What on earth happened to the 10 commandments tablet ?

tribe of Levi; ark location

No offense taken, and welcome to a2k. Now to disagree with you....

It's interesting that you mention the Bible as supporting your claim, because it contains numerous references to the "tribe of Levi" (Revelations chapter 7 is the first example that comes to mind).

Here's a listing of the tribes of Israel, with Levi listed as one of the 12.

Yes, Levi became the priest tribe, while the tribe of Joseph split into 2 tribes named after Joseph's sons, but whether Levi is called one of the 12 or not doesn't change the fact that the tribe of Levi is the tribe of Levi.

As for your theory about the Ark of the Covenant being buried in Ohio, I see no reason to believe that's anything other than nonsense. Please explain the evidence that led you to your conclusion.

Regarding rock layers being in the wrong order, that's a common phenomenon around the world, and I don't see any "deeper significance relative to the Ark" in mounds & craters.

Monger, short publishing the paper here, there is a huge amount of evidence. If you want to give me a P.O. Box address on a private message, I'll be glad to send you a copy. It's good bathroom reading.

Thanks for the offer, grotto. I don't doubt that I'd find your paper interesting.

Would you mind listing a couple of the chief evidences here?

Off the top of my head, the good quality relationship between the Phoenicians and the Israelites (City of Tyre during the era of Solomon); Phoenician archaeology in the U.S. (see Dr. Barry Fell's works); the timing of events (too numerous to list here); Actions of early Freemasons in Ohio...
This is a story where one event links to the next. The paper is of an academic nature (I presented it at the local University) and properly footnoted, etc. It's tough to explain here, but these items sort of indicate the nature of it.

The first two things you mentioned are certainly not evidence of the Ark's location; and unfortunately the second two, as presented here, are far too vague for any sort of consideration.

Are you, as far as you know, the only researcher to come to the conclusion you did regarding the Ark's whereabouts?

Well, as I said, you would have to read the totality of the work to even begin to understand my points with this evidence. As far as others coming to the same conclusion, my work was original and is not widely known about. I have not published it in any professional journals as my professional academic interests lie elsewhere (ethics). The only authoritative person who might be considered as supportive (but not necessarily a "believer") is a PhD of History at the University where I presented it. He much encouraged me to publish my work in book form.
Honestly, I wasn't out to change the world. I just got interested in the topic and spent several weeks doing research and putting it into an academic, readable form. I will say that several of my friends who read the paper and who are not fellow researchers accept my theory.
And, as I said, I'd be glad to send you a copy.

Does anyone knowof the 12 or 13 sacred rocks that represent each tribe? Where are these rocks from. Was each a piece of the famous tablet. What happens when you bring these rocks together? Does it create the aegis or better know something representative of the golden fleece ?

I have heard these stones are important,are they merely symbols or something some.In greece thay have put specific numbers on stone for certain good luck charmsn that go along with it. They keep this stone inside the house for good luck above the door.

Could Mt Olympus have been the place the tablet came from.

I'm still having a think but in the meantime I'll refer you back to the post I made on the 1st of November at 18:55 :

For these monks to stand in the way of an investigation into the true nature of the artifacts is irrational.
Why are they refusing ?
What are they hiding ?
Why are they refusing the potential to bring a great deal of understanding and help for the human race ?
They stand in the way of the truth. Their OWN conscience should make them step aside so the truth can be found.
They aren't though, so what does that tell you ?

Sorry dudes that was continuing on from my last post on this thread and not a reply to the subsequent posts.

So true Phoe, so true! How can you locate something that is a myth, and never existed??

Grottomaster: I was so happy to read that your field is ethics. Please provide us with the following:

The top ten sources from your bibliography.

The name of the University and date you made your presentation.

and your answer to these questions:

1) Given the recent return of other ancient properties to their rightful owners by what right do ?

2) Why should any person or group have to call for the return of their rightful property? Shouldn't any person or group in possession of that which is not theirs make certain and swift restoration?

I'm sure this information will help clarify this issue for myself and others.

Joe

Welcome aboard, grottomaster ... really glad you found us and decided to join in. Sure hope you find enough here to cause you to want to stick around. If there's anything about A2K you'd like help figurin' out, bells-and whistles-wise, just holler, and somebody'll point you in the right direction in short order. This is an accomodating and freindly bunch, all in all.

Now, on to business.



Gee, why does that have such a familiar ring to it?



I'm a little unclear on what you're getting at here on a couple points. First, have you reason to suppose that if submitted to peer review your treatise stands promise of publication, or, be that not the case, do you feel it would be unethical to submit your work to such review? If the former, I would posit that to do otherwise than to provide accepted accredidation to valuable insight regarding the human condition and experience would be unethical, while if the latter, I would posit it would be unethical to maintain that the self-evident probity of one's work immunizes it from the honorable traditions and standards of peer review.



And in what form of book? An academic exposition, a trade paperback, a novel, a personal memoir, or what? Was a publisher or other venue suggested, or editing or co-authoring of final publication draft offered, or financial support tendered? Just curious to ascertain the sort and level of encouragement provided by your chief credentialled supporter. Forgive me, but I get into things like nuance and perspective. Nobody is without at least some faults.



OK ... lemme see if I've got this ... Some weeks of student effort in a field unrelated to your academic specialty has resulted in a breakthrough overlooked by generations of graduate, and frequently multiply degreed, archaeologists, anthropologists, historians, other professional scholars and theologians. who have devoted their lives to examining the matter in depth and detail, and your theory appeals to other students who are not researchers ... is that pretty much it?



I'm sure the offer, in common with your theory, is widely appreciated as fully befits its self-evident merit.

And again, lemme say welcome aboard. I hope you enjoy it here.

Joe, The bibliography is just about what you would expect. Bits and pieces from archaeological journals and papers, some Freemasonry stuff, The Holy Bible, etc. About 20 entries. Probably the most major supporting document is a book by Dr. Barry Fell, "Bronze Age America" and a couple of his other works.
I presented the paper at Shawnee State University which is in Portsmouth, Ohio.
Would the paper withstand peer review for publication? I seriously doubt it. It was never on my mind to submit it beyond its present form... another one of my voluminous papers gathering dust in my library.
I think if you go back to my original post, Joe, you'll glean my purpose. My point was simply, "here's what I believe because of my personal research," (paraphrasing myself.) My motivation? To challenge the so-called world authority? Nope. Purely self-edification. My career is over. I decided to re-enter college and study an entirely new field. Why? Something to do. I have nothing to do so I get interested in a topic which usually culminates in a paper. My thought is, sometimes, I might be hitting on the spark of an idea that someone will read later (someone notably smarter than I am) which might ultimately lead to a great discovery. Then maybe I'll get a post in their bibliography. It doesn't really matter to me though. I've been widely published in other realms (non-academic mostly) including newspapers and magazines so my ego has already been adequately pacified on that front.
Have I been academically published? Yes.
My most recently published papers (one of which got me a cash award from my University) dealt with business ethics, and,
; flaws in the reporting of the western media, respectively.
The first was entitled "Using Fictional Classics in Teaching Business Ethics: The Catcher in the Rye vs. The Great Gatsby." This one was co-written by Dr. James D. Day and was presented by him at the 2001 International Business Education & Technology Conference, held in Cancun, Mexico 3/14-21/01. The paper is quite boring if you want to know the truth.
The second was entitled: "Bias in the Western Media: The Case of the IRA and the British Government." For that one, I've got a nice bronze plaque on my wall and the paper is now used as a guide for other university students who are working on their undergraduate research papers.
An older one which I presented (in my former field) was written for and presented to the local Medical Society annual conference and was entitled "Toxic Plants of the Appalachian Foothills."
I've written about 30+ other academic papers, again, most of which were done for my own edification or because someone asked me to lecture on a particular topic.
The truth is, Joe, I enjoy doing field work and academic research and I don't much care where it leads me. Certainly, the Ark paper led me to an ending which I did not anticipate.
Am I a buffoon? Probably.
Do I want the world to swing to my point of view? I quit trying to achieve that ridiculous quest about 20 years ago.
But I have a lot a fun and my wife and daughter think that I'm an okay guy. Or,, at least, they say so to my face.

Whoops! There was one more item that I wished to clarify for you, Joe. The "friends" I referred to who bought into my theory were not "students." They were just friends. Adults, regular people, not college grads for the most part.
I didn't wish to mislead you into thinking that I had generated a University cult following. These folks are beer-drinking buddies.

Somehow, I figure I missestimated you, grottomaster. Reserving comment on your thesis, I respect your apologia.

(edit ... I snuck back in to correct a typo)

hello grooto,

welcome to a2k. NOW

stop wasting my space and help withy the real stuff.Can you help or not ? With your grand educated brain help me and stop telling me about you in this post , because it is about me.

algis, Gees. Sorry. I just gave you my best info. on the topic and everybody started bombarding me.
To maybe give you a better answer, (and let me assure you that my brain is somewhere between that of Alfred E. Neuman and Lee Harvey Oswald), I did see a very good PBS documentary (Nova?) about 5 years ago on the probability of the Ark being in Ethiopia, as some have suggested here. I regret that I can't tell you the title of the show but that is a starting point. It is quite a plausible theory but with one problem... there is quite a bit of proof out there that there was more than one "Ark." The Egyptians used "Arks" quite a lot and some credible sources have stated that this is where Moses got the idea in the first place. I think I recall something about this in back issues of either "Biblical Archaeology Review" or "Archaeology." Both periodicals are good starting points for research.
I can tell you for a fact that the Masonic Lodge conducts one particular ritual which purports that the Ark is hidden away in the closed, sealed caverns under the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. (Where there now sits an Islamic Mosque and an Islamic Shrine). This is part of the Royal Arch "degree." I sort of view that as allegory and legend but there are those who stand by that particular theory.
I hope that all this at least gives you a starting point for your future inquiries.
If I came off as a know-it-all, again, I apologize. That was not my intention. I was just trying to respond to the questions of others.

That happens around here.

OK lets diverse to the round spheres in Costa Rica.Some claim this is where atlantis was.