Rodney King Dead At 47

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by stilldontknow

Wow of course your gun control laws wont affect those stats. All down to ethnicity. Lets see. Russia black population negliable, Hispanic population non existant, intentional homicide rate over 12 per 100,000. Statistics are fun.

I dislike guns and the National Rifle Association. Nevertheless, countries with stricter gun control laws than the United States, such as Mexico and South Africa, have higher murder rates.

The single greatest predictor of murder rate in a country seems to be the racial composition of that country.

[stilldontknow]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

I dislike guns and the National Rifle Association. Nevertheless, countries with stricter gun control laws than the United States, such as Mexico and South Africa, have higher murder rates.

The single greatest predictor of murder rate in a country seems to be the racial composition of that country.

You are a blinkered deflector of the inconvenient. The UK is every bit as violent as the US. Our thugs and the populace in general just aren't as efficient at killing each other as we dont have easy access to hand guns. Don't believe me then feel free to google the relevant violent crime rates. I know you like a good google.

Another incovenient observation. Why, if the black and particularly Hispanic proportion of your population has risen dramatically in the last 30 years, have, according to your Dept of Justice, violent crime figures dropped by a third over the same period? Simplistic I know but then you seem to like simplistic correlations.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by stilldontknow

You are a blinkered deflector of the inconvenient. The UK is every bit as violent as the US. Our thugs and the populace in general just aren't as efficient at killing each other as we dont have easy access to hand guns. Don't believe me then feel free to google the relevant violent crime rates. I know you like a good google.

Another incovenient observation. Why, if the black and particularly Hispanic proportion of your population has risen dramatically in the last 30 years, have, according to your Dept of Justice, violent crime figures dropped by a third over the same period? Simplistic I know but then you seem to like simplistic correlations.

In the United States the murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants is 4.8 percent.
In the United Kingdom the murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants is 1.23 percent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

I would attribute that both to stricter gun control laws in the UK, and a higher percentage of whites.

Since 1980 the prison population in the Untied States has tripled.

http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/is...punishment.pdf

In addition, since the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 millions of potential violent street criminals have been aborted. The same kind of females who are most likely to have abortions are also most likely to have boy babies who grow up to become violent street criminals.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

I dislike guns and the National Rifle Association. Nevertheless, countries with stricter gun control laws than the United States, such as Mexico and South Africa, have higher murder rates.

The single greatest predictor of murder rate in a country seems to be the racial composition of that country.

The murder rate in several African countries is pretty low (ie. Senegal, Gabon, Cameroon, Ghana, Togo, Mauritania, Niger, Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Botswana, Ethiopia).

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/africa.html

How do you account for that, DL?

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

The murder rate in several African countries is pretty low (ie. Senegal, Gabon, Cameroon, Ghana, Togo, Mauritania, Niger, Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Botswana, Ethiopia).

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/africa.html

How do you account for that, DL?

In the website you posted I could not find murder rate, and I could not find the source of the statistics.

The following website confirms most of what you said:

http://chartsbin.com/view/1454

but it does not attribute its assertions to a source.

The following website attributes its sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

Unfortunately, it does not list the countries you did. It does say that per 100,000 inhabitants:
the murder rate for Southern Africa is 32;
the murder rate for West and Central Africa is 19;
the murder rate for East Africa is 23;
the murder rate for the Caribbean is 21;
and the murder rate for North Africa, which is mainly white is 6.
It attributes this data to the Global Study on Homicide, UNODC.

That website says that the murder rate for the United States per 100,000 inhabitants is 5.0. It attributes this assertion to Crime in the United States 2009. Department of Justice — Federal Bureau of Investigation (USA). 2009-09.

If the countries you list do have low murder rates the reasons require more study than they have been given. It may be that tribes are more intact in these countries, and that this contributes. It may also be that statistics gathering is less accurate.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

In the website you posted I could not find murder rate, and I could not find the source of the statistics.

The following website confirms most of what you said:

http://chartsbin.com/view/1454

but it does not attribute its assertions to a source.

The following website attributes its sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

Unfortunately, it does not list the countries you did. It does say that per 100,000 inhabitants:
the murder rate for Southern Africa is 32;
the murder rate for West and Central Africa is 19;
the murder rate for East Africa is 23;
the murder rate for the Caribbean is 21;
and the murder rate for North Africa, which is mainly white is 6.
It attributes this data to the Global Study on Homicide, UNODC.

That website says that the murder rate for the United States per 100,000 inhabitants is 5.0. It attributes this assertion to Crime in the United States 2009. Department of Justice — Federal Bureau of Investigation (USA). 2009-09.

If the countries you list do have low murder rates the reasons require more study than they have been given. It may be that tribes are more intact in these countries, and that this contributes. It may also be that statistics gathering is less accurate.

I'm confused as to why they are combining stats for western and central africa.

I have been to many countries in western Africa. My father is from West Africa. I know for a fact that the murder rate is low in most West African nations (with the exception of regions engulfed in war).

And if "whiteness" is any indication of a decrease in homicide rates, why does Latin America (especially countries with few blacks like Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador) have the some of highest homicide rates in the world?

[origen01]

.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

I'm confused as to why they are combining stats for western and central africa.

I have been to many countries in western Africa. My father is from West Africa. I know for a fact that the murder rate is low in most West African nations (with the exception of regions engulfed in war).

And if "whiteness" is any indication of a decrease in homicide rates, why does Latin America (especially countries with few blacks like Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador) have the some of highest homicide rates in the world?

Latin American countries with high Indian and mixed race populations have high murder rates. Latin American countries where the population is mainly European, like Chile and Argentina, have low murder rates.

I will reserve my judgement on West Africa. However, until one is a crime victim it is easy to under estimate the crime rate of an area.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

Latin American countries with high Indian and mixed race populations have high murder rates. Latin American countries where the population is mainly European, like Chile and Argentina, have low murder rates.

Now you are being silly. Then why does Peru generally have a lower homicide rate than Mexico? Mexico is pretty European...

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/E...te_Dataset.pdf

[Rixer]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

Latin American countries with high Indian and mixed race populations have high murder rates. Latin American countries where the population is mainly European, like Chile and Argentina, have low murder rates.

It's the drug wars in the involved Latin American countries that boost the murder rates. Higher illegal drug trade, higher murder rate. Race has little to do with it.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Rixer

It's the drug wars in the involved Latin American countries that boost the murder rates. Higher illegal drug trade, higher murder rate. Race has little to do with it.

..right. And I find it very puzzling how he views the high homicide rates in Eastern Europe as nothing more than an aberration concerning his theory on the influence of race on crime.

[69magpie]

Originally Posted by origen01

..right. And I find it very puzzling how he views the high homicide rates in Eastern Europe as nothing more than an aberration concerning his theory on the influence of race on crime.

Because he's a tosser who manipulates the facts he finds to try to prove (unsuccessfully at that) his fucked up ideas on race and crime......and if you can't see through doggo's bullshit by now Origen then I shake my head at you in disbelief.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by 69magpie

Because he's a tosser who manipulates the facts he finds to try to prove (unsuccessfully at that) his fucked up ideas on race and crime......and if you can't see through doggo's bullshit by now Origen then I shake my head at you in disbelief.

Go away and read a book.

[69magpie]

Originally Posted by origen01

Go away and read a book.

What do you suggest...The Bell Curve.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by 69magpie

What do you suggest...The Bell Curve.

nah, that's too hard for you...

[Distant Lover]

A number of factors influence a country's murder rate. Russia has the highest murder rate of any predominantly white country. This can probably be attributed to the social dislocations that followed the fall of the Soviet Union. I think the Russian people and the people of the world would be safer and better off if the Soviet Union still existed, but was evolving in the direction of Social Democracy.

Another factor that influences a country's murder rate is the amount of time that the population has practiced urban civilization. During the paleolithic era, and even the more recent and much briefer neolithic era, all men participated in war, and wars were more lethal than they have been since. The best warriors had the most wives, so the best killers had the most children. Their sons inherited the abilities and inclinations of their fathers.

Lawrence H. Heeley explains this in his book War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage: "Building on much fascinating archeological and historical research and offering an astute comparison of warfare in civilized and prehistoric societies, from modern European states to the Plains Indians of North America, War Before Civilization convincingly demonstrates that prehistoric warfare was in fact more deadly, more frequent, and more ruthless than modern war."
http://www.amazon.com/War-Before-Civ.../dp/0195119126

With the beginning of urban civilization we have a division of labor. The military becomes a specialty. It often becomes difficult for most professional soldiers to have any children at all. Violent criminals are removed from the gene pool by criminal justice systems.

The Mexicans did have the Aztec Empire, and before it the Mayan civilization. The high murder rate in Mexico can in part be blamed on the drug trade. Peru had the Incan Empire. With less of a drug trade, Peru has a murder rate only slightly higher than that of the Untied States.

Civilization began in Egypt. Although there is much poverty in Egypt, the murder rate is lower there than in the United States.

[generation_canal]

don't know who that is.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

A number of factors influence a country's murder rate. Russia has the highest murder rate of any predominantly white country. This can probably be attributed to the social dislocations that followed the fall of the Soviet Union. I think the Russian people and the people of the world would be safer and better off if the Soviet Union still existed, but was evolving in the direction of Social Democracy.

Another factor that influences a country's murder rate is the amount of time that the population has practiced urban civilization. During the paleolithic era, and even the more recent and much briefer neolithic era, all men participated in war, and wars were more lethal than they have been since. The best warriors had the most wives, so the best killers had the most children. Their sons inherited the abilities and inclinations of their fathers.

Lawrence H. Heeley explains this in his book War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage: "Building on much fascinating archeological and historical research and offering an astute comparison of warfare in civilized and prehistoric societies, from modern European states to the Plains Indians of North America, War Before Civilization convincingly demonstrates that prehistoric warfare was in fact more deadly, more frequent, and more ruthless than modern war."
http://www.amazon.com/War-Before-Civ.../dp/0195119126

With the beginning of urban civilization we have a division of labor. The military becomes a specialty. It often becomes difficult for most professional soldiers to have any children at all. Violent criminals are removed from the gene pool by criminal justice systems.

The Mexicans did have the Aztec Empire, and before it the Mayan civilization. The high murder rate in Mexico can in part be blamed on the drug trade. Peru had the Incan Empire. With less of a drug trade, Peru has a murder rate only slightly higher than that of the Untied States.

Civilization began in Egypt. Although there is much poverty in Egypt, the murder rate is lower there than in the United States.

Ever read "Crime and Punishment"? Russia has long struggled with a relatively high homicide rate. Things spiraled out of control with the fall of Soviet Union but that really serves to DISPROVE your point that race is the single greatest predictor of homicide rates. If you have a strong state, the murder rate is likely to be lower.

Your Egypt comment seems a little bizarre. The Egyptians did not build the first civilization--they were third behind the Sumerians and Harappans.

Besides, even before the time of Jesus the Egyptian ethnogroup was on the decline and has since dissipated from the Earth.

Some of the Semitic people of the region are still around, though. Of course the Jews and Arabs are still around. Semitics also include black people like the Ethiopians--who have a relatively low homicide rate. The Nubian people are still around...

[origen01]

Originally Posted by origen01

Besides, even before the time of Jesus the Egyptian ethnogroup was on the decline and has since dissipated from the Earth.

Actually, I was wrong and the Copts are the direct descendants of the ancient Egyptians (though the purity of their lineage is up to debate as pre-Arab Egypt was heavily dominated by Greek influence). Anyway, Copts are a minority in modern day Egypt.

[smcaaphd]

I would really like some bacon-flavoured crisps right now...or no, not crisps, but some kinda bacon, flavoured crispy, crunchy snack *yum*

[origen01]

Originally Posted by smcaaphd

I would really like some bacon-flavoured crisps right now...or no, not crisps, but some kinda bacon, flavoured crispy, crunchy snack *yum*

no swine on Shabbos.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

Ever read "Crime and Punishment"? Russia has long struggled with a relatively high homicide rate. Things spiraled out of control with the fall of Soviet Union but that really serves to DISPROVE your point that race is the single greatest predictor of homicide rates. If you have a strong state, the murder rate is likely to be lower.

Your Egypt comment seems a little bizarre. The Egyptians did not build the first civilization--they were third behind the Sumerians and Harappans.

Besides, even before the time of Jesus the Egyptian ethnogroup was on the decline and has since dissipated from the Earth.

Some of the Semitic people of the region are still around, though. Of course the Jews and Arabs are still around. Semitics also include black people like the Ethiopians--who have a relatively low homicide rate. The Nubian people are still around...

On the internet I have found conflicting estimates of the murder rate in Ethiopia. I would expect it to be low, because the Ethiopians have had a urban civilization for well over two thousand years. Ethiopia is mentioned in Homer's Odyssey, which was composed about 800 BC. Ethiopia is also mentioned in Genesis 2:13, although the reference may be to Nubia, which was also a Negro urban civilization that is over three thousand years old.

I am prejudiced in favor of Ethiopians because I associate them with Ethiopian restaurants that have pretty Ethiopian waitresses. Also the Ethiopians have an ancient denomination of Christianity. They may even have the Ark of the Covenant, but that is a long story.

[CS natureboy]

You know, if Obama had a son, he would look like Rodney King.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

On the internet I have found conflicting estimates of the murder rate in Ethiopia. I would expect it to be low, because the Ethiopians have had a urban civilization for well over two thousand years. Ethiopia is mentioned in Homer's Odyssey, which was composed about 800 BC. Ethiopia is also mentioned in Genesis 2:13, although the reference may be to Nubia, which was also a Negro urban civilization that is over three thousand years old.

I am prejudiced in favor of Ethiopians because I associate them with Ethiopian restaurants that have pretty Ethiopian waitresses. Also the Ethiopians have an ancient denomination of Christianity. They may even have the Ark of the Covenant, but that is a long story.

I was thinking about the Ark of the Covenant yesterday. I firmly believe that it is STILL within the ruins of the First Temple. I think the Babylonians tried to loot it but were smitten when they touched it. They probably thought it was too much trouble to take and they simply left it inside the temple as they burned it to the ground.

Of course, YHWH is a God of "all-consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29 / Exodus 24:17) and the Ark probably remains intact.

If archeologists were allowed to dig underneath the Temple Mount, they would probably find the remains of the First Temple and the remains of the Ark of the Covenant.

Again, this is just my belief.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

I was thinking about the Ark of the Covenant yesterday. I firmly believe that it is STILL within the ruins of the First Temple. I think the Babylonians tried to loot it but were smitten when they touched it. They probably thought it was too much trouble to take and they simply left it inside the temple as they burned it to the ground.

Of course, YHWH is a God of "all-consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29 / Exodus 24:17) and the Ark probably remains intact.

If archeologists were allowed to dig underneath the Temple Mount, they would probably find the remains of the First Temple and the remains of the Ark of the Covenant.

Again, this is just my belief.

There are a number of places the Ark may be. If it is found it should be given to Israel.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

There are a number of places the Ark may be. If it is found it should be given to Israel.

I believe it is underneath the Temple Mount. Whenever it was held captive in antiquity, misfortune befell its captors.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

I believe it is underneath the Temple Mount. Whenever it was held captive in antiquity, misfortune befell its captors.

It would be great if it is under the Temple Mount. If it is in Egypt or Iraq and if it is discovered the Moslems will try to destroy it, because they will think that if the Israelis get it they will destroy the Temple Mount and rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem.

There are Israelis who want to do that anyway. If they get the Ark of the Covenant there will be more support for doing that.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

It would be great if it is under the Temple Mount. If it is in Egypt or Iraq and if it is discovered the Moslems will try to destroy it, because they will think that if the Israelis get it they will destroy the Temple Mount and rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem.

There are Israelis who want to do that anyway. If they get the Ark of the Covenant there will be more support for doing that.

I don't think Muslims want to destroy the Ark. They worship the same God as the Jews. They also revere the Ten Commandments.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

I don't think Muslims want to destroy the Ark. They worship the same God as the Jews. They also revere the Ten Commandments.

Those are good points. I hope you're right.

[richief]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

On the internet I have found conflicting estimates of the murder rate in Ethiopia. I would expect it to be low, because the Ethiopians have had a urban civilization for well over two thousand years. Ethiopia is mentioned in Homer's Odyssey, which was composed about 800 BC. Ethiopia is also mentioned in Genesis 2:13, although the reference may be to Nubia, which was also a Negro urban civilization that is over three thousand years old.

I am prejudiced in favor of Ethiopians because I associate them with Ethiopian restaurants that have pretty Ethiopian waitresses. Also the Ethiopians have an ancient denomination of Christianity. They may even have the Ark of the Covenant, but that is a long story.

You do realise that Achilles was also mentioned in the Odyssey, plus a plethora of fantastic monsters, so I would really not take any of it for truth and never use it as a historic point of reference.

As for the ark of the covenant you can look all you like but it odes not exist outside the ramblings of a few cultists.

I did note that DLs bigotry is flying high again and anyone that is not of European descent is the cause of crime, and he prefers the Nordic Europeans, blonde hair, blue eyes.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by richief

I did note that DLs bigotry is flying high again and anyone that is not of European descent is the cause of crime, and he prefers the Nordic Europeans, blonde hair, blue eyes.

Actually I prefer Ashkenazi Jews and Orientals. When they were building great civilizations and writing great literature the Nordics were iron age barbarians without cities, writing, and mathematics. I say that although I am a Nordic Gentile.

[Distant Lover]

After the death of King Solomon in 931 BC King David's Empire divided into the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom. From then on the Northern Kingdom is referred to in the Old Testament as Israel. The Southern Kingdom, which preserved the dynasty of David, is referred to as Judah.

Pharaoh Shishak took advantage of the division of David's Empire to invade the Northern and Southern kingdoms in order to loot them. This is how the event is recorded in 1 Kings 14:25-26: "In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem. He carried off the treasures of the Temple of the Lord and the treasures of the royal palace. He took everything, including all the gold shields Solomon had made."

In my opinion "everything" includes the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark may exist somewhere in Egypt, perhaps in one of the caves lining the Nile River. More probably Pharaoh Shishak melted down the gold in the Ark and added it to the golden sarcophagus in which he was buried. That sarcophagus still exists.

[richief]

It also may be in Area 51 after Indy found it. But to find something that never existed takes talent.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by richief

It also may be in Area 51 after Indy found it. But to find something that never existed takes talent.

I doubt the Israelites would have invented something that is so central to their worship. The Dome of the Rock has a stone floor that has imprints that fit the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant as described in Exodus 25:10-22.

Biblical Archaeologists do not doubt that Solomon's Temple existed. Similar temples have been discovered elsewhere in the Fertile Crescent.

[McDick]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

A number of factors influence...blah blah blah.

At times it astonishes me that you exist in the 21st century.

[kydave]

If Rodney were with us today he wouldn't want everyone fighting in the form,He would just say"Can't we all just get along"? Then he would hit the crack pipe.

[nighttouch]

He is stoned out of mind leading cops on a wild goose chase, endangering much of LA. Did he deserve the beating? nope Was he worth all the sympathy? nope

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by McDick

At times it astonishes me that you exist in the 21st century.

My opinions on innate differences in ability and behavior are essentially the same as those of Charles Murray. In the United States he is a respected political scientist. His articles are published in the most respected journals and newspapers in this country.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

After the death of King Solomon in 931 BC King David's Empire divided into the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom. From then on the Northern Kingdom is referred to in the Old Testament as Israel. The Southern Kingdom, which preserved the dynasty of David, is referred to as Judah.

Pharaoh Shishak took advantage of the division of David's Empire to invade the Northern and Southern kingdoms in order to loot them. This is how the event is recorded in 1 Kings 14:25-26: "In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem. He carried off the treasures of the Temple of the Lord and the treasures of the royal palace. He took everything, including all the gold shields Solomon had made."

In my opinion "everything" includes the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark may exist somewhere in Egypt, perhaps in one of the caves lining the Nile River. More probably Pharaoh Shishak melted down the gold in the Ark and added it to the golden sarcophagus in which he was buried. That sarcophagus still exists.

I was going to disagree with you and reaffirm my belief that it is underneath the Temple Mount....


...but then I came across this:

39 Jehoiakim was twenty-five years old when he became king of Judah and Jerusalem. He sinned against the Lord.
40 King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylonia invaded Judah, captured Jehoiakim, and took him to Babylonia in bronze chains.
41 Nebuchadnezzar also carried off some of the sacred utensils from the Temple and put them in his own temple in Babylon.
42 The stories about Jehoiakim, his depravity, and the godless way he lived are recorded in [The Chronicles of the Kings.]
43 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he succeeded his father Jehoiakim as king,
44 and he ruled in Jerusalem for three months and ten days. He too sinned against the Lord.
45 A year later King Nebuchadnezzar had Jehoiachin taken to Babylonia as a prisoner; Nebuchadnezzar also carried off sacred utensils from the Temple.
46 Then he made Zedekiah king of Judah and Jerusalem. Zedekiah was then twenty-one years old, and he ruled for eleven years.
47 He sinned against the Lord and refused to listen to the prophet Jeremiah, who spoke the word of the Lord.
48 Although King Nebuchadnezzar had forced Zedekiah to swear in the Lord's name that he would be loyal to him, Zedekiah broke his oath and rebelled against him. He stubbornly refused to obey the commands of the Lord, the God of Israel.
49 In addition, the leaders of the people and even the chief priests did more godless and lawless things than all the corrupt heathen; they defiled the Temple of the Lord, which he had made holy.
50 The God of their ancestors had continued to send prophets to call them back from their sins, because he wanted to spare them and the Temple.
51 But when the Lord spoke through his prophets, the people made fun of them and laughed.
52 At last the Lord became so angry with his people and their depraved ways that he ordered the kings of Babylonia to attack them.
53 The Babylonians killed the young men of Judah all around the Temple and did not spare anyone, young or old, man or woman. The Lord handed them all over to their enemies.
54 The Babylonians carried off all the sacred utensils from the Temple, the treasure chests, and the wealth of the king; they took everything away to Babylon, leaving nothing behind. (KJV includes the phrase "and the Ark of God").
55 They burned down the Temple, broke down the city wall, set fire to its towers, 56 and completely destroyed all its beauty. Nebuchadnezzar forced all the survivors to be led away to Babylon,
57 where they served him and his descendants as slaves until the rise of the Persian Empire. And so what the Lord had foretold through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:
58 "The land will lie desolate for seventy years to make up for the Sabbath rest that has not been observed."

The Ark was most likely carried off the Babylon. If such is the case, it probably came into Persian possession and later into the possession of Alexander and his generals. They probably shipped all the riches of Babylon to Alexandria--unwittingly including the Ark. From there, it is quite possible that the Ark could have found it's way to Ethiopia.

Another fact to shoot down my Temple Mount theory--the Medieval Knights Templars controlled the Temple Mount in 11-12th centuries. They excavated the site in search of the Ark and found diddly squat.

[Distant Lover]

origen01,

There are a number of places the Ark might be if it still exists. The thing to keep in mind, however, is that until the rise of Christianity the only value it would have had for non Jews would be from the gold that was part of it. If the Jews did not hide it somewhere it was probably destroyed for the gold.

Awhile ago I read an interesting theory about the Ark in The Biblical Archaeological Review. When Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians a group of Jewish refugees including Jeremiah escaped to Egypt. On an island in the Nile they built a new temple. About two hundred years later that temple was destroyed.

The person writing the article suggested that the Jewish refugees carried with them the Ark, and put it in their new temple. When that temple was destroyed some Jews took the Ark, and traveled south on the Nile River. When they could not travel any more because of water falls, they built a shrine to hold the Ark. The place where the water falls begin is the location of an ancient Ethiopian church that claims to have the Ark.

The Ethiopian Church will not show the Ark to anyone. About a year or two ago I read that it was thinking about showing the Ark to some scientists for verification, but the church authorities decided against it.

Keep in mind that the person writing the article was presenting a theory of what might have happened. He did not claim that it had to happen.

[richief]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

I doubt the Israelites would have invented something that is so central to their worship. The Dome of the Rock has a stone floor that has imprints that fit the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant as described in Exodus 25:10-22.

Biblical Archaeologists do not doubt that Solomon's Temple existed. Similar temples have been discovered elsewhere in the Fertile Crescent.

There is an henge in Wiltshire built around 5000BCE it was supposed to be a landing pad for starships but they got the dimensions wrong and instead used it as a feeding place for people moving north to south and vice versa, a stone age greasy spoon.

You have no idea what the marks on the floor of the dome of the rock were for, you can only postulate, and why do you believe that the jews would not invent something central to their beliefs, the easiest way to propagate a lie is to create false evidence.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by richief

There is an henge in Wiltshire built around 5000BCE it was supposed to be a landing pad for starships but they got the dimensions wrong and instead used it as a feeding place for people moving north to south and vice versa, a stone age greasy spoon.

You have no idea what the marks on the floor of the dome of the rock were for, you can only postulate, and why do you believe that the jews would not invent something central to their beliefs, the easiest way to propagate a lie is to create false evidence.

I read about the marks on the Dome of the Rock a long time ago, so my knowledge is not current. If memory serves me, the marks fit the dimensions of the Ark, as described in Exodus 25:10 And they shall make an ark of shittim wood: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof.

That description comes from a document that was probably written in the seventh or eighth century BC, and incorporated into Exodus. This was long before the Dome of the Rock was built. The markings may have been added later, however. Also, it has been a long time since I read about this.

[richief]

So the dimensions came first and then the D of the R, odd that the markings are just the same as the Arc.

[origen01]

I do not believe the Ark was melted down. The Bible tells of numerous incidents where people who have improperly handled the Ark were stricken dead.

I know, Richief, it's not exactly historical but this is my religious belief. I'm not perfect but I believe in the God, YWYH.

It's probably good that the Ark was taken.The whole concept of the Ark seems awfully like a fig-leaf for idolatry. People should worship the spirit of the Law not the actual tablets...

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by origen01

I know, Richief, it's not exactly historical but this is my religious belief. I'm not perfect but I believe in the God, YWYH.