I mentioned above that the Ark that the Ethiopians were given was the one that was responcible for the drought and famine in Israel in the days of David and this, then, indicates that, in fact, Ethiopia still has the Ark of the Covenant.

Now, the problem is that the Ark was supposed to be atoned once every year on Yom Kippur and this, assuredly, has not been done and thus, about once every generation the sins of the people or politicians gets to the point where judgment is poured out until atonement is achieved and then they are good for another 30 years or so.

If we have reached that point again then there is a couple of options they could try. They could have the Guardian try and ask the Lord what the problem is and how to make reconciliation so that the famine can be stayed.

The other – risky – option is for the Bishop of the Ethiopian Church to have communion at the Church were the Ark is and then, after Transubstanciation and before anyone takes communion, take the Chalice with the Blood into the Holy of Holies and anoint the Mercy in the same manner that the Levites would on the day of Atonement and then, in theory, the Ark would be reconciled with the House and people of Ethiopia – for the life time of that Bishop and then, when another Bishop is elected, he should go through the same proces once during his ministry (this is based on the Blood of Y’shua being greater then of the animal sacrifices, but still limited by the Priestly Office itself and thus, with the cities of refuge a person was stuck in the city until the High Priest died taking his sins with him to the grave, and a new High Priest was elected).

Because the Levitical Priesthood was decommissioned at the time the High Priest ripped the Holy Robe at Y’shua’s trial, it is not possible to use that Priesthood (or the sacrifices including that of the Ashes of the Red Heifer) until such a time as the Lord re-commissions it and, therefore, Atonement must be performed by the Christian Church and the only sacrifice we offer is the Eucharist.

It is my hope that someone will see to it that this information gets to the appropriate people so that something can be done about this situation before it gets any worse.

If you are a rich person, there is no reason to show off because you are aware of your wealth. You don’t have to open your bank account to some stranger to prove it. The stranger can speculate whatever he wants, or he can go jump in the Blue Nile if he chooses. As far as the rich person is concerned, he simply does not care about what the stranger thinks. After all, he is just a passer by and it is best to ignore him. In this analogy, of course, the rich person is Ethiopia and her wealth is Ark of the Covenant (Tabot).

J. Walkins

Would appreciate any comments you might have on this. Also, below, please find some of my own musings concerning the Ark of the Covenant.

Sincerely,

David T. Hill

David Hill (3 Feb 2004) “The Arks of the Covenants”

Concerning the Ark of the Covenant being in Ethiopea.

I have heard of this before and actually read a book on the subject however, there is some information that everyone is missing.

First off is the fact that, at the time of Moses,there were two legitimate Arks made for the two separate sets of Ten Commandments. Further, what that book pointed out was that, in the days of Solomon, a third Ark was made, susposedly, to give to the Queen of Sheba which is the one that susposedly resides in Ethiopia (there is enough circumstancial evidence to indicate that they definately have one of those three Arks). However, apparently, they switched the Arks and the real one that was in the temple, was taken by the Queens Escort and the copy was left in the Temple.

It is this copy of the Ark (the third ark) that the Rabbi assuredly saw for a brief moment underneath the Temple in 1967, when they regained Jerusalem. He saw something covered with animal skins that could only have been one of these three arks.

Another book has shown that, on a comparison of the accounts of the Building of the Temple and its destruction by the Babylonians, that there is a three foot difference in the Heighth of the two Pillars of the Temple, which led these archeologists to suspose that Solomon designed these two pillars to be Sand Hydraulics that, upon the invasion by the Babylonians, the Temple Priests activated and thus this copy of the Ark of the Covenant was lowered underneath the Temple, and then covered over by the Priests and that is where this Rabbi saw the Third Ark – underneath the Holy of Holies.

The book itself concluded by saying that the most likely place for the Ark is in the Temple itself, somewhere in a secret chamber. But, they didn’t realize that it was not the original Ark.

Now, the question is, which Ark does the Ethiopians have. The one with the original Ten Commandments that were broken by Moses and which represent the Lord Y’shua himself and his “breaking” for our sins. Or do they have the second Ark which contains the second (unbroken) set of Ten Commandments?

It is highly unlikely that Benaiah or Nathan the Prophet would have allowed the original Ark of the Covenant to leave the Temple Complex regardless of how much they thought Solomon and the Nation were backsliding or regardless of how Saintly and worthy the Queen and her escort were.

So, it seems apparent that, if they gave them one of the two originals that it was definately the second Ark that they allowed them to have. This would explain the significance of the Ark in Ethiopian History, unlike anything else could explain it.

Now, as that book also pointed out, the last known reference to the original Ark of the Covenant, was during the days of Jeremiah. As a Prophet and a Priest and one who was filled with the Holy Spirit, he would have known the difference between the two Arks.

And, with the silence of the Biblical Record, there is an account that comes to us from the Assyrian Histories that, when Jeremiah was taken, by force, into Egypt, that he took several of the Temple Instruments with him and “a mysterious box” (Artesen Sales). He subsequently got on a boat in Egypt and sailed to the British Isles with this Box and an escort which included the Royal Bloodline in the person of the Crown Princess, which apparently is the person refered to in the chapter in Jeremiah concerning the Branch who was planted in the British Isles and is where most of the Royal Lineage in Britain comes from, who trace their ancestry back to David through this woman.

Now, with the Second Ark in the hands of the Ethiopians and the Copy in the Temple itself, lowered into the floor (probably by Jeremiah himself or upon his orders or recommendation), he himself took the original Ark of the Covenant with him.

But, the mystery does not end there for, with the Royal daughter given to the escort for protection (to be wed to the then current King of Ireland), Jeremiah got on another boat with the mysterious box and sailed away to places unknown. Where they ended up is open to conjecture. But, one should keep one thing in mind as Berry Fell has proven (“America B.C.”).

Transatlantic Ocean Travel was known in the days of Jeremiah…

Editor’s Notes : May 5, 2010

I really had an excellent post on the Two Tabernacles (with a break down of all the verses and the thought process involved) which came out after the post above and reconciled all the various information, but it is now, alas, lost in cyberspace, but if you trace out all the references in the Old Testament, with this knowledge, then it reconciles all the differences and makes perfect sense.

Point is, because the offering of the Israelites was so generous Moses was able to build two complete sets of Tabernacle and Ark for the Two Sets of the Ten Commandments.

The first set with the broken tablets and jar of Manna and Aaron’s Rod that budded, ended up in the High Place of Gibeah (probably Caleb left it in his City that he gave to the Priesthood and then Elud the first Judge of Isarel moved it with himself to Benjamin which was his tribe and the High Place of Gibeah) and was visited by both David (who left the Sword he took from Goliath there) and Solomon (just before he started the Temple and it is when Y’hava asked him what he wanted). This is the Ark that was ‘responcible’ for the seven year famine until the Gibeonites were avenged of Saul’s treachery.

The second Tabernacle and Ark was placed in Shiloh in Ephraim from the begining of Israel’s take over of the Holy Land and this Ark was the most popular because it had been responcible for most of the miracles associated with it. This is the one that was lost to the Philistines and subsequently returned and inspected (to the tune of thousands dead) so that they knew what was in it and it was the one David ended up moving to Jerusalem and it was set up in the Temple.

After this, the first Tabernacle and Ark Solomon gave away to the Queen of Sheba where it made its way to Ethiopia because he wanted to consolodate his rule and decided that having two Arks might be an impairment to this goal.

Now, a third Ark was actually made around the time of Jeremiah who hid the Second one (which he subsequently took to Egypt with him when he was forced to leave Israel and, legend has it, he got on a boat with it and sailed to the British Isles where he took it onto another boat and was gone for a year or too and came back without the Ark) and placed the third in the Temple just before the Babylonian Invasion and this is the Ark that was seen by the Priest for a moment when Israel took Jerusalem in 1967.

The significance of the first Ark being in Ethiopia is that, during the year 2008 I went on a tare for Ancient (Antediluvial) wisdom and knowledge and read a whole host of books on various subjects including on the Great Pyramid and, during the course of those studies, I determined that Ethiopia was known in the Antediluvial World as the Home of the Gods. There is actually a Hieroglyph (which actually means God – see Glyph following) for them and their land and it is composed of Three Flags standing for the Trinity so, in a sense, the Ark would just be returning home, in a manner of speaking and this gives reasoning and motivation for Y’hava to allow the Ark to depart from Israel in the first place.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_LxzM3av-nYo/S-Hq9N9xotI/AAAAAAAAAhA/cKSvgN-A1Nc/s128/GodGlyph.jpg

Black Schist sarcophagus of Ankhnesneferibre
Twenty-Sixth Dynasty, Thebes
The British Museum, London, UK

If that is the case how come Templers who were so committed to Christianity never constructed churches that resemble Laibala in European lands? In Europe were there shortages of rocks that are similar to Lalibala’s rock that stop Templers from constructing Lalibala like churches? Or Europeans were not Christians enough to allow church construction? Taking these facts into account one can see Templers role in Lalibal’s construction to be weak or put under doubt.
My strong argument against the claim by Grham Hankok and Bob Cornuke is not only based on the lack of Lalibala like churchs in Europe, but on the style of the cross seen in Templers and in the ceiling of Lalibela. So just because of the existed resembles between Lalibala’s cross and that of the Templers can we say Templers may have built Lalibala ?

The answer is No; because, before Lalibela’s time that kind of cross seen in the ceiling of Lalibela also existed or carved at one of the tombs of Axume which was made by and for king Ezana who ruled at 3ad and who was just converted to Christianity- this is 900 years earlier than Lalibala. As a matter of history, we know that at 3 AD, there were no Templers anywhere on earth; then how that style of cross came to be in AXUME. Obeviously, the cross style that we see in the night Templers originally is not Templers’s at all. This very fact drop the inference that the Templers role in Lalibela’s construction based on cross resumblance.
Obviously,the mistake risen from a hasty conclusion and knowledge inadequacy about Christianity in Ethiopia and the axumite kingdom led Bob Cornuke and Grham Hankok to take a wrong conclusion and mislead their viewers that is unfortunate.

Any way, how the Templers’s cross and the cross in Lalbala came to have great similarity?
The answer partly is this – from 3AD on ward and certainly at the 11th century Christian Ethiopians were required to travel to Eyersulam (Jerusalem) that was their obligation and a pilgrimage duty all Christians should obey to. At the 11th century Ethiopian travelers to Jerusalem met Templers and introduce that cross to the knight Templers. For this there is ancient writings suggesting Ethiopians knowledge about the Templers and there is also oral accounts on that regard. In fact, Ethiopians not only knew about Templers but about other European significants such as the Vikings. For example, there is record in Ethiopian ancient books referring Vikings but refering them in different name, in which for example, at 6 or,7th century a typical prayer of Ethiopians goes as “ O almighty God save us from the opened mouth of northern lions”. This was referring the savagery of Vikings and the very existance of vikings.

Coming back to the film, the other clue that the commentators claim shows a link the Templers were played role in Lailable’s construction is the oral tradition and writings that Grham Hankok heard about. Whereby the Grham inferred that the oral tradition refer white people helped the construction of Lalibela.

According to the written and oral accounts of Ethiopian source, in help building Laibala ancient Ethiopian records credited angles;and there is no mention of any race of people of any kind. For the record, there is no oral or written Ethiopians account that link Lalibla with white people. I do not know where he ( Grahm) got that information?

Perhaps, he (Grham) may have misunderstood their (Ethiopian) account on that regard. Why I suspect that ( I mean the misunderstanding in Grham’s part), in Ethiopia angels said to be are like light and bright ; perhaps, if they are to be personified , expected to have bright colour. Hence, when Ethiopian monks spoke of this nature of angels Grahm Hankok may have had misunderstood the monks and the oral tradtion as if they were talking about white people. As a result, a false perception in Grham’s part, led him to think they( ethiopian mokns) were referring white people.

Making film of that nature require one not jump to conclusion in simple resemblances. We all seek knowledge based on substance not by emotion; but the film maker unfortunately was driven by emotion. In addition, the film maker does know about Templers and their cross but does not know Axume in relation to that style cross seen in Lalibela. Although, I hate to politicize matters of this nature; however , it might have been puzzling for Grahm Hankok and Bob Cornuke to contemplate how a magnificent building like Lalibala could have been built by Africans. Perhaps, they are a bit trapped in the 18th century European mentality. When we see pyramids in Cambodia and in Inca south America, and when we see magnificent monuments in Easter islands and other places we should know that at different spots on the glob at different times civilization had once flourished independent of European influences but lived short. That was the case in Ethiopia as well.

In the book you cited above, the author’s name is spelled Lapiso Delibo and NOT Lappiso Delebe (first line of your comment) or Lappiso Delebo (the last line) (see the Bibliography on p. 248).

If your attempt is to question the introduction of Judaism and its rituals to Ethiopia by using the citations that you provided from Dr. Lapiso’s book, I am afraid that you have not presented a strong case. Your citation skipped those points that contradicted your argument. Here is what Dr. Lapiso wrote on p. 45:

“Bezehe Yethiopia misrakawi yezewd seratena mengest sir new sositu melekotawena ahadawi yekiristina, yeoritina, yeslemena haimanotoch keMetshaf Qidusena keQidus Qura’an gar beselamawi mengid wede ager wist bemegbatena mengestawi yeminet, yetemertena yebahel tequamat, meseretochena mesariawoch bemhon balefut 1700 ametat wist yetesfafut.”

Orit is a clear reference to the Old Testament and Judaism. You also skipped a critical reference to Judaism as well as to inscriptions in ancient Damaa’t, Saba, Ge’ez, and Greek languages in connection to your first citation (see pp. 44-45).

According the recent archeological disscoveries, up until 330 AD when Christianity was introduced by the Greeko-Romans, ancient Ethiopia, its people, government and religion was Awamawi. (p45)

In that year, 330 AD, two Syrian exiles Fremnatos and Adosyos introduced Christianity into the Awamawi palace. Before that there is no evidence of ORIT (old testament) to have ever been worshiped in Ethiopia.(33)

Basically, the sources of the complications and problems of Ethiopian history are the two books writen by the Alexanderian Coptic church, namely Fitha Negest and Kibre Negest. (p121)

Kibre negest was writen by the Egyptian church officials and translated into Geez around the 14th century during Atse Amde Tsion reign.

The Bible was for the first time translated into Geez in the city of Axum by the Greeko-Romans around 470-550AD.

(See Dr. Lappiso Delebo’s book: YeEthiopiawinet Tarikawi Meseretoch ena Mesariawoch. Translations are mine)

Ones more, the importance of something has very little to do with the thing and almost everything to do with how important you feel it is. Notice this is a neutral statement. You get from it what you read into it.

ALL things that exist, exist in the moment of now. While the concept of an Ark exists in the moment of now, the Ark may not.

In life, things do not exist in either the past or future; they can only exist in the moment of now.

The experience of the Ark isn’t in what we think, it’s in what we feel. And this feeling creates and shapes the Ethiopian society.

And that’s what exists in the moment of now.

The Priest’s “We don’t have to prove it to anyone. [If] you want to believe, it’s your privilege. If you don’t want to believe, it’s your own privilege again.” is a sad cop-out. If a foreign power decided to walk right in there and take whatever they find, there’d better be a good reason for them not to. His response to Gates is not going to persuade any rational person to respect the place as sacred because it contains the Ark; for rational people the burden of proof would fall on the person making this claim to prove the Ark is there.

Not only is the Makeda legend full of enough inconsistencies to make belief in it tantamount to believing in fairies; but people should also stop and take some time to think about this logically. If Israel honestly believed Ethiopia had the Ark they’d either have taken it already, threatened to take it, or at least have demanded its immediate return (similar to how Ethiopians desired that Italy return the Obelisk taken from Axum). None of these things have happened.

I do not say that people should not have faith, just that it be probabilistic faith based on the evidence and facts at hand. The question should be “what is most likely true based on the evidence”, and a person can have faith in that conclusion. Blind faith is not a virtue to be proud of, especially if it is held “in spite” of evidence to the contrary.

Thank You!

It seems that we are somewhat moving away from Axum, a city founded in the AD, while discussing a legend belonging to the BC. Dr. Pankhurst, in his conversation with Graham Hancock in the book The Sign And The Seal has stated that the Ark story do not fit chronologically.

As to the Ethiopian Source, Kebre Negest, Dr. Lappiso has concluded that It was a 12th. Century creation of Ethiopian and Egyptian religious leaders who wanted to overthrow the Zagwe Dainasty in order to form a Davidic MoA Anbesa kingdom in Ethiopia.

Why is our approach to faith “different”?

Faith, uh? What is so special about faith?

First of all Saba is a name of a place and not a name of a person. The Bible makes a specific reference to Queen of Sheba or Saba. Saba as a place name is found both in northern Ethiopia and the Arabian Peninsula. Both Ethiopian and Hebrew sources narrate the meeting of the Queen of Sheba with King Solomon. The Ethiopian source, such as Kebre Negest, makes a reference to Ibne Hakim or Ibne Melek, the son of the wise or the son of the king and later corrupted into Menelik. As you pointed out, the story of the Queen of Sheba and King Solomon is rooted in oral tradition, Jewish folklore and Ethiopian mythology.

KIng Solomon’s rule, according to Richard Pankhurst (THE ETHIOPIANS, p. xiii), is cerca 974-932 BCE (Before the Common Era) and the historic kingdom of Da’amat and Saba, according to Stuart Munro-Hay (ETHIOPIA UNVEILED: INTERACTION BETWEEN TWO WORLDS, p.246), is cerca 800 BCE. Both dates are estimates and yet they are not 800 years apart. As I indicated in my previous comments, we have not carried out a great deal of archaeological research in Ethiopia nor do we have sufficient ‘historical evidence’ to discredit mythologies and oral traditions.

Again our approach to faith is different as compared to historical investigation. The Ark of the Covenant or what Christian Ethiopians call tabotena tsilat are sacred and central symbols to deeply rooted faith. And faith, I like to argue, is important to life and living.

Thanks. And I pray you will take the journey seriously and taste that the Lord is good~!

No, in fact it is to the contrary. Some people have a hard time accepting the fact that the Ark indeed may actually be in Ethiopia. All physical and circumstantial evidence suggest that it is more likely that the Ark is in Ethiopia than not. Please don’t confuse enlightenment with degrading or denying the rock of the faith of millions of Ethiopians, who have maintained, guarded and protected their religion for thousands of years. “We don’t have to prove it to anyone. [If] you want to believe, it’s your privilege. If you don’t want to believe, it’s your own privilege again.”

The importance of something has very little to do with the thing and almost everything to do with how important you feel it is.

{I do not believe that the “Ark” exits anywhere!} Many people tried to stress this fact but it seems Ethiopians do not want to face it. Pankhurst and other Ethiopian historians including Tamrat Taddesse and Lappiso Delebo {have written} about the “legendary” nature of this “Ark” story. {However} the time line of King Solomon and Queen Sheba do not coincide. There is about 800 years between the two. Besides, there was no Menelik I in our history, neither was Sheba an Ethiopian queen. Dr. Lappiso in his book “YeEthiopiawian Maninet...” has raised the issue broadly. By the way, {how is it possible} that God gave someone the {Ark} some thousands years ago? I mean if we the enlightened Ethiopians keep the tradition/history without raising questions, how {can we expect} the younger generation to be better than us? By the way, {there is also} no historical fact/data that Ethiopia ever accepted the Old Testament as religious text before New testament. Look at the Axum obelisk and its carvings.

Ethiopia is the New Jerusalem as it is the oldest Jerusalem. Why would the Ark go back?

Thank you
Jesus Horowitz

I also would like to express my appreciation for this and your several other fine articles published on Tadias Magazine. They are very educational and intellectually stimulating. It is also great that you take your time to interact with your readers. It’s like attending a free lecture by a Cornell Professor without having to do the assignments:-) I love the internet. Proliferation of education is a good thing!

May the Tabot keep Ethiopia and the world safe for ever. Amen.

Tatari Temari
(Undergrad at a college much smaller in size than its name)

Brx

Most explanations are a trick to escape from experiencing. Ultimately, we create our world by experiencing it. However we say it is how it’s going to be.

I appreciate your thought provoking and informative comments and questions regarding one of Ethiopia’s religious traditions: The Ark of the Covenant. If I may start with Meron, it is important to remember that Ethiopians have established a tradition of replicating tabotat. The practice makes it absolutely difficult to lose the Ark again. Furthermore, The Ark is protected by millions of believers at all times.

I find Mel’s question a bit too general. I think human dvelopment is wholistic, including both physical and spiritual growth. I do not see faith as a stumbling block to development. The absence of development or underdevelopment is a consequence of power abuse or the perpetuation of a system that piles privilege and resources to a few at the expenses of the majority. I concede that power abuse could have secular or religious cover.

I want to remind Abebe that the historical narrative of the ancient Ethiopian past is based on less than 3% archaeological diggings. We need to carry out more field research to soundly document the chronology of Ethiopia’s long history. I just want you to take into consideration the pre_Aksumite civilizations, such as Damot and Yeha that correspond to the time period of King Solomon.

Ayele

Melkam ametbal everyone!!!

The second question concerns the legend of King Salomon and the Queen of Sheba. If we believe what historians are telling us, by around 300 BC Axum was a small village and became a one of the world’s big powers only around the the third to the seventh century. If King Solomon was around 1000BC, how can we explain the difference of 700 years between the inception of Axum and the arrival of Menelik I and his escorts?

JAH BLESS!!

I enjoyed your article. It is evident that you are free from the shackles of dogma and the unsubstantiated claims of religion by the objective manner in which you examine the need for faith rather than a literalist approach to the subject.

My question is this, given the state of Africa— the abject poverty, the violence, lack of education, sky rocketing population and AIDS pandemic, and the fact that nearly all us adheres to some sort of religion, would we benefit from a more secular based cultural shift? To elaborate, if our beliefs inform our actions, and most us cling to an ancient set of beliefs and customs, how are we to focus on reality and rally our energies to push us into an enlightened and progressive future?

I especially liked the inclusion of a reference to Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Junior!

Thank you for highlighting the importance of the Ark of the Covenant (tabot) and its centrality in our spiritual life. Of course, for researchers like Professor Henry Louis Gates, most of the story is based on legend and circumstantial evidence and there is not a single scientific evidence to prove or disprove the existence of the Ark at all, let alone its existence in Ethiopia. My questions to the Harvard professor is that: Why do we have to prove our faith scientifically? Gates wants to be the man who discovered the Ark of the Covenant (that will surely bring bigger news coverage than sharing beer with the President and a policeman at the White House). Is there any scientific proof , for example, to the existence of the Christian God that the Baptist, Catholics, Mormons, Lutherans, or any other religions worship?

The most fascinating part for me is the fact that Ethiopians have always claimed to have the Ark ever since it was reported lost from Jerusalem.

Kiru,
Boston