Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clouseau · 10-26-2007, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

So do you suppose that the Israelites thought that God in his entirety was literally over the ark?

That evolved with time. At first, yes. Later, not so much. See Jeremiah 3:16.

That does not give the least indication that there was belief in a whole God in a small space. Any genuine evidence?

Clouseau · 10-26-2007, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cege

The Israelites believed, then, that Lord of Hosts was one title for their God, and that by bringing the ark of the covenant into battle, they were literally bringing that God (enthroned as he was atop the golden cherubim on the ark/chest) into the battle. It was expected that the Lord of Hosts ("hosts" to indicate the number of Israelite soldiers) would supernaturally enable their army to prevail over the Phillistine army.

Is that close enough to what the authors of Samuel intended future readers to understand?

Quote:

That's also my understanding. By carrying God into battle before them, the Israelite army would be invincible.

What fundamentalism there is in the USA. Do you people get taught poetry at school?

Cege · 10-30-2007, 04:51 PM

Whether or not the Israelites thought God in his entirety was present with the ark, they certainly seemed to have believed that God was enthroned above the ark so at least present there in some major capacity.

The ark, with God enthroned above it, was said to have magical properties before the time of the book of Samuel, and during the time of Samuel. Even though the ark didn't win the battle for the Israelites, the stolen ark did cause the Phillistines to have a major outbreak of hemorrhoids, which in some instances led to deaths.

Just looking into the ark killed either 70 or 50,070 men when the Phillistines thought it wise to return the ark to the Israelites. No mention of how the cover of the ark came off so anyone (much less 50,000 plus) people could look inside, much to their despair.

I don't see any indication in Samuel that the Israelites believed anything else than God dwelling above the ark of the covenant. Wherever the ark was, that was where the power and glory of God was.

Cege · 11-02-2007, 06:57 PM

I know the plagues of Egypt are topic currently on another thread, but I wonder if the plague of 'hemorrhoids' in 1 Sam 5 is actually bubonic plague complete with mice/rats inflicted on the Phillistines by God and/or the ark.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-30-2007, 04:51 PM	#53
Cege Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: 36078 Posts: 849	Whether or not the Israelites thought God in his entirety was present with the ark, they certainly seemed to have believed that God was enthroned above the ark so at least present there in some major capacity. The ark, with God enthroned above it, was said to have magical properties before the time of the book of Samuel, and during the time of Samuel. Even though the ark didn't win the battle for the Israelites, the stolen ark did cause the Phillistines to have a major outbreak of hemorrhoids, which in some instances led to deaths. Just looking into the ark killed either 70 or 50,070 men when the Phillistines thought it wise to return the ark to the Israelites. No mention of how the cover of the ark came off so anyone (much less 50,000 plus) people could look inside, much to their despair. I don't see any indication in Samuel that the Israelites believed anything else than God dwelling above the ark of the covenant. Wherever the ark was, that was where the power and glory of God was.

11-02-2007, 06:57 PM	#54
Cege Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: 36078 Posts: 849	I know the plagues of Egypt are topic currently on another thread, but I wonder if the plague of 'hemorrhoids' in 1 Sam 5 is actually bubonic plague complete with mice/rats inflicted on the Phillistines by God and/or the ark.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.