Posted on 01/05/2014 3:41:43 PM PST by Jandy on Genesis
Alice C. Linsley
There is a beautiful psalm of David concerning the Ark's removal to Zion. Not many are aware that the Ark rested in David's royal city of Bethlehem. Psalm 132:1-7 makes this clear.
O Lord, remember in David's favor his extreme self-denial, how he swore to the Lord, vowed to the Mighty One of Jacob, 'I will not enter my house, nor will I mount my bed, I will not give sleep to my eyes, or slumber to my eyelids until I find a place for the Lord, an abode [mishkanot- footstool] for the Mighty One of Jacob.' We heard it was in Ephrath [Ephratha - Bethlehem] we came upon it in the region of Jaar. (Hebrew Study Bible)
The parallelism of "Ephrath" and the "region of Jaar" require that we investigate further. Jaar is spelled Jair in the New Jerusalem Bible (p. 424) and Jaare-oregim in the Hebrew Study Bible (p. 660). The latter means "Jaare the weaver" and II Samuel 21:19 states that Jaare was from Bethlehem. So it appears that the Ark was guarded by the priests of Bethlehem until David was able to have it moved to "the city of David," a 12-acre ridge south of the Temple Mount (II Sam. 5:9). This area was inhabited continuously for 2000 years before David.
In place of the "region of Jaar" the King James Version has "we found it in the fields of the wood" and the New Jerusalem Bible has "Forest-Fields" instead of "fields of the wood." Both versions fail to trace Jaar's hometown in Scripture and miss this important clue concerning the Ark's resting place in Bethlehem.
The Bethlehem of David and Jesus is in Galilee, not on the West Bank. (See "Related readings" at end of original article for links.)
it’s dudette.
You should read xone’s response to me....the complete opposite of yours. He ends it with “Catholic, right?”
I saw it last night before I posted. I like to tweak the Creationists on Noah's Ark myself for fun as you did.
But I decided not to go that route because that was not the Ark that this post was about,
this post was about the Ark of the Covenant that Moses kept the 10 commandments in, that supposedly disappeared when the Babylonians destroyed the First Temple in Jerusalem a few hundred years BC.
Old Testament (Torah) era Bible history used to be one of my reading hobbies.
I did, you never replied but saw on another thread that you were indeed a Catholic. Helps to explain why Catholics have little use for the 'book they penned', since it all just stories that teach a good lesson. Just like Cat in the Hat.
Which is how people who read the Bible as a nice collection of stories end. It means whatever you want it to mean. It trivializes the Word of God.
I am not the avid Bible reader that PROTESTANTS are. We have the Sacraments. Receiving, almost daily, I might add, the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God, I have found that the daily readings at Mass are sufficient for all the Bible readings.
ALL the Bible is covered (I was told) in a cycle of THREE years. So, I have heard the entire Bible MANY times since I am old. I started going to daily Mass, believe it or not, while my husband and I lived (for five years, starting in 1980) in Saudi Arabia.
ARAMCO provided "special teachers" for us Christians: Catholics (priest), Protestants (one minister for all the denominations) and a vicar for the few Anglicans. So, I picked up right where I left off in the cycle, since Mass is exactly the same wherever a Catholic goes in the world.
It was also in English and the vernacular is in use. So when in Rome, the Mass is in Italian.
So, it is NOT that we have "little use" for the Bible, we HEAR the entire Bible every three years so have no need to read it.
Protestants have, I understand, no daily service where the Bible is read and so, for God's word, they must read the Bible on their own.
We worship Sundays, hear God's Word and receive the sacrament of Holy Communion. Reading the Bible has its own advantage.
I doubt the three-year lectionary covers the whole Bible, but in any case, if it isn't considered inerrant but a series of moral stories, then that isn't the right understanding of God's Word. When the Lord quotes His Word, it is wise to pay attention to the reference.
We have the Sacraments.
Yes, one of which is Baptism.
From: http://www.catholic.sk/main.php?page=183-en-Rite_of_Baptism
Celebrant: Father, you give us grace through sacramental signs, which tells us the wonders of your unseen power.
In Baptism we use your gift of water, which you have made a rich symbol of the grace you give us in this sacrament. At the very dawn of creation your Spirit breathed on the waters, making them the wellspring of all holiness. The waters of the great flood you made a sign of the waters of Baptism, that make an end of sin and a new beginning of goodness.
Through the waters of the Red Sea you led Israel out of slavery, to be an image of God's holy people, set free from sin by Baptism. In the waters of the Jordan your Son was baptized by John and anointed with the Spirit. Your Son willed that water and blood should flow from his side as he hung upon the cross. After his resurrection he told his disciples: “Go out and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” Father, look now with love upon your Church, and unseal for her the fountain of Baptism. By the power of the Spirit give to the water of this font the grace of your Son. You created man in your own likeness: cleanse him from sin in a new birth to innocence by water and the Spirit.
The Catholic Church references the Flood (rightly) in the Baptismal sacrament rite. If you don't hold to the flood as a historical event are you not disagreeing with the Catholic Catechism and should not participate in the Eucharist until you go to confession and return to obedience to the Catholic church?
I know a flood happened. I even mentioned it on the thread somewhere. Cave drawings also show an ENORMOUS flood. I was questioning the Ark's ability to hold pairs of EVERY living creature.
The Church does NOT mandate belief in that Ark. It's not in any catechism. There ARE mandates of belief: Mary's immaculate conception of God's Son, Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, for one.
The Church is more interested in our behavior according to God's plan...not whether Noah could fit the elephants into the Ark or not. We are to love God and love each other. It's a SIMPLE plan God has for us....not always an EASY one to follow, but a simple one.
according to God's plan...not whether Noah could fit the elephants into the Ark or not. We are to love God and love each other. It's a SIMPLE plan God has for us
Well one must know than because some other entity informed. It is in the Bible yes, but it could just be a good story that teaches a nice lesson. Discounting, picking and choosing what parts of the Bible are true is interesting. "Take eat", another interesting story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.