Chapter 1359: The Kingdom of Jews

The Bible says that other copper works made by Hulan for the Temple of Solomon include basin shovels and sprinkler bowls. In the Chinese version of the Bible, "spray bowls" were originally translated as "trays", and two steel pillars, each of which was eighteen cubits high and twelve cubits. He stood two pillars in front of the hall porch.

One is on the right, named Yajin; one is on the left, named Boaz, so the work of building a pillar will be completed.

The Masonic legend also contains Yajin and Boaz. According to the "old rituals", these two huge pillars are hollow, and they are loaded with "ancient records" and "valuable works" that record Jewish history. The Masonic claimed that these records contain the history of Shami Stone and its owners. "The fastest update of the full text is hand-printed.

Scholars soon had new questions: What exactly is this "Sandmi Magic Stone"? Is it just a secret of the Freemasonry? Is it mentioned in the Bible?

In fact, the word "Shami" only appeared four times in the Old Testament and the New Testament, three of which are used as place names and one is the name of a man.

Therefore, these things mentioned everywhere are obviously not "Shammy Demon Stone", and the latter is the secret that the Freemasons claim to have been sealed in the copper pillar of Hulan. The final discovery is in the "Talks" and "Jewish Interpretation"

Watch the latest chapter

Moses once commanded the Israelites to "not move iron tools" when building the sanctuary. Therefore, Solomon also ordered craftsmen to use hammers, axes and chisels when they were chiseled and carved the huge rocks on the exterior walls and courtyards of the temple.

He provided the craftsmen with an ancient device that dates back to the time of Moses himself

This device is called "sand secret" that can cut the hardest material. It has neither friction nor heat. "sand secret" is also called "stones that can split rocks" to preserve the sand secret. It cannot be put into an iron container or any metal container, because it will burn such a user device to pieces

It was a pity that Shami also disappeared after the temple was destroyed and the temple was also destroyed.

The Shami Magic Stone makes a mystery more profound. The core of that mystery is the strong fortress on the top of Mount Moria

What is the true nature of the inner temple, and the purpose of building it is very clear, that is, to "place the Ark of the Lord". The temple of Solomon has a huge winged angel statue in the sea of ​​copper columns and a gold inner temple.

This is obviously a carefully built special place. It is the focus of superstition and religious confusion, and it is the center of Jewish belief and cultural life. So how could the Ark of the Covenant disappear from it?

After Solomon's death, Israel suffered several disasters of war and was taken away from the temple. The first disaster occurred in 926 BC, when Solomon's incompetent son Reboam was in power.

According to the records of 1 Kings of the Old Testament, an Egyptian pharaoh named Shiza launched a large-scale invasion on Israel: in the fifth year of King Reboam, Shiza, the Egyptian king, came to capture Jerusalem, seized the treasures in the temple of the Lord and the palace, and took them away.

This account is so simple that it is impossible to do anything, and there is no place that shows that the ark of the covenant is not included in the spoils of Shisa. If Solomon put the ark in the temple only 30 years later, it is reasonable to think that the authors of the Bible will definitely mention this incident and lament the loss of this precious sacred object.

However, they did not mention it at all

This means one of two situations: either the ark of the covenant had been secretly transferred before the arrival of the Egyptian army, perhaps as the legend of the Ethiopians said, the ark of the covenant was transferred when Solomon was in power; or during the Egyptian invasion, the ark of the covenant was always in the inner temple.

Shisa himself left a relief depicting the grand triumphal at the Temple of Kelnek in Egypt, and the content of the relief suggests that he did not take away the relief. The scholars were already very familiar with the relief during their visits to Egypt. Therefore, it is certain that it did not mention the Ark of the Covenant at all, nor did it mention the encirclement and looting of Jerusalem for this.

An authoritative paper unambiguously declared that most of the towns that Shisa looted were located in northern Israel. The Bible says that Shisa's attack target was Jerusalem, but there was no Jerusalem in the inscription on the relief.

Although the inscription on this relief has been severely damaged, it is certain that Jerusalem was not listed as an offensive target because the attack locations listed in the inscription are sorted by geographical location, and there is no Jerusalem in it.

So, what was the situation in the Holy City at that time that explains the Bible emphasized Shisa plundered the treasures in the temple of the Lord and the palace?

The scholars' consensus is that Shizah did surround Jerusalem, but never really entered the holy city; he did "take away the treasures from the temple of the Lord and the palace."

Some authoritative scholars believe that only a part of the Egyptian army passed through Jerusalem at that time, and those treasures were probably handed over by King Reboam, not to mention that even if the Ark of the Covenant was still in Jerusalem in 926 BC, these treasures could not include the Ark of the Covenant.

On the contrary, these spoils are far less sacred. Most of them are offerings offered by the people and royal families to Jehovah. Most of them are very precious gold and silver products. These offerings are not placed in the inner temple of the temple, but in the special treasure houses on the outer part of the temple. In the Old Testament, they have always been called "the treasury of the royal palace."

A famous Bible researcher pointed out that these treasures are sometimes robbed by foreign invaders, and sometimes used up by kings who lack national treasury. Therefore, the treasury of the royal palace is often sometimes full and sometimes empty...

Therefore, Shissa's invasion did not involve the inner temple of the temple of Solomon, and it was completely wrong to link that invasion with the disappearance of the Ark of the Covenant.

This also applies to analyzing the next robbery that Solomon's temple seemed to be subjected to. At that time, Israel, which David and Solomon united, had been divided into two hostile kingdoms.

One is the "Jewish Kingdom" in the south, which includes Jerusalem; the other is the "King of Israel" in the north

In 796 BC, Joash, the monarch of the northern kingdom, fought with the king of the southern Jewish king Amazeh in Bethhemai: the Jews were defeated and fled to their homes in front of the Israelites.

Asch, the king of Israel, captured Amazei, came to Jerusalem, demolished the walls of Jerusalem and took all the gold, silver and weapons in the temple of the Lord and the palace treasury.

Similarly, this time the looting of the temple did not include the inner temple and the Ark of the Covenant. An authoritative who studied this history pointed out that Joash did not even enter the outer sanctuary of the temple, nor did he enter the inner temple, saying that Joash took away the treasure of the "State of the Lord", which is just an omitted statement of "the treasure house of the Lord's house".

It is not difficult to see this from the facts: The Bible always uses "the treasury of the palace" and "the treasure house of the house of the Lord" side by side

The truth about Shisa and Joachim robbing Jerusalem was that these two people never declared that they had taken the ark, and the Bible did not record the reason for this. The reason is now clear: neither of them had entered the inner temple where the ark was hidden, but had only snatched away the precious gold, silver and treasures.

However, as for the next time the most powerful invader who ransacked Jerusalem, the situation was different. He was the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, who had captured the holy city of Jerusalem twice. The first time was in 598 BC, and he obviously entered the temple of Solomon.

The Bible describes this disaster: At that time, the army of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem and surrounded the remains... Nebuchadnezzar came in person

Jewish king Jehoiajin and his mother's servants and eunuchs went out of the city to surrender to the king of Babylon and the king of Babylon took him. At that time, it was the eighth year of King Nebuchadnezzar.

The king of Babylon took away all the treasures in the house of the Lord and the palace, and destroyed all the goldware in the sanctuary of the Lord, King Solomon of Israel.

What does Nebuchadnezzar's spoils include? It is now known that "the treasures in the temple of the Lord and the palace" cannot include any holy objects like the ark of the covenant.

These terms have very specific and clear meanings in the original Hebrew text, referring only to the less important treasures in the treasure houses of kingdoms and temples.

So far, a more important situation is that the Babylonian king "destroyed all the golden instruments in the sanctuary of Jehovah created by King Solomon of Israel" translated by the translators of the Jerusalem Bible as "sanctuary", and the original Hebrew text exactly means "the outer sanctuary"

To determine the exact location of the "peripheral sanctuary", a look at the architectural layout of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church will greatly help it strictly imitates the layout of the triple division of the Temple of Solomon: the peripheral sanctuary in the Ethiopian church is strictly constructed in the "sanctuary".

This means that the "Sanctuary of the Lord" that Nebuchadnezzar robbed was not the inner temple where the ark of the covenant was placed, but the archway of the inner temple was in ancient Hebrew, and the archway of the inner temple was called "de"

i", corresponding to the inner hall in the Ethiopian church, where Tapot is placed

So, if Nebuchadnezzar's first attack on Jerusalem, the Ark of the Covenant was still in the temple of Solomon, it can be concluded that the Babylonian king did not take the Ark of the Covenant, but only "destroyed" and "take away" the "golden instrument" placed by Solomon in the outer sanctuary.

The other treasures snatched by Nebuchadnezzar are quite specific. They are: the pure gold lampstand in front of the inner hall, five on the right and five on the left, and the golden lanterns and wax cutters on it, cups, plates, tweezers, spoons, fire tripods, door puns, and door pivots in the inner hall of the Holy Place, and door pivots in the outer hall.

According to the verification, the

i" should be translated as "inner hall" rather than "inner hall", and "hekal" should be translated as "outer hall" rather than "outer hall"; the translation of the Chinese Bible does not reflect these nuances

Of course, in this translation, “inne

ine" "de

.duyidu.

Read it

The three terms and olyofolies are interchangeable, and they all refer to the same sanctuary, which was the place where Solomon placed the ark of the covenant many centuries ago.

When scholars confirmed this view, they immediately saw a fact: although Nebuchadnezzar did not rob the inner palace, he still took away the door of the inner palace.

Therefore, it is completely possible to conclude from this: the gate of the inner hall was removed, and the king of Babylon or the soldiers who carried out his orders could see the situation in the front hall of the inner hall. This is a very important discovery

Actually this is a key discovery

Back then, those Babylonians looked into the inner temple, and they would surely see the two gold statues of winged angels, Solomon put them on the ark as a guard. They would also surely see the ark itself, and they did not feel guilty when they took down the gold from the artifacts in the outer sanctuary.

Therefore, a question has to be asked: Why didn't they immediately rush into the innate hall and peel away much larger amounts of gold from the walls and statues? Why didn't they take the Ark of the Covenant into trophy?

The Babylonians have always despised the Jews and their religion, so it would be a big mistake to think that they would not rob the inner temple of some kind of fraternity, so as not to harm the feelings of the conquered.

On the contrary, all evidence shows that if Nebuchadnezzar and his soldiers would have no hesitation to loot them without hesitation if they were seen as the ark and the rich prey of the inner walls and the statues of the angels.

At that time, every time the Babylonians occupied a land, they would definitely steal the important idols and holy objects worshipped by the locals and transport them back to the god Maduk, who was worshipped in their temples.

The Ark of the Covenant is such an ideal offering, but the Babylonians did not even move the gold of the Ark of the Covenant, let alone bring it back to their country intact.

In fact, whether it is the Ark of the Covenant or the statue of the winged angel on the golden cover, they are all safe and sound.

The reasonable conclusion is: in 598 BC, when the Babylonians first invaded, the Ark of the Covenant and the gold-wedged angel statue were no longer in the archway of the inner hall.

In fact, the four-wall floor and gold on the cemetery of the inner temple were stripped away before this. This view seems to at least provide a preliminary evidence for the Ethiopians claiming to have the ark of the covenant because it has been confirmed that Asch of Shisahe did not snatch away the ark of the covenant nor other treasures from the inward temple and that only they had obtained certain treasures from the temple before Nebuchadnezzar.

The Babylonians robbed Jerusalem in 598 BC, of ​​course, was not the last time Nebuchadnezzar launched. If there is any evidence that Nebuchadnezzar robbed the ark of the covenant during the second looting of the holy city, the conclusion would be proved to be completely wrong.

After the successful invasion in 598 BC, Nebuchadnezzar built a puppet king named Zedekis on the throne of Jerusalem. However, it turned out that this "puppet" had its own plans. In 589 BC, he began to rebel against his Babylonian master.

Nebuchadnezzar immediately fought back, and he marched into Jerusalem again, finally breaking through the walls. In early July 587 BC, Nebusaland, the chief servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem, burned the temple and palace of the Lord with fire, and burned the houses of Jerusalem.

The entire army of the chief guards demolished the walls around Jerusalem, and the tin pillars of the house of the Lord, and the basin and sea of ​​copper of the house of the Lord, and the copper was transported to Babylon.

He also brought the spatula, wax and scissors, and all the bronze incense burners and sprinkler bowls used in the North. Whether it is gold or silver, the guard also brought them.

Solomon made two steel pillars for the temple of the Lord, a sea of ​​copper, and several basins, all of which were too numerous to be called

All of the above contents are detailed catalogs provided by the Bible, namely, all the items and treasures that Nebuchadnezzar robbed back from Babylon after the second capture of Jerusalem.

There is still no Ark of the Covenant, no Solomon used in the inner wall of the inner temple and the winged angel statue, and the gold outside. This situation is very important.

In fact, there is absolutely nothing mentioned except the items on the list, so it is obvious that the trophy in 587 BC was just copper harvested from the copper column and the basin seats, which were made by Hulan four centuries ago.

The things on this list of trophys and the things stolen from the temple in 598 BC, which the Bible says can confirm each other, which strongly illustrates the authenticity of the list.

That time, although Nebuchadnezzar did not take away the bronzes, he took away the "treasures from the temple of the Lord and the palace" and stripped away all the gold from the sanctuary in the outer sanctuary.

Therefore, after 11 years, only the gold and silver plundered by Nebusaladan would have been a few incense burners and sprinkler bowls. He did not find anything more valuable. The reason is very simple: in 598 BC, all the best things had been stolen back to Babylon.

The ark of the covenant was not included in the two trophys, so the conclusion was that some time before the Babylonians invaded Jerusalem, the ark of the covenant must have been no longer in the temple of Solomon.

According to this idea, another often cited explanation for the disappearance of the Ark of the Covenant is becoming increasingly untenable. The explanation is that when Nebusaladan sets fire to the temple, the Ark of the Covenant will be destroyed by the fire.

If the Ark of the Covenant was indeed sent away before 598 BC, then of course it escaped the catastrophe when the Temple of Solomon was destroyed.

But, based on this chain of reasoning alone, can it be confirmed that the Ark of the covenant has been transferred to Ethiopia?

Of course, it cannot. Through further research, some legends of the Jewish kingdom provide several different statements for the whereabouts of the Ark of the Covenant. Any of them, as long as they are strong enough, can deny the legend of "the Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia"

Therefore, all of these statements are worthy of careful consideration

The first problem to be clarified is: it was only when the second temple was built that the Jewish people realized that the Ark of the Covenant was missing, and realized that the disappearance of the Ark of the Covenant was a huge mystery. They were confused and suddenly found that the artifact was gone (to be continued)
Chapter completed!