer with a stick, some manna and some broken tablets inside.  But you're right, the difference is no more dissimilar than morning and sunrise.  What were we thinking?

You falsely accuse the English language of being the destroyer of the two words, but this English that descends from the Hitites of Turkey includes the Greek word kibotos which is used for both Hebrew words arohn and tevah. And since Genesis 50:26 says this arohn (ark of covenant) is a coffin, and 2 Kings 12:10 says that this arohn (ark of covenant) is a chest, I stand correct.

Neither Genesis 50:26 nor 2 Kings 12:10 are talking about the ark of the covenant as far as I can tell.  Unless you've discovered that they got that wrong too.  Ultimately, I bow to your superior authority which was granted from on High in the 1980s.  The rest of us are stuck with the Bible.

Be that as it may, we have learned now that the way Hebrew ties the two objects together (Noah's giant sea vessel and the coffer of the covenant) is by giving them different names, descriptions and functions.

And the way Hebrew differentiates two cities (English: Babel and Babylon) is by giving them exactly the same name in Hebrew (Babel).

I would never have discovered these hiddent truths if you hadn't straightened me out.  It doesn't pay to apply plain sense to things, because you never know when there really is none.  This is why I've discovered that it's pointless to read Hebrew and Greek.  It only seems to be a logical way to study.  You have shown it to be a completely worthless exercise. 

The Revelation of post-modern Elijah continues.

[Elijah]

I thought you said you knew Hebrew. Then why do you now say youre blind and do not see the word of the Bible saying Joseph was buried in an ark, and money was found in an ark.

Genesis 50:26 (NIV) says So Joseph died at the age of a hundred and ten. And after they embalmed him, he was placed in a arohn (ark = coffin) in Egypt.
Genesis 50:26 (NAS) says So Joseph died at the age of one hundred and ten years; and he was embalmed and placed in an arohn (ark = coffin) in Egypt.

(Gee I wonder if we should argue why one translation says THEY when the other never mentions a THEY who did it. Well never know maybe the embalming linen wove itself around him like a snake by a ghost.)

So then the Almight NonTalent concluded right here the ark existed before Moses had built it because it was occupied by the body of Joseph first. Oh wait, Joseph was curled up in it, the manna was stuffed under Joseph's arm, and the bible between his legs.

2 Kings 12:10 (American) says When they saw that there was much money in the arohn (ark = chest), the king's scribe and the high priest came up and tied it in bags and counted the money which was found in the house of the LORD.

2 Kings 12:10 (KJV) says And it was so, when they saw that there was much money in the arohn (ark = chest), that the king's scribe and the high priest came up, and they put up in bags, and told the money that was found in the house of the LORD.

Exodus 25:10 says And they shall make an ark (arohn = chest or coffin) of ****tim wood: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof.
(Oh this is cute with the ****, whats it suppose to say chittim wood?)

It doesnt say here that the money was speciffically in the covenant ark in the Most Holy, yet if you/I insist arohn was the covenant ark, then you/I/we insist the proof is that this box was in the house of God and the priests found the money so it must be the covenant ark. I do not conclude this because I know that this chest, and the covenant ark, and the teveh of baby Moses, and the teveh of Noah, are all relative, the same. I prefer cedar chest in meaning a box to save. Because they all do that both teveh and arohn.

I would also like to point out that the English word ark obviously comes from arohn (arok) so why would this derivative of world language have translated Tevah as an Arohn (chest) unless they regarded the intended analogy from Noah's chest to baby Moses chest to Most Holy chest.

The Egyptians who raised and schooled Moses had no qualms about calling a Teveh (or Noahs ark) a coffin (Arohn /Arok) for 40-day Osiris, as Noah reborn thru the Flood, or Noah later reborn thru waters of death (Aquarius). Your desire to remove all pagan knowledge as being too dirty to descend from Noah is why you have allowed all these cultures (and America) to claim that none of them descended from Noah. In doing so you have removed the threat of global destruction in the same previous manners of world destruction that have occurred before in the process of astral impact building up continents to live on (both with fire and water not just one).

[notalent]

I thought you said you knew Hebrew.

Your desire to remove all pagan knowledge as being to dirty to descend from Noah is why you have allowed all these cultures and America to claim that none of them descended from Noah. In doing so you have removed the threat of global destruction in the same previous manners that have occurred before in the process of astral impact building up continents to live on.

If there was a connection between Noah's ark and the ark of the covenant, it would have been simplicity itself for them to be called by the same name.  Seems like they went out of their way to call them different names, with different proportions and functions.  But that's just applying plain sense, which you have shown is clearly not the way to understand anything.  You're the post-modern Elijah sent from God on High to auspicate Armageddon, and there can be no scripture in the Bible that can nullify such authority.  And we can take your word for it, really.  We don't need any other authentication but your word and the lucid prose of your incredible bulletins.

[Elijah]

No we in metaphor do not apply plain sense. Jesus said the seed must die to get the tree. He did not mean you must crush up the seed and destroy it, make it dead. He meant it must lose its form as a seed to become the tree. You cant have your seed and have your tree too. So to many people it can sound like a stupid thing to say, kill your seed to get your tree. Yet people are stupid, for 900 years did not the Aztec /Maya sacrifice their good hearts like a Christian should. Yep, perhaps not their enemies, butu the good hearts, the best for God got their hearts cut out alive and drugged for pain. It would seem to me they made bad of a good analogy 4000 years old.

This destroying the seed, or losing it, or ending it, killing it, requires you risk losing the seed in dirt, and mud, and water it, where it may rot, and not grow. You must take the risk. So what he said is true. Illusions exist by God, the sunset kills the sun, and the sun is reborn again in the morning.

 This is why Eve's sin was not her taking a risk, but rather doing so when someone else already knew it was a risk. Apparently Adam had seen SOME animals die from eating it. Or perhaps some died after making a regular diet of it. But for certainty metaphor is NOT simple and not all believe it is fair. Peter was angry with Jesus when he was about to die. But the verbal fight with Peter was of better spent time than apostles sleeping on the ground waiting. Peter was angry and he said, there Lord now you are not riddles and your'e speaking simple to the point. Yeh right, that was after Jesus said that to produce a child a woman will happily bear the pain.... he meant his death would give birth to a better church. But did Peter see enough to feel deep loving empathy for Peter's pain... no he didn't. All the pain that I feel now before my death is nothing compared to how innocent I know the soon to be slaughtered 10,000 saints will face believing the world is easily pulled by Satan into the sweet slaughter of these ones by thinking these people are arrogant to be the last to go to heaven. These saints will gather knowing they will be killed for no just reason, nor legal reason. And they do it, to tell the sheep the hour is here, Go, and run for your life, and do not turn back, head for those mountains; all the laughing ones who survive the fire will drown in the water behind you; remember Lot's wife not wanting to leave.

I am shamed because I should have trusted I would get inside that ark to bring you these things from out of it. And instead I chickened out and came back a 3rd time, only once up the  mountain.

[notalent]

Apparently Adam had seen SOME animals die from eating it. Or perhaps some died after making a regular diet of it.

That means God's warning was superfluous.  Adam could see the evidence from watching animals drop dead.  However, he thoughtlessly never tells Eve of this danger.  Then when she eats of it, he does too despite the scientific animal evidence, not to mention God's oh-by-the-way warning.  Perhaps it was a Romeo and Juliet moment.  Crikey, I don't know what that crown prince of lacunae, Moses, was thinking when he omitted these important details.  Some critical brain cells must have gone offline.  Either that or the Qumran scribes and the Masoretes are the ancestors of Readers Digest.

All the pain that I feel now before my death is nothing compared to how innocent I know the soon to be slaughtered 10,000 saints will face believing the world is easily pulled by Satan into the sweet slaughter of these ones by thinking these people are arrogant to be the last to go to heaven.

I won't ask where the number 10,000 comes from, since I already know it's among the books that were never written that could fill the earth, but would have been wasted on those who wouldn't live to benefit from them.   We are the blessed to read these heretofore unwritten warnings of latter day global floods of armageddon and only 10,000 casualties among the faithful.  I think in old Elijah's day there were more per capita at 7000.  But these are darker times, to be sure.

These saints will gather knowing they will be killed for no just reason, nor legal reason. And they do it, to tell the sheep the hour is here, Go, and run for your life, and do not turn back, head for those mountains; all the laughing ones who survive the fire will drown in the water behind you; remember Lot's wife not wanting to leave.

Makes me wonder why they would need to spend 7 months burying the dead from armageddon when the bodies will surely have been washed away by the flood.  That seems a puzzle.  Perhaps old Ezekiel wasn't rowing with both oars in the water.

I am shamed because I should have trusted I would get inside that ark to bring you these things from out of it. And instead I chickened out and came back a 3rd time, only once up the  mountain.

No, you did right.  It's better you don't rob the old tub of it's contents like some thoughtless pilgrim chipping bits off the true cross to make a good luck charm.  After all, we are not like doubting Thomas.  A word from you is like freshly printed money.

In times like these, you posts fill a much needed void.

[Elijah]

That means God's warning was superfluous.  Adam could see the evidence from watching animals drop dead.  However, he thoughtlessly never tells Eve of this danger.  Then when she eats of it, he does too despite the scientific animal evidence, not to mention God's oh-by-the-way warning.

Why would God warn with a deep booming Hebrew voice from heaven, if he has warned thru the death of animals. Why would he warn thru a whisper in Adam's ear if he has warned thru evidence that Adam has seen. Why would you create a Hebrew voice in Adams head if he has warned thru Adams eyes and ears and touch. You mock me for seeing that our BIble is filled with the claim that this is the true real way Jehovah speaks (98% of the time) to you and me and others, (clearly YOU don't listen to Him, and yet you fabricate the claim that you and I and others must then insist, oh they got a double warning, my way and the Bible's way. There is no my way, I have stated the Bible's way, and YOU have added your way, the way the dying world sees it, and it is why you and they die.

I won't ask where the number 10,000 comes from, since I already know it's among the books that were never written that could fill the earth, but would have been wasted on those who wouldn't live to benefit from them.   We are the blessed to read these heretofore unwritten warnings of latter day global floods of armageddon and only 10,000 casualties among the faithful.

134,000 wait for 10,000 and you mock that the last 10,000 would be killed as if guilty of being Waco or Jamestown. They never proved Waco killed themselves as Jamestown did, the news just sort of became old, and the accusations against the guilty good ole USA just faded.

Makes me wonder why they would need to spend 7 months burying the dead from armageddon when the bodies will surely have been washed away by the flood.  That seems a puzzle.  Perhaps old Ezekiel wasn't rowing with both oars in the water.

I assure you that 6 billion people die, and for you to believe most will be out to sea is a total absolute scientific fiction.

No, you did right.  It's better you don't rob the old tub of it's contents like some thoughtless pilgrim chipping bits off the true cross to make a good luck charm.  After all, we are not like doubting Thomas.  A word from you is like freshly printed money.

It's sad that you cannot see your replies as identical to what the four gospel writers has witnessed against Jesus; and it's sad that you feel it is a cynical eveil crime only against Jesus and not against all others who speak boldy as Jesus and  the prophets did. Like Moses said, prophecy is proven true by its happening, versus the things that do not happen. I know you go back to your weatherman to listen to his next weather prophecy without judging him for his 40% error. You allow him the reality, but not others. Yet you are blind to the fact that the nose of the USA is put in Jerusalem by churches who feel they make the temple of God come true by doing it. God wants you to go build that temple so that you will cause the war of religion that makes all govenrments destroy your churches first, because you have ignored his Christian temple going to heaven to do this disgusting thing giving a temple to a world that has killed his Christ. The blood of guilt is not just Jews, the world killed Jesus, and the world also kills the most accurate of seers or prophets. They peck at the petty little things that do not come true because they fail to see the single mass that does come true. There are many who beleived the only truth Jesus said that ever came true was Jerusalem and its temple destroyed, and mind you that was after it happened that they were forced to admit it happened.

You prove me to be ELIJAH,
because you choose to make this disputed
altar sacrifice like a smoking forum into the internet air.
You also went on about what you don't like me saying,
though my rebuttal that Egyptian ark of Osiris was a coffin ark like the ark covenant, and Egypt uses it to refer to Noahs ark. I don't seek to bring ark evidence to expand the number of survivors in faith; I seek to bring the evidence down as judgement set on the desk of the judge against the guilty. When you are in court, the evidence is not placed on his desk so that you can last minute repent by seeing proof. It is put there to explain why your capital punishment death is not unjust by the court. BUT all that I do, you reverse what my intent is, to wash your own hands that apparently feel guilty for all YOU do not do for your God as I have done for mine, though I admit I have done so little or what I should have done and ought to do.

[notalent]

That means God's warning was superfluous.  Adam could see the evidence from watching animals drop dead.  However, he thoughtlessly never tells Eve of this danger.  Then when she eats of it, he does too despite the scientific animal evidence, not to mention God's oh-by-the-way warning.

Why would God warn with a deep booming Hebrew voice from heaven, if he has warned thru the death of animals. Why would he warn thru a whisper in Adam's ear if he has warned thru evidence that Adam has seen.

Moses says that God "commanded...saying" (Gen 2:16).  The serpent has a conversation with Eve about this command.  You say instead that Adam inferred this "command said" from God by scientific observation.  So what are Eve and the serpent really talking about? 

And the better question is, how do YOU know?  How did God "tell" you.  "Well, I thought about it and plucked the answer out of my imagination."

Ironically, you echo the question of the serpent to Eve, "Yea, hath God said..." and the answer from you is "literally?  No."

Once again, the plain sense of a passage is overthrown to accommodate....what?  Was Moses really that bad a narrator?