You would first have to know the object even existed to began with before you could even ponder on who or where it might be. Many objects were written about in the bible, but not one of those objects have ever been discovered such as The Ark, The Commandments, The Holy Grail, to name a few. I highly doubt that the so called "ark of the covenant" even existed, or if it did was long stripped of its value.

Originally posted by silent thunder
Another interesting thing (perhaps familiar to you, given your avatar...): The relationship of the demons, pentacles and grimoires associated with Solomon and the building of the Temple. One wonders at the mix of divine (the Temple and Holy of Holies) with the demonic (Solomon allegedly summoning, binding, and compelling demons to build the Temple).

Thats an interesting thought. Just yesterday I learned that the Quran says Solomon commanded "Jinn" to perform several works.

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Well researched thread I think, but I would like to ask: is the historicity of King Solomon proven beyond reasonable doubt or would one have to resort to holy scripture for proof?

King Solomon is only mentioned in ancient scripture. However, because more then one source mentions Solomon, his existence is more likely than mythical. But even if he were only mythical, that myth has had very real life consequences throughout history!

Originally posted by WalterRatlos
[i I can't remember any archaeologist to have announced

Its almost impossible to perform excavations in the entire area..

To add to the confusion perhaps:

There is a Triumphal Arch in Rome (I`ve forgotten the name). On it is a carving showing the triumphant Roman Army returning to Rome after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. The soldiers are carrying a number of "sacred" objects among them what appears to be the Ark.
Later the Vandals sacked Rome and the Ark disappeared, perhaps taken to the Languedoc in France when the Vandals were driven from Rome. The Languedoc is, the heartland of the Knights Templar and the cathars. So it is quite possible that they came into possession of the Ark among other treasures.
Later, when the Templars were forced to flee France by King Philip, their fleet sailed away apparently taking their treasure with them. Where they went to nobody knows for certain but some Templars do pop up in Scottish history later. It is of course from Scotland that you get the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry which is so prevalent in the USA so there is a suspicion that some of the Templars may have sailed to America before Columbus and perhaps taked their treasure with them.
For further intrigueing reading you might want to Google the word "Amerika".
There is also the matter of Rosslyn Chapel, near Edinburgh.
While we are heere and there are many Americans present on this thread: Have you ever wondered why America is called that? The "official" story is that the continent was named after Amerigo Vespucci, an Italian explorer/mapmaker. But don`t you think it strange that someone decided to call what he had discovered by his first name rather than his last name? I mean no other Country or area has been called after someones`s first name, has it? You have Pennsylvania called after William Penn - he didn`t call it Williamsylvania, did he? Pittsburg is similar. Washington: No-one suggested they call it "George" now did they? I can`t see anyone saying I name this Country after me "Fred". Amerigo Vespucci would have said lets call it "Vespucciland" or something surely.
I would love to hear what Americans have to say on the subject.

I`ve just remembered: The Arch in Rome is called the "Arch of Titus" who is the General who destroyed the Temple.

Originally posted by Slipdig1
Have you ever read why moses was called moses?

I know you are not talking to me but I am compelled to write this, did you HONESTLY believe that Moses got his name because he was pulled out of the water when he was a child?

According to the bible (???)

Exodus 2:1-10 (King James Version)

1And there went a man of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.

2And the woman conceived, and bare a son: and when she saw him that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months.

3And when she could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child therein; and she laid it in the flags by the river's brink.

4And his sister stood afar off, to wit what would be done to him.

5And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to wash herself at the river; and her maidens walked along by the river's side; and when she saw the ark among the flags, she sent her maid to fetch it.

6And when she had opened it, she saw the child: and, behold, the babe wept. And she had compassion on him, and said, This is one of the Hebrews' children.

7Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for thee?

8And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother.

9And Pharaoh's daughter said unto her, Take this child away, and nurse it for me, and I will give thee thy wages. And the women took the child, and nursed it.

10And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water.


The bible tells us that the daughter of the Pharaoh himself has salvaged Moses and she even gave it a name and asked one of her slaves (allegedly Moses' own mother) to take care of him.

And you believe all this BS? You really believe that the daughter of a Pharaoh would hold no grudge or anything like that against the Hebrews? Remember they are the "elites" in that society, they treat slaves (Hebrews) like garbage in that time and you honestly believe she would save that baby? Also if she ever did this thing I have no doubt that she would've been executed for this crime that she had done.

There is a reason and i suggest you read that you read this as it will put to rest some of your misconceptions about him being Egyptian. He just had an Egyptian name

So you are telling us that it just happened?

It happens that Science sometimes brings new ways of seeing things, and Egyptology today shows a compelling probability that Moses was, in fact, the masked figure of Akhnaton.

Now maybe you should try and read other books other than the *bible* because it is one of the heavily coded books about history, it is also very one sided and if you honestly believe that then nothing cannot be done to help you.

Ha ha your the one that is funny, your saying that the written down history of the Jewish is wrong and somebody's new age theory about moses is true. LOLOLOL.

Your arguement is backed up by pure conjecture and the bible is backed up by millions of worldwide believers.

You dismiss something that is written down as truth, for something that is proposed as a theory? It isn't written down that moses was this masked man/god. It is supposed by evidence tailored to look that way.

Laugh at me all you want, but why you choose to believe someones misguided theory compared too many years and people of belief confounds me. I have never heard of Moses being anyone else, and maybe your veiw is the uncommon one, did you think of that?

Moses was who was stated in the bible, there is no other evidence he was not.

i just read the stuff on Akhnaton and all that is similiar is his floating and the banishment.

all roads lead to soloman's temple.

but no, seriously, some huge and important part of human history is revolving around that temple (and man's) secrets. Near enough every religion, every secret society and every interest is directed to that area. Something very significant has been hidden from the history books. We need to get under that temple.