I've heard several references in History and Discovery channel type TV programs that say that the Bible talks about the Ark of the Covenant miraculously flying. Not to mention there was a line about that in Indiana Jones. I am not aware of any Bible reference that says any such thing. Is there some verse I'm missing? If not, is there some other ancient source -- the Talmud or Josephus or something -- that makes such a statement? Or is this just some crazy idea that came out of nowhere?

  • 1
    Good question. I have certainly never heard that before, and that's quite a rare occurrence. I found a discussion forum that has several verses in the thread, but all of them could easily be taken another way... Have you tried this on the Judaism site? It might be a better fit there. While the Ark of the covenant is certainly of interest to Christianity, it's arguable more of interest in Judaism, and the experts there may have a more definitive answer. Jan 3, 2014 at 6:30
  • You may find that asking your question here will help too: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com Jan 3, 2014 at 17:59
  • @curiousdannii A simple edit to "What is the basis of this belief" should suffice. I'm going to bed now, but that's probably better than closing, so I'll do it later if you don't.
    – user3961
    May 3, 2015 at 8:40
  • @fredsbend I think that would almost invalidate AG's answer. But it probably would be better. Better still would be for the question to be edited with specific quotes which claim that it flew.
    – curiousdannii
    May 3, 2015 at 9:07
  • @curiousdannii I'm pretty sure I've heard it before. Yes, a link showing that someone believes it is probably necessary.
    – user3961
    May 3, 2015 at 23:23

4 Answers 4


The Ark of the Covenant is never recorded as having flown in Scripture.

There were only two means by the Ark ever moved -

  1. Per God's command, the Ark was transported by the priests, using the Acacia poles which held it through the base, for this purpose.

    When the Priests carried it into the Jordan River when it was still flowing in Joshua 5, for example, the river receded. If it could have flown, there would have been no need for the priests to "step out" in faith.

    enter image description here

  2. On two occasions, contrary to God's command, an ox cart was used to transport it.

    a. In 2 Samuel 6, the Ark is being drawn "on a new ox cart," as follows:

    And they carried the ark of God on a new cart and brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill. And Uzzah and Ahio,[a] the sons of Abinadab, were driving the new cart,[b] 4 with the ark of God, and Ahio went before the ark.

    Famously, it began to tip, and Uzziah tried to steady it. For this, he was immediately zapped (that's not a technical term) by God, and died instantly. Had the Ark been capable of flight, one would have assumed that it would have steadied itself in such an instance.

    enter image description here

    b. Also, in 1 Samuel 5, the Israelites had lost the Ark in battle to the Philistines. When the Philistine's local deity Dagon kept falling over before it, as if it were bowing, the Philistines started moving it from Ashdod to Gath and throughout their cities. Problem was- people kept dying. So, eventually they decided to get rid of it, and send it on its merry way with a bunch of gifts for the Israelites.
    enter image description here

    1 Samuel 6 records:

    The men did so, and took two milk cows and yoked them to the cart and shut up their calves at home. 11 And they put the ark of the Lord on the cart and the box with the golden mice and the images of their tumors. 12 And the cows went straight in the direction of Beth-shemesh along one highway, lowing as they went. They turned neither to the right nor to the left, and the lords of the Philistines went after them as far as the border of Beth-shemesh. 13 Now the people of Beth-shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley. And when they lifted up their eyes and saw the ark, they rejoiced to see it. 14 The cart came into the field of Joshua of Beth-shemesh and stopped there. A great stone was there. And they split up the wood of the cart and offered the cows as a burnt offering to the Lord.

  3. The story of the Ark of the Covenant being moved by Nazi jeep pickup truck is, alas, non-canonical, and adheres only to the obscure Spielbergian sects of Christianity.

    enter image description here

In all seriousness, however, the legends of the ark flying may be attributable to the winged cherubim on top of the mercy seat. This ornament of two angels, only either end of the ark, their wings touching, may have inspired such an idea, but they were strictly ornamental.

enter image description here

  • Thanks! When I heard in Indiana Jones about the Ark flying I figured that was something they just made up for the movie. Then I heard the same thing on some documentary that was full of things the Bible supposedly said that I was pretty sure it didn't, so I dismissed that too. But then last night I was watching something on History channel that seemed to take the Bible seriously -- one of those "can we find naturalistic explanations for Bible miracles" -- and then they went off about the Ark flying, and I was wondering if I was just missing something.
    – Jay
    Jan 3, 2014 at 17:04
  • And of course the Ark was never transported by Nazi jeep. They would have needed a pickup truck.
    – Jay
    Jan 3, 2014 at 17:06
  • @Jay Some "documentaries" are less historically reliable than some Spielberg movies. Jun 13, 2023 at 12:04
  • @DJClayworth Sure. Plenty of "documentaries" are about as reliable as "I overheard somebody at a bar say that his brother-in-law told him that there's a rumor going around that somebody had a dream about this".
    – Jay
    Jun 26, 2023 at 4:53

I have no idea what OP might have heard about this, but the somewhat surprising answer to the question:

Does the Bible ever say that the Ark of the Covenant flew or levitated?

is: Yes.

There is a curious verse embedded in the story of the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River by the Israelites in Joshua 3-4. The miracle of the stopped river is bounded by the movements of the priests bearing the ark, beginning in 3:13 -

It shall come about when the soles of the feet of the priests who carry the ark of the Lord, the Lord of all the earth, rest in the waters of the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan will be cut off, and the waters which are flowing down from above will stand in one heap. [NASB]

The miraculous moment ends with the priests and the ark moving out of the stream-bed on to dry land in 4:18 -

It came about when the priests who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord had come up from the middle of the Jordan, and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up to the dry ground, that the waters of the Jordan returned to their place, and went over all its banks as before. [NASB]

I have chosen to cite the NASB because its rendering is quite literal. Many English versions do not render 4:18 this way, but often go with something like:

  • HCSB: "...and their feet stepped out on solid ground,..."
  • NIV: "...No sooner had they set their feet on the dry ground..."
  • NRSV: "...and the soles of the priests’ feet touched dry ground,..."

for the Hebrew at that point is curious. It unambiguously presents the priests not as carrying the ark but as being carried:

...and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up to the dry ground,...
נִתְּק֗וּ כַּפּוֹת֙ רַגְלֵ֣י הַכֹּהֲנִ֔ים אֶ֖ל הֶחָרָבָ֑ה

The verb here, NTQ, is quite clearly Niphal, i.e., the priests' feet are "passive", as in NASB's rendering above, and cf. the BDB entry:

BDB p. 683

Now this is a bit embarrassing, really, or at least awkward. What could possibly lift up the priests' feet in this way?! The Septuagint translator certainly avoided it (or, as Holmes thinks, didn't understand it), as have most commentators, antique or modern (and I have checked Keil, Cooke, Boling, Soggin, Woudstra, Butler, Hess, Pitkänen, and Rösel -- not one comments on this!). And the only academic article I'm aware of on the wider theme neglects this completely: G. Coats, "The Ark of the Covenant in Joshua: A Probe into the History of a Tradition", Hebrew Annual Review 9 (1985): 137-157. But not Rashi, who had this to say about it:

the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up: from the water to the dry land which was beside them, and the waters returned to their place. Hence, the Ark is found to be on one side and Israel on the other side. Accordingly, the Ark lifted its bearers and passed over. And concerning this matter, Uzzah was punished when he took hold of the Ark. If it bore its bearers, can it not be deduced by a fortiori conclusion that it can bear itself?

It is interesting that Rashi uses this incident -- that it was, in fact, the power of the Ark itself that carried the priests out of the river bed -- to explain the LORD's anger against Uzzah who steadied the ark in 2 Samuel 6 (see answer above). Of course, Uzzah need not have intevened in this way, since the Ark had previously demonstrated its capacity to "bear itself", as Rashi put it.

So this, then, is the surprising moment when the Ark of the Covenant "flew or levitated" in a story in the Hebrew Bible.

N.b. I'm resisting the temptation to add a graphic to this answer. Caveat lector.

  • Oh well -- I was actually quite pleased with this one!
    – Dɑvïd
    Feb 7, 2017 at 13:39
  • 1
    I wouldn't say that the passive voice unambiguously presents the priests as being carried... maybe another day I'll be able to present a counter argument.
    – curiousdannii
    Feb 7, 2017 at 15:31
  • @curiousdannii I only say that Rashi thought it did, and that a "plain rendering" of the Hebrew (as in the NASB -- not a "niche" translation!) represents it this way. It wouldn't be the first time translators and commentators ignored the plain meaning of the text.
    – Dɑvïd
    Feb 7, 2017 at 15:45
  • The text leaves the agent of the passive verb unstated. In such cases the plain reading is to look for the most logical animate actor, not an inanimate box. When there's obvious animate beings present (the priests themselves) we'd have to come up with strong reasons to not identify them as the actor and to pick the box instead... Would you identify the ark as the actor responsible for the soles of the priests' feet "resting" in 3:13?
    – curiousdannii
    Feb 7, 2017 at 15:50
  • @curiousdannii Don't see the force of the analogy to 3:13 -- but Rashi clearly read 4:18 as displaying the Power of the Ark! Feel the force.......
    – Dɑvïd
    Feb 7, 2017 at 16:12

In regards to the above text: "Consider Numbers 10:33-36, the ark seems to be flying in this text". I think that your statement is somewhat interpretive of the text. Nothing is hidden in the Bible. You can take the text at face value. If you do, then the above passages do not mention the ark flying by any means. When I read that passage it would appear to me that Israelites in charge of carrying the Ark scouted 3 days ahead of the main tribe and that Moses' blessed the Ark upon exit and return. I think its these type of passages that can be twisted to create alternate paradigms that seem plausible to luke warm Christians (of which I have been guilty of as well). That said, The "History Channel"or the Atheist Channel as I like to call it is no source of viable, accurate scripture for Christians. Shows like Ancient Aliens are clever at throwing in Bible passages and references (They had a great time fabricating stories when they discussed the book of ezekiel) to muddy the waters,but even mainstream scientists say the work is largely founded on wild fantasies that have no merit in the scientific world. Also regard these type of programs with respect as they are undoubtedly one of the largest tools that diseminate lies creating doubt, traps and pitfalls for Christians.


Matt 6:34

  • Welcome to the site. We are glad you decided to participate. Please see What this site is about and How this site is different to help you learn how the site works. Also see the help center and take the tour to learn the site functions. I hope to see you post again soon.
    – user3961
    Jun 18, 2015 at 7:44
  • Unfortunately, this seems to be an opinion without supporting references. Also the quoted passage is not in the question. A good answer on this site should respond directly to the question.
    – Bit Chaser
    Feb 6, 2017 at 3:56

I think the OP might be referring to this episode on the History channel
Not sure where this text is from however, mentioned in the video:
"God said to him: Uzzah, it bears those that carry it, can it not certainly bear itself".

  • That's helpful info but should probably be a comment not an answer, since OP is asking for biblical sources for such a claim.
    – bob
    Jun 21, 2022 at 19:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .