Timothy to Hebrews - The Preterist Archive

494 Hebrews IX. 2-5.
same level with these, therefore on the bottom of the ark, not on
the ground before the ark. Bleek himself admits it to be possible
(ii.
p. 458) that Ex. xxx. 6 may have the meaning, that the altar of
incense, because it was r^-szn •'ssV, stood in the holy of holies, notwithstanding
its being expressly said shortly before that it stood
" before the vail," and yet, he all at once repudiates the very natural
intcr])retation of Ex. xvi. 34, that the pot of manna and Aaron's
rod, because niyn nicV, had their place in the ark.
We have still to look at the passage in 1 Kings viii. 9. It is
here said, certainly, that " there was nothing in the ark except the
two tables," but what time is it that is here spoken of ? The time
of Solomon ! Now, that in the time of Solomon the golden pot of
manna and Aaron's rod should have been lost will not seriously surprise
any one. Had not the ark been long in the hands of the Philistines,
and carried about from place to place ? Might not the
Phihstines have thrown aside the seemingly worthless rod of Aaron,
and taken away the more valuable pot of manna ? Let us now,
however, inquire finally, why then in general the circumstance is
mentioned in 1 Kings viii. 9, that in Solomon's time, when the ark
was brought into the temple, " nothing was in it save the two tables."
Certainly not for the purpose of obviating any idea that there might,
perhaps, be in the ark, besides these, some bowls, plates, caps, etc.,
It is quite evident that the statement has then only a meaning
etc.
when it is supposed, that there was something else besides the tables
helonging properhj to the ark, which one might justly and reasonably
expect to find in it. Now, let any one search through the whole
of the Old Testament, and he will be able to discover no other objects
that could be expected in the ark besides the tables, except
the pot of manna and Aaron's rod mentioned in Ex. xvi. and Num.
xvii. Thus, then, the passage 1 Kings viii. 9 speaks not of what
belonged to the ark in Moses' time, but of what was found in it in
the time of Solomon. With an emi)hasis expressive of surprise, it
is observed, that " the tables only were found in it," i. e., that the
pot of manna and Aaron's rod had been lost. This very passage,
therefore, contains a decided
testimony, that both of these objects,
so long as they yet existed, had their place in the ark of the covenant.—The
second question is, why the author, in general, mentions
these objects which, in reference to the cultus, had no special significance
? In ver. 5 he says ex])ressly, that, in so far as his object
was concerned, he might pass over the more particular description
of the cherubim ; surely then, he must have had a special reason
for not passing over the pot of manna and Aaron's rod. This
reason consisted, on the one hand, i)crhai)s in this, that he wished
to shew how, in the innermost sanctuary, there were not merely