Did an invading army destroy the most holy relic in history
out of pure fear?

The Ark of the Covenant was the most sacred, holy object in ancient Israel.  It represented the direct presence of Yahweh, God Almighty, to the Israelites.  Indeed, the "light of God" shone directly between the two gold Cherubs facing one another on the top of the Ark, assurance of the divine presence. 

 

The Ark was so holy and sacred that anyone who looked upon it or touched it would immediately die save for one person:  the High Priest of Israel, who saw the Ark once a year.  This was fictionally portrayed in the first Indiana Jones movie:  Raiders of the Lost Ark. But more importantly, when the Ark was captured by the Philistines (who wisely kept it covered and never touched it-- to our knowledge)... its presence brought a curse upon them, as they did not treat it with the holy reverence God's command required.

 

WAS IT REAL?

Whether individuals believe the Ark was real or not equates to whether they believe in the Bible, in God, in creation.  The beliefs of humans are diverse. There is evidence not only within the scriptures, but in history that the Ark was real.  Egyptian reliefs and artifacts (such as the tomb of Tutankhamun) frequently depict portable shrines, chest-like boxes mounted on long carrying poles, and guarded by winged divine figures (similar to the cherubim). Throughout the ancient Levant, various cultures worshipped deities whose presence was believed to inhabit an unseen space above an empty, ornate seat or pedestal rather than a physical statue. The Ark functioned architecturally and culturally in a manner entirely consistent with 2nd and 1st millennium BCE regional religious practices.

 

While no definitive archaeological dig has unearthed the Ark itself—and its ultimate fate following the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE remains one of history's enduring mysteries—the Ark fits seamlessly into the material culture, politics, and religious traditions of the ancient Near East.  Whether individuals choose to believe in its existence is a personal choice. The scriptures repeatedly state it existed.  Denial of such could be considered mere personal bias without proof.  In simple terms:  if someone states something did not happen, it falls on them to explain why they are so confident in making such a statement.  "Because I say so," is not gernally considered sufficient reasoning in logical terms.  Agreed, they may make the same statement regarding the Bible itself-- except that a couple of billion people accept the Bible as true and that the Ark existed.

 

Thus for the purpose of this article, I will take it as evidential that the Ark of the Covenant was real, and that it mysteriously disappeared.  And of course as the title of this article suggests, I will offer a logical hypothesis of what happened to it.

 

THE ARK VANISHED

Sometime in history, the Ark of the Covenant vanished.  It is widely agreed this happened prior or during the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian Empire (586 BCE).  There is no record of why / how it vanished.  Mention of it simply disappeared from written record, which makes this one of the "great Biblical mysteries of the ages".  The Ark was never found.

 

There are some theories as to what happened to the Ark  I will discuss them here, why they are unlikely, and provide my own thoughts on this matter.  Let me state ahead of time that this is not a crucial subject to Jewish teachings, nor the Christian doctrine or faith.  The only possible impact I could imagine would be if the Ark were to mysteriously re-appear, thus confirming Biblical accounts-- especially if people started dying if they looked at it or touched it.  But I think this is one concern we need not be bothered with... and am about to explain why.

 

THE LEVITES HID THE ARK THEORY

The only ones allowed to carry the Ark were the Levites or Priests.  They did so while the Ark was covered from sight, and by several men carrying it on two poles run through gold rings attached to the Ark. Thus it has been conjectured that before the Babylonians captured Jerusalem and destroyed the temple, the Levites removed the Ark from the Most Holy and hid it somewhere.  That somewhere is not known.

 

Why I think this unlikely. There are several reasons I believe this to be unlikely:  

1) The Israelites thought Jerusalem was impregnable.  Even the King believed God would not allow Jerusalem to be destroyed.  Right down to the last minute when King Zedekiah fled Jerusalem through a secret passage in the wall... the prophecies of Jeremiah (that Babylon would destroy Jerusalem)  were discarded as ravings of a lunatic.  Jeremiah was put into prison and thrown into a cistern for his prophecies.  So why would the Levites remove the very holy relic they believed (down to the last moment) would be instrumental in miraculously saving them?

 

2) Israel  was steeped in false worship.  Scripture states they had set up false gods in the temple itself, desecrating the temple.   There is good chance then that they considered the Ark of the Covenant as only a figurehead, a fixture to be used in the worship of Yahweh-- among numerous other gods of their time.  The descriptions given in the Bible of their false worship actually depict them turning their backs on God and worshipping the rising of the Sun. 

 

Chances are they simply didn't care enough about the Ark to move it.

 

3) If they did still respect the Ark as the presence of God, it would be inconceivable to them that any place would be more safe than the Most Holy-- especially if any invading Babylonian who looked upon the uncovered Ark or touched it would instantly die.  

 

Basically, they very likely felt the Ark was in the safest place it could possibly be.  There was simply no need to move it.

 

4) Where would they move it to that the Babylonians would not find?  The Babylonians managed to track down and kill King Zedekiah and his sons when they tried to escape Jerusalem under the cover of darkness.   If they could track him down when he was trying his hardest to quietly escape... what of a group of Levites carrying a heavy box on long poles across the countryside?   Or if they hid it somewhere within Jerusalem... where could they possibly have hidden it that has not been uncovered down to this day?

 

As one can reason out, this theory would seem unlikely.   It is far more likely that the Levites would leave the Ark right where it was, trusting in God to keep it safe. 

 

THE BABYLONIANS TOOK IT  

The theory:  when Nebuchadnezzar II and the Babylonian army besieged and destroyed Jerusalem, the Ark was taken as plunder back to Babylon.

 

The Evidence: Biblical books detail the massive haul of temple treasures taken to Babylon. However, the Ark is notably absent from the specific inventory lists of captured sacred vessels in 2 Kings 25 and Ezra 1, leading some scholars to argue it was simply omitted or melted down for its gold.

 

Why I think this unlikely.  If the Babylonians went to all the trouble to detail the inventory of precious items they took from the temple, the #1 item on the list would have been the Ark of the Covenant.  Not only would they have absolutely listed their top treasure as commemoration of conquering a historically impregnable city... they would have put it on display (if possible, without having visitors drop like flies).  So it would seem very unlikely that the Babylonians took the Ark and destroyed it.  That is unless...

 

The Ark was still considered deadly.  There are two conceivable possibilities here, both I consider to have equal weight: 

 

1) The Ark was still deadly, in which case anyone-- Babylonian or otherwise-- who looked upon or touched the Ark died the moment they did so.   The Babylonians were not fools.  They undoubtedly knew of the Ark. They knew of its legendary power.  They were a superstitious people who knew the power of the Israelite God.  They were not going to mess with that Ark.  Likely, they were scared to death of what it represented:  the presence of Almighty God himself... the God who had rescued Israel from Egypt and brought devastation upon so many other nations. It is unlikely they were foolish enough to mess with Israel's most legendary and deadly symbol. Or...

 

2) The Ark was no longer deadly because the Israelites had broken the Covenant of God to the point that he had totally abandoned them.  At such point the sacred significance of the Ark could have no longer existed, for God's presence was no longer there.  It was just a wood box covered with gold.  A piece of furniture.   But no one knew that... so they still weren't going to mess with the Ark of the Covenant.  Not unless they had a death wish.  

 

There are at least half a dozen theories similar to the above, most of them involving the Ark being secretly transported elsewhere.  One of those theories even involves the Queen of Sheeba in the time of Solomon.  However, all of those theories bear the same problems:

 

* Lack of historic evidence

* Lack of reliable record (established, trustworthy documentation)

* Modern day evidence  (if it was hidden, why has it never been found?) 

* Traces of made-up stories rather than actual historic accounts

 

So in short, none of these theories have anything seriously backing them... and they go against the basic logic that the safest place for the Ark to reside was in the Holy of Holies, the Most Holy chamber of the Temple in Jerusalem, protected by God Himself.   This is the strongest historic / psychological reasoning one might consider.  The Israelites simply didn't believe the Temple of Solomon would ever fall, so they didn't move it.  And the Babylonians were seriously afraid of the thing.

 

THE FAR MORE LIKELY FATE OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT

When Babylon invaded Israel, once the walls were breached there was pandemonium.  No time to move the Ark anywhere.  Everyone was simply trying to survive.  Dominant members of the Priesthood, Levites and Nobility were executed, including the King of Jerusalem himself, as well as his direct heirs to the throne.  

 

The Temple of Solomon was totally destroyed by demolition and fire.  This is an interesting aspect, and goes back to what was mentioned earlier about the Babylonians not being total idiots.  They knew the stories.  They knew the power of Yahweh.  So rather than risk instant death if they even so much as looked at the Ark, it would make more sense to have the priests bring the treasures out of the temple (if they even bothered)... set the interior of the temple on fire (which they did according to historic records) and then tear it down stone by stone.  The temple was covered with gold, so they would have definitely wanted that.  The temple implements were made of gold and red copper (as valuable as gold).  So they would have taken all of that-- thus the extensive and detailed temple inventory record. 

 

After that, the smart thing to do would be to burn the temple to the ground,  eliminating the power of the Israelites, and then demolishing the structure.   The inside of the temple was lined with resinous, flammable cedar-- to which they could have added other timbers.   The resultant heat would have been far more than enough to melt the gold of the Ark and burn the wood that formed its primary structure.  

 

To put it simply: the most likely outcome of the Ark of the Covenant was that it was burned to ash and molten gold slag by the Babylonians... without their ever entering the temple building itself.  This would have by far been the easiest and safest course for that invading army.  

WOULDN'T GOD HAVE STOPPED THE DESTRUCTION OF THE ARK OR SAVED IT?

In a word, no. To Yahweh the Ark was a symbol, not an object of worship.  It was his "footstool", his symbolic place of residence in Israel.  Once Israel had by all accounts severed their relationship with God, the Ark would have become meaningless, its symbology irrelevant.  At that point it just became another piece of wood and gold.  If God didn't stop the destruction of Solomon's temple and the Most Holy itself, the Ark would have easily suffered the same fate.  It simply had no meaning any longer; the Israelites had broken their covenant.  The symbol of God's favor had ceased being a symbol.

 

 

Following the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, physical location of the Ark of the Covenant was never again mentioned either in scripture or reliable secular documentation.

 

-- Pathfinder