The Lost Ark,
the Shroud of Turin,
and Enough Rope to Hang Myself
By James BeauSeigneur
Editor's Note: The following is the first of several
articles adapted by the author from his new novel, In His
Image: Book One of The Christ Clone Trilogy, from Selective
House Publishers. I am currently reading the book and can
highly recommend it. It is by far the best end-times novel
I've ever read. For ordering information, including a
discount and autographed copies for PropheZine readers, see
ordering information.
Ray Gano, PropheZine
There are a lot of theories and claims about where the Ark
of the Covenant is. A few people claim to have actually
seen it. Strangely, they all claim to have seen it in
different places, so to such claimants I think it's prudent
that we take a "put up or shut up" attitude.
Me, I've got my own theory. And if you'll give me enough
rope to hang myself (for the non-US readers, that's just an
expression) I promise to raise some interesting questions,
even if I don't convince you my theory is correct.
The Bible doesn't mention the whereabouts of the Ark after
the Temple was destroyed in the Babylonian invasion. It's
generally assumed that when the Persians plundered the
Temple they took the Ark with them. But the Bible says that
when Ezra returned from Babylon to rebuild the Temple, he
brought back what the Persians had taken.1 Some people have
speculated that the Ark may have been taken from the Temple
when it was destroyed by Titus in 70 A.D. and that it was
either melted down or perhaps locked away and later hidden
in some secret treasury room in the Vatican. However, there
is some evidence to dispute that theory. In Rome there is
an arch which was dedicated to Titus in honor of his
successful siege of Jerusalem. Carved into the arch are
scenes of the Roman destruction and looting of Jerusalem,
including a detailed carving showing the treasures taken
from the Temple. The Ark is NOT among the treasures
depicted, even though, as the most highly valued item, it
surely would have been included had Titus taken it.
One possibility that I've never heard of anyone pursuing is
based on II Maccabees, one of the apocryphal books
appearing in the Catholic Bible. According to that text,
the Prophet Jeremiah hid the Ark in a cave on Mount Nebo in
Jordan to prevent the Persians from finding it.2
I think it may be somewhere in southern France.
I never really gave it much thought until a few years ago
when they announced the results of the carbon 14 dating of
the Shroud of Turin.
"What does all this have to do with the Shroud?" you ask.
It really isn't important to my faith whether it's real or
not, but from a purely scientific point of view, I believe
the Shroud is just too good to be a fake. Until recently
though, the carbon 14 dating seemed conclusive. Then one
day I was reading some of the writings of St. Jerome.
Jerome lived in the fourth and early fifth century and was
the person who first translated the Old Testament directly
from Hebrew to Latin. In the piece I was reading, Jerome
quotes from a book which he called the 'Gospel of the
Hebrews,' a book which unfortunately either no longer
exists or is lost. Jerome doesn't quote from it very
extensively, but the small piece he does quote reveals a
very interesting piece of information about the Shroud. Of
course, there's no way of knowing how authentic this gospel
really was. It may have been as spurious as some of the
other apocryphal writings. But what it says is that after
Jesus rose from the dead, he took his burial shroud and
gave it to the servant of the High Priest.3 That's not very
much, but it's the only record we have that indicates what
happened to the Shroud following the resurrection.
You may remember reading about the servant of the High
Priest in the Bible. He's a rather minor character but he's
mentioned in all four Gospels.4 We even know his name:
Malchus. Malchus was among those who went to arrest Jesus
on the night before his crucifixion. The Apostle Peter
attempted to fend them off with a sword and in the scuffle
he cut off Malchus' ear. Jesus told Peter to put his sword
away, and then picked up the ear and placed it back on the
side of Malchus' head and instantly healed it.
This same Malchus would have been in the Temple on a daily
basis and would have seen the curtain which separated the
people from the Holy of Holies inexplicably torn in two
after Jesus' crucifixion.5 (The Holy of Holies was the most
sacred place in the Temple. According to I Cor. 15:6, when
Jesus died, God himself tore the curtain from top to
bottom, allowing ordinary men and women--not just the high
priests--access to his holy presence.) And Malchus, like
everyone else in Israel at the time, would have been very
much aware of Jesusí miracles and especially the evidence
of his resurrection. It seems reasonable to me to assume
that Malchus, having experienced all this - especially the
healing of his ear - may well have become a follower of
Jesus himself. If so, it would explain Jesus' contact with
him after the resurrection: the Bible says that Jesus
appeared to more than five hundred people in and around
Jerusalem after the resurrection.6
If Jesus did give the Shroud to Malchus it must have been
to preserve the Shroud as evidence of the resurrection! I
believe Jesus may have told Malchus to put the Shroud in
the Ark of the Covenant.
Why would he do that?
It's a little complicated. As I said, we're pretty sure
that the Ark wasn't in the Temple when it was plundered by
the Romans in 70 A.D. So where was it? I believe it was
hidden by the High Priest.
Between the time of the Babylonians and the Romans there
were several other times that bandits tried to rob the
Temple. I think the priests probably developed an
evacuation plan to hide the Ark whenever the Temple was
threatened (much as the National Archives of the US
protects the Constitution and the Declaration of
Independence by lowering them into a vault below the
building). Surely when the Romans conquered Israel, the
priests realized that the Temple was once again an
extremely attractive target for those seeking their
fortune. Are there really tunnels and hidden passageways
under the Temple where the Ark could have been hidden?
Absolutely. In fact, not just tunnels, but large vaulted
rooms. Most haven't been excavated but they have been
identified by radar soundings.7
My theory is that the Ark was hidden somewhere in the
tunnels beneath the Temple to protect it from the Romans.
If so, very few people would have known about it, but
certainly the High Priest would have known. And if the High
Priest knew, it's likely that his servant--that is,
Malchus--would have known as well.
Okay, now let's move ahead in time about eleven hundred
years, during the time of the first Crusade. Not many
people realize that the Crusaders, who were mostly French,
were quite successful in their first attempts to take the
Holy Land from the Muslims. They even succeeded in
capturing and holding the city of Jerusalem and
establishing a French-born king (who claimed to be a
descendant of David) over the city. Shortly after that, an
order of knights known as the Knights Templar was formed in
Jerusalem.
The stated purpose of the Knights Templar was to protect
Jerusalem and to aid European pilgrims coming to the Holy
Land. This was a rather unrealistic undertaking, since
originally there were only six or seven members in the
order. And they were very poor. Ironically, poverty was one
of their vows. I say "ironically" because somehow over the
next hundred years, this small group of knights not only
grew in number, but grew unbelievably in wealth. In fact,
these men became the first international bankers, loaning
money to kings and nobles throughout Europe. How they
acquired their immense wealth has been the subject of great
speculation.
The headquarters for the Knights Templar was in the Mosque
of Omar, that is, the Dome of the Rock, which sits on the
site of the old Temple. It has been suggested that the
knights excavated the tunnels beneath the Mosque and found
the treasures of Solomon's Temple and that was the source
of their wealth.
But how does the Shroud of Turin fit into all this?
One of the reasons God had Moses build the Ark was to act
as a container for certain sacred objects: the stone
tablets on which God wrote the ten commandments; the first
five books of the Bible written by Moses; a container of
manna, which God caused to fall from the sky each morning
for the Hebrews to eat while they were in the desert; and
one other thing, Aaron's staff, which God had miraculously
caused to sprout, bud, and bear almonds.8 Those things were
placed in the Ark as a witness to later generations of
God's covenant with Israel.
But something always struck me as odd about that list of
items. Stone tablets will last forever. Protected in the
Ark, the parchment that Moses used to write the first five
books of the Bible might last for thousands of years. But
the container of manna, under normal conditions, would turn
to dust within just a matter of months. And Aaron's staff -
though it might survive the centuries as a simple wooden
staff - without the budding and the almonds, would not be
much of a witness of God's covenant or of His power. That's
when it occurred to me that perhaps the power of the Ark is
greater and quite different than we may have realized. For
instance, think about the staff for a minute. How tall do
you imagine Aaron's staff would have been?
Shepherding hasn't changed much over the centuries, and if
you visit the Middle East you'll still see most shepherds'
staffs are about six or seven feet long. So when you think
about Aaron's staff, with the limbs and sprouts and almonds
growing from it, it would have had quite a large diameter.
But, based on a standard 18 inch cubit, the absolute
longest that staff could have been and still have fit in
the Ark is four feet, nine inches, and that's without any
branches.
The only way that a six to seven foot shepherd's staff
could have fit into the Ark is if the inside dimensions of
the Ark are not limited by the outside dimensions.
Now, for the container of manna and Aaron's staff to have
been a witness to future generations, there must also be
some miraculous, preservative power to the Ark - something
which prevents deterioration of items that are placed
inside of it. What I'm suggesting is that perhaps inside
the Ark there is a total absence of dimensions: no length,
width or height (which would explain how Aaron's staff
could fit); and no time (which explains how the manna and
the staff could be preserved)!
Further, I'm suggesting that the servant of the High Priest
put the Shroud in the Ark to preserve it, and there it
remained until it was taken out, over a thousand years
later, by the Knights Templar when they discovered the
Temple treasures!
Of course, it's mostly just conjecture - but it does offer
a unified theory that would provide a consistent
explanation for a number of unanswered questions. Besides,
it makes sense that the Shroud - the only physical evidence
of Jesus' resurrection and the consummation of God's new
covenant with his people - would be kept in the Ark of the
Covenant together with the evidence of God's old covenant.
That's why the Shroud flunked the carbon 14 dating. For
over a thousand years it totally escaped all deterioration
and aging while it was inside the Ark!
But what about the Knights Templar? Is there any connection
between them and the Shroud of Turin?
As far back as it can be traced, the first person who we
can positively prove had the Shroud was a man in France
named Geoffrey de Charney. Some years later his family gave
the Shroud to the House of Savoy, who later moved it to
Turin, Italy.
So is there a link between de Charney and the Knights
Templar?
I'm glad you asked. As a matter of fact, there is.
As I said earlier, the Knights Templar became very powerful
throughout Europe. But then the King of France decided he
no longer wanted them around. He accused their members of
hideous sins and atrocities. They were arrested and
tortured to force them to confess to his trumped up
charges. Those who confessed were locked away in prisons;
those who refused were tortured to death or burned at the
stake. Two of the last to be executed in this way were
Jacques de Molay, the Grand Master of the Knights Templar,
and Geoffrey de Charney, Preceptor of Normandy. That
Geoffrey de Charney apparently was the uncle of the later
Geoffrey de Charney, who was the first person that we can
positively determine had possession of the Shroud.
Additionally, one of the things the king accused the
knights of doing was worshipping the image of a man. The
Shroud of Turin!
What I'm proposing is that the Shroud, the Ark, and the
other Temple treasures were taken from Israel and hidden in
southern France by the Knights Templar. If so, many of the
treasures and the Ark may still be there, hidden away. In
fact, there is a secret society in France called the
Prieure de Sion, which traces its origins to the Knights
Templar. The head of the society has been quoted as saying
that he knows where the Temple treasures are and that they
will be returned to Jerusalem "when the time is right."9
So there you have it - my theory. The rope is in your
hands.