Talk:Ark of the Covenant/Archive 1

message: Why are writings from the Quran are included?
The Ark is Jewish!
Islam has nothing to do with it. I'll keep deleting it.
: So was Jesus old boy, but if you deleted him I'm sure a couple of christians might get a bit miffed, or if you have issues because it is Jewish should we therefore not delete the references about the bible as well? In all seriousness, the ownership of the Ark isn't in question, but this section shows that it was referenced in other religeous texts. Please don't forget this article also mentions it was in Indiana Jones and in a computer game, and I for one believe the Quran references are far more valid. Please give a valid reason for removing this part of the article or people like myself will keep putting it back, discourse is by far an away the best option, and removes the need for this continual petty reverting. Regards. Khukri  (talk . contribs) 18:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Truth is truth indeed. And the truth is that whether you like it or not, the Ark is relevant to Islam. It doesn't matter whether or not the Quran is correct regarding the Ark. It's not about "appeasing" anyone. --RLent 20:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it.  If the Ark is mentioned in the Quran, why can this fact not be mentioned on Wikipedia?  It was validly sourced to the verse in the Quran where it is mentioned, and I think it should be restored to the article, along with the note that some Muslims, notwithstanding the Quran quote, do not recognise it. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 15:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Using inflammatory terms like appeasement, and asking about someone's religious beliefs will not further your argument with me. I will ask you one question, is the Ark mentioned or recognised in the Qur'an? It's in the article now, and will remain there until this is discussed and we have consensus, one way or the other. Let's keep it civil and trust me it will  get resolved. Khukri  (talk . contribs) 15:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: "While most Western historians are skeptical of this claim, there is evidence that the treasury houses a sacred relic of the Falasha Jews and predates the Christian era." - any source for this claim? Jayjg (talk) 16:22, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The idea of an ancient group of Ethiopian Jews has been relegated to scholarly sidelines.  The group seems to date from the 14th century.  In fact, the use of Falasha appears to be suspect.  While there are numerous sources of the Jewish Felasha Queen Gudit, it's pretty clear that while she was not Christian, it's not at all certain she was Jewish and she was not part of a broader group of Felasha.  See Beta Israel for DNA and scholarly consensus.  I'll get rid of the reference in the article.  - BanyanTree 04:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  there is evidence that the treasury houses a sacred relic of the [[Falasha]] Jews and predates the Christian era. 

message: To my way of thinking, this whole article needs to be rewritten and considerably shortened. Many things are stated as fact when clearly they are fiction. The whole section on capacitors looks like twaddle of a high order. If one has faith, then one does not need to rely on primitive batteries to produce a credible and fatal blast smiting thousands at once. Pete 22:25, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tripe

message: It is stated that Tesla made his assertions in the [[1900s], but do we mean between 1900 and 1909 or do we mean the 20th century? Either is possible given Tesla's time-period, but I'm guessing it should be 20th century.
:: It was a 1915 article. So the 20th century would be correct. JDR 14:50, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  1900s 

message: I would have to agree; if any of it is to remain, it should at least be sourced. Jayjg (talk) 5 July 2005 19:40 (UTC)
: The parts are referenced. TLC is a reputable source. And Nikola Tesla's note of the topic is referenced. JDR 18:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electrical operation? 

message: When did this article decide to describe the ark as a moveable sanctuary?  The tabernacle was the moveable sanctuary, and the ark was located within it.  Or is there some Jewish perspective I am missing? Jdavidb 20:15, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moveable sanctuary 

message: Reddi has reverted this article 4 times today (in reverse order...):
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ark_of_the_Covenant&diff=22719015&oldid=22718580
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ark_of_the_Covenant&diff=22715383&oldid=22714188
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ark_of_the_Covenant&diff=22712120&oldid=22711038
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ark_of_the_Covenant&diff=22704951&oldid=22701870
All of these are 6th Sept, since 17:16. Note that the first on that list (last in time) is disguised with a few wiki-links to hide the reversion, and is not marked as the reversion it is.
: In what looks to me like a fit of pique, Reddi has added a dispute tag to the page. I've removed it, as (as even Reddi admits) the factual accuracy of the page is *not* in dispute at all. Reddis complaint is about the absence of his pet stuff, not the accuracy of what remains. William M. Connolley 20:58:28, 2005-09-06 (UTC).
:: It's not a "sudden outburst of anger". If there was a better / more descriptive tag, I'd put it in. But sadly there isn't. The factual accuracy of the page is in dispute ... omission is is one thing that make something inaccurate (this is different than purposeful omission). The artiocle doesn't even state that it is leaving out information . The article is inaccurate because of POVs and ignoring cited references. JDR
Who said anger? This is too feeble and pathetic for anger. Its pique. You are abusing the dispute tag, because you can't get your way with the text you want. This is nothing to do with factual accuracy, and all about you trying to bludgeon your fairy stories into the article. William M. Connolley 22:10:31, 2005-09-06 (UTC).
: Your pseudoskeptical ignorance shows WMC. If you want to use words, find out what they mean. 
:: Because the Ark's operations is referenced in several books and writings of people that understand enegry ... noted by engineers and researchers ... the article is inaccurate, because of the lack of information. JDR 12:03, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reddi's 3RR vio 

message: ===Modern speculation of operation===
Some have inquired on a scientific explianation of the Ark's operation.TLC : "The Lost Ark" (Investigation of the Ark's description) [Archived copy, Wayback machine] Burger, David, "Electrical & Electronic & Telecommunications Milestones in Australia". New South Wales. December, 2004. (Senior Member of the IEEE; k3hz@ieee.org) Sassoon, George,  "The ancient of days: deity or manna-machine?". Electronic textbooks have discussed the concept in discussions of capacitors through time. Some have suggested that it could be a microwave cavity resonator."An electrical engineering question". Soc.history.ancient, Usenet. Historical inquiry concerning the Ark of the Covenant indicates that it operated as an electrical circuit have been held by some, including, in the 1900s, electrician Nikola Tesla. The design of the ark have characteristics to generate an electric charge, and thus could facilitate an electric discharge between the cherubs. Exodus 28 also describe priests garments which seem similar to static control smocks. Courson, Chris, "Nikola Tesla".  Chrisbot.com. "Exodus 28". Skeptic's Annotated Bible.
The biblical accounts of individuals sudden deaths from touching the Ark could correspond to death by a lethal high voltage charge. In Leviticus 10, Nadab and Abihu perform unprescribed procedures with the Ark which results in a "fire from the Lord," which "devoured" Aaron's sons. "Leviticus 10:1". Skeptic's Annotated Bible. Some biblical accounts could correspond with exposure to some extremely high frequency electromagnetic fields (such as ultraviolet light or x-rays). "Fiery jets" occasionally burned and destroyed close objects. Louis Ginzberg’s "Legends of the Jews" has ancient oral traditions referring to "sparks" from the cherubim.
: Two sparks issued from the Cherubim that shaded the Ark, and these killed all the serpents and scorpions that crossed the path of the Israelites, and furthermore burned all thorns that threatened to injure the wanderers on their march through the desert.Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews. The Ark and the Cherubim.
::: "In Leviticus 10, Nadab and Abihu perform unprescribed procedures with the Ark which results in a "fire from the Lord," which "devoured" Aaron's sons." - there is actually no mentioning of the arc in that passage (and I know of no connection between the arc and this). this is totally irrelevant and unrelated.
Jewish legend also has occasional records of a "cloud" between the cherubim. The Ark was considered dangerous at these times and Moses would not approach it.Ginzberg, Louis, "The Legends of the Jews". 	 
Tesla, in the article "The fairy tale of electricity" (published September 9, 1915), stated in regards to the Ark:	
: The records, though scanty, are of a nature to fill us with conviction that a few initiated, at least, had a deeper knowledge of amber phenomena. To mention one, Moses was undoubtedly a practical and skillful electrician far in advance of his time. The Bible describes precisely, and minutely, arrangements constituting a machine in which electricity was generated by friction of air against silk curtains, and stored in a box constructed like a condenser. It is very plausible to assume that the sons of Aaron were killed by a high-tension discharge, and that the vestal fires of the Romans were electrical. Tesla, Nikola, "The Fairy Tale of Electricity". September 9, 1915. 	 
	 
Of the archaeological discoveries of the last century (which include the Baghdad Battery among others), there is an indication that a working knowledge of energy devices might have been present in ancient Middle Eastern cultures. Moses' received specialized training in the house of Pharaoh (Exodus 2:10).		 
The more recent theory concerning the Ark's operation, that the Ark of the Covenant was a extraterrestrial communications box, by Author Erich von Däniken is considered considered unlikely by mainstream archaeology. Von Däniken speculation edges toward a particular point of view. In the film "Chariots of the Gods", von Däniken showed an Ark replica made by Minnesota college students which produced a electrical charge, though.
: Could it be that this ark contained a very powerful Radioactive source. This would explain the faces of the saints going white and glowy. There could be exposed to a radioactive source. [unsigned: by 81.70.252.138]
:: Don't you think it is more likely to have been exposure to the Space Aliens kept inside that made the Saints go white? William M. Connolley 08:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED

message: Some have inquired on a scientific explianation of the Ark's operation.TLC : "The Lost Ark" (Investigation of the Ark's description) [Archived copy, Wayback machine] Burger, David, "Electrical & Electronic & Telecommunications Milestones in Australia". New South Wales. December, 2004. (Senior Member of the IEEE; k3hz@ieee.org) Sassoon, George,  "The ancient of days: deity or manna-machine?". Electronic textbooks have discussed the concept in discussions of capacitors through time. Some have suggested that it could be a microwave cavity resonator."An electrical engineering question". Soc.history.ancient, Usenet. Historical inquiry concerning the Ark of the Covenant indicates that it operated as an electrical circuit have been held by some, including, in the 1900s, electrician Nikola Tesla. The design of the ark have characteristics to generate an electric charge, and thus could facilitate an electric discharge between the cherubs. Exodus 28 also describe priests garments which seem similar to static control smocks. Courson, Chris, "Nikola Tesla".  Chrisbot.com. "Exodus 28". Skeptic's Annotated Bible.
The biblical accounts of individuals sudden deaths from touching the Ark could correspond to death by a lethal high voltage charge. In Leviticus 10, Nadab and Abihu perform unprescribed procedures with the Ark which results in a "fire from the Lord," which "devoured" Aaron's sons. "Leviticus 10:1". Skeptic's Annotated Bible. Some biblical accounts could correspond with exposure to some extremely high frequency electromagnetic fields (such as ultraviolet light or x-rays). "Fiery jets" occasionally burned and destroyed close objects. Louis Ginzberg’s "Legends of the Jews" has ancient oral traditions referring to "sparks" from the cherubim.
: Two sparks issued from the Cherubim that shaded the Ark, and these killed all the serpents and scorpions that crossed the path of the Israelites, and furthermore burned all thorns that threatened to injure the wanderers on their march through the desert.Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews. The Ark and the Cherubim.
::: "In Leviticus 10, Nadab and Abihu perform unprescribed procedures with the Ark which results in a "fire from the Lord," which "devoured" Aaron's sons." - there is actually no mentioning of the arc in that passage (and I know of no connection between the arc and this). this is totally irrelevant and unrelated.
Jewish legend also has occasional records of a "cloud" between the cherubim. The Ark was considered dangerous at these times and Moses would not approach it.Ginzberg, Louis, "The Legends of the Jews". 	 
Tesla, in the article "The fairy tale of electricity" (published September 9, 1915), stated in regards to the Ark:	
: The records, though scanty, are of a nature to fill us with conviction that a few initiated, at least, had a deeper knowledge of amber phenomena. To mention one, Moses was undoubtedly a practical and skillful electrician far in advance of his time. The Bible describes precisely, and minutely, arrangements constituting a machine in which electricity was generated by friction of air against silk curtains, and stored in a box constructed like a condenser. It is very plausible to assume that the sons of Aaron were killed by a high-tension discharge, and that the vestal fires of the Romans were electrical. Tesla, Nikola, "The Fairy Tale of Electricity". September 9, 1915. 	 
	 
Of the archaeological discoveries of the last century (which include the Baghdad Battery among others), there is an indication that a working knowledge of energy devices might have been present in ancient Middle Eastern cultures. Moses' received specialized training in the house of Pharaoh (Exodus 2:10).		 
The more recent theory concerning the Ark's operation, that the Ark of the Covenant was a extraterrestrial communications box, by Author Erich von Däniken is considered considered unlikely by mainstream archaeology. Von Däniken speculation edges toward a particular point of view. In the film "Chariots of the Gods", von Däniken showed an Ark replica made by Minnesota college students which produced a electrical charge, though.
: Could it be that this ark contained a very powerful Radioactive source. This would explain the faces of the saints going white and glowy. There could be exposed to a radioactive source. [unsigned: by 81.70.252.138]
:: Don't you think it is more likely to have been exposure to the Space Aliens kept inside that made the Saints go white? William M. Connolley 08:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern speculation of operation

message: This information should be included in the article. JDR 12:03, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the correct logical way to go about something is to invent a theory, and then prove it. not to invent a theory, assume its correct and use it as proven scientific fact. when you can't prove a theory to be correct then it is meaningless. it carries no weight. therefore, since the previous facts have not been proven false, the assumption is they are correct, since at the time they were proven as true. if you want to prove them wrong you must disprove the evidence these facts are based on, which is the testimony of an entire nation who saw miracles that could not be natural, not even with todays technology. prove there testimony is false, that all those events that happened over a period of decades had in fact not taken place, and you disprove the bible. any thing less than that cannot change the bibles status as proven fact. these theories about the possibility of the arc being an electric device are based on the assumption the bible is false, therefore do not belong in an encyclopedia which dealse with fact. however, these theories are about electrical features the arc may have had and as such are worthy theories. theories that try to explain how things happened based on the assumption that proven fact is false, don't belong. 20:10, 17 January 2007
* The Badillo citation talks about an analysis of the Ark  ... but you misconstrue why it was included ... it was not about the ark being a electrical device .... only that the ark had been investigated (for stated bibilical or other purposes). 
Wikipedia should state the facts from various sources to express the known claims that the Ark may have been a electrical device. Doing so is not original research, OTHERS have had the idea before aand investigated the possiblities, and even a television show elaborated on it.  This is what is called "source-based research," and is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia.. This is not "original Bible interpretation" ... it is a "sourced interpertation". 
16:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: END

message: I've removed this paragraph from the end of the article:
:In the video game Halo 2 the "Ark" is a secondary control system for the ringworlds (the "Halos") that are capable of killing all life in the galaxy. The Ark is presumably on Earth, near the city of Mombasa. This Ark could be a reference to Noah's Ark, since activating it would destroy all life much like the Great Flood; interestingly, the purpose of the Halos is to stop the spread of a scourge that turns sentient beings into the "Flood", a horde of ravenous, zombie-like creatures.
As you can see, it's not actually about the Ark of the Covenant.  I'm pasting it here in case someone finds it salvagable. Dan 20:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halo 

message: I tidied her bit up, but is it really relevant that a 'supposed' psychic thinks it underneath the sphinx, with absolutely no evidence what so ever apart from her 'spirit guide'. I'm up for deleting it, as I can't find any other sources, but I didn't look too hard. Khukri  (talk . contribs) 11:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Browne