1021 The Third Temple CAN be built without a World War

The Third Temple CAN be built without a World War

Newsletter published on May 29, 2019

This newsletter is at http://mailstar.net/Temple-not-at-Dome.doc

(1) The Third Temple CAN be built without a World War
(2) Locating the Jewish Temples
(3) Bob Cornuk: Josephus wrote that 2nd Temple was entirely destroyed;
therefore Wailing Wall is not part of Temple
(4) Eleazar who led resistance at Masada said Roman fortress was the
only structure left by 73; therefore Wailing Wall is part of Fortress
Antonia
(5) Professor George Wesley Buchanan endorses Ernest L. Martin's book on
Location of Jewish Temples
(6) How to buy The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot, by Ernest L. Martin

(1) The Third Temple CAN be built without a World War
- by Peter Myers, May 29, 2019

Thanks to M for sending a video about this (item 2).

It turns out that the "Temple Mount" - site of Al Aqsa Mosque and the
Dome of the Rock - was NOT the site of the Jewish Temple (First & Second
Temples).

The "Temple Mount" was actually the site of a Roman Fortress, the
Fortress of Antonia.

Jewish Fundamentalists have got it wrong. They want to pull down the
Dome of the Rock, and Al Aqsa Mosque, in the mistaken belief that those
buildings are on the site of the First & Second Temples.

The temple was 1 stade (stadia, 90m, 600 feet) from the Fortress. The
Fortress was much bigger, because it housed 6,000 Roman soldiers (the
10th Legion) and 4,000 support staff.

Over 1 million people have watched this video (item 2), yet it has not
made the MSM.

This video could prevent World War 3, if enough people watch it.

(2) Locating the Jewish Temples

From: M

This video says very convincingly the the first and second temple stood
on the offal in the city of david and that the "temple mount" was the
fortress Antonia.

They want the temple rebuilt but not on the mount and right away to
bring on the end.

https://youtu.be/oKTO8YYs29c

The Coming Temple - Full Documentary

1,216,044 views

NuBeat Music

Published on 21 Dec 2016

Filmed in the Old City of Jerusalem, this ground-breaking documentary
investigates the research of renowned Biblical archaeologists, Bob
Cornuke, David Sielaff and Earnest L. Martin who claim that Solomon and
Herod's Temples never stood on the Haram al Sharif, also known as the
Temple Mount. If they are right, then there is nothing to stop the
Jewish people building their long awaited for Third Jewish Temple in the
actual site where the Temples once stood. But is tradition too strong?
We'll see.

(3) Bob Cornuk:Josephus wrote that 2nd Temple was entirely destroyed;
therefore Wailing Wall is not part of Temple

https://baseinstitute.org/investigations/temple/

Temple

by Bob Cornuke

The Temple Mount is considered to be the historic place of Solomon’s and
Herod’s temple. Muslims call it the Harm al-Sharif, the place from which
Mohammed went to heaven on his horse named Barack. Even though the
Temple Mount is in the most holy site of the Jews and situated right in
the middle of Israel it is also solely in the administrative control of
Muslims. Jews desperately want to take control of the place, as well as
rebuild their temple there. Muslims on-the-other-hand relay a stern
warning that if a Jew ever puts one shovel to their professed holy site
a war may follow.

It may be surprising to some, but in the fourth century, people were
trying to find the lost sites of the former temples of Solomon and
Herod. They simply did not know where the temple sites were placed. In
70 AD the temple was completely and utterly uprooted by the Romans, thus
fulfilling Christ’s prophesy that not one stone would be standing upon
another there. The temple was eradicated from all recognition, so much
so that no one could even tell that the building had ever existed. So,
in the next 300 years, with so many Jews having been killed or expelled
from the land, people were not sure where the correct location of the
temple was so four other sites that were proposed. The temple mount was
settled on as the site of the lost temple even though the Bible seems to
indicate that it is someplace altogether.

Like so many, I have always thought that the location for the temple of
Solomon had been proven to be on the traditional Temple Mount in
Jerusalem. But, I began to become doubtful of that traditional view of
the temple placement after Dr. Paul Feinberg alerted me to the
revolutionary work of the late archaeologist and author, Dr. Ernest L.
Martin. This research effort would not have been possible without his
groundbreaking insights.

However, I hope that my own personal research presented herein offers a
bold new chapter in this potentially history-adjusting subject.

Jesus warned His disciples of the coming destruction of the temple and
that not one stone of the temple would be left on top of another.
Matthew 24:1-2 says, "Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple,
and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. And
Jesus said to them, ‘Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say
to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be
thrown down." Christ’s words clearly state that the entire temple, each
and every stone, will be dug up, dislodged, and tossed away. It is
interesting to note that there are massive stone blocks by the thousands
set in the wall supporting the Temple Mount platform. Was Jesus wrong in
His prophesying that not one stone would remain standing?

When you look carefully at the Bible verse, "not one stone upon
another," we find that Jesus was actually gone from the temple when He
spoke those words. Jesus was walking away when His disciples came up to
Him and called His attention to the temple buildings. The verse
continues with Christ asking, "Do you not see all these things?"

What Jesus is mentioning is the whole of the temple, being seen from a
distance of some unknown calibration, but most assuredly down the road
some from the temple complex. It was from this space of separation that
Christ says that every stone of the temple would be thrown down. He
would have been describing the walls, ancillary buildings, and all.

Historian Flavius Josephus wrote that the entirety of the temple was
indeed in total ruin and destruction after 70 AD. He went on to say that
if he had not personally been in Jerusalem during the war and witnessed
the demolition by Titus of the temple that took place there, he wouldn’t
have believed it ever existed. In Josephus (Jewish Wars, VII, 1.1) it
speaks of widespread destruction in all Jerusalem as well. Archaeology
and eye-witness evidence suggests that Jerusalem was destroyed so
severely that not much of it was left. However, the foundation walls of
what we call today the traditional Temple Mount would not, in all
likelihood, be included in the manifest of any destroyed edifices
because it was Roman-owned and would be considered separate from
Jerusalem by Josephus.

If found that Jews at the Wailing Wall, when interviewed, said that the
huge high walls of stones standing there today gives testimony that
Jesus was flat-wrong and that His proclamation that not one Stone of the
Temple will remain standing disqualifies Christ as a being completely
truthful.

I however feel that those high stone walls there today are remnants from
a former Roman fort occupied by the mighty Tenth Legion (Legio X
Fretensis). I also believe that the true site of Solomon’s temple is
about a thousand feet South of the temple mount in the City of David.
This would mean that Jesus was correct in His prophetic words and that
each and every stone, to the very last was one, was cast down.

WHERE WAS THE TEMPLE?

The garrison of Fort Antonia in Jerusalem was as big as several cities
according to Josephus housing approximately 6,000 men plus the needed
support staff. All told, as many as 10,000 personnel that serves served
there. But this huge fort has ever been found in Jerusalem by
Archaeologists. I feel that archaeologists have not found the mighty
Roman fort is because it is the huge temple mount complex and that
tradition has concealed it from historical notice.

A FOURTH CENTURY EYE WITNESS

In 333 AD, the Pilgrim of Bordeaux wrote that while looking east from
the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, he saw stone walls with foundations
going down to the Tyropoean Valley. Keep in mind that the pilgrim was
looking due east and was staring directly at the traditional Temple
Mount area. He said absolutely nothing about it being the temple site,
but rather he describes the stone walls as the Roman praetorium. This
means that the walls would have survived the Roman/Jewish war of 66-70,
because they were property of the Roman fort itself. The praetorium
there, according to the pilgrim, was the place where Jesus was sentenced
to death. So, in effect, if we are to believe the Pilgrim of Bordeaux,
the dome over the Dome of the Rock, which is a Muslim shrine, would be
the very site where Jesus was sentenced to death by Pontius Pilate.

In the sixth century the Piacenza Pilgrim wrote of an oblong stone at
the Roman praetorium as well, and described this rock as the place that
Pilate heard the case of Christ.

EVIDENCE FROM THE MASADA COMMANDER

One of the dramatic events that Josephus describes in his work is the
plight of the fleeing rebel Jews who went to the fortress in Masada.
Eleazar Bin Jari (commander of the Jewish rebels at Masada) in 73 AD
encouraged those in the high mountain fortress that suicide was the only
answer rather than surrendering. This same Eleazar memorialized the
following about the destruction in Jerusalem: "It [Jerusalem] is now
demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing left but that
monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those [the Romans] that
hath destroyed it, which still dwells upon its ruins." Eleazar was
documenting that Jerusalem was eradicated with nothing standing, except
the Roman camp called the Antonia Garrison Fort with its high stone
walls still standing. It can be surmised that years later, when the
Roman fort was mostly still standing and subsequent conquerors came to
the place of those high stone block walls, they must have believed that
the magnificent fortress had to be something of major importance. To
some, it had to be the site of Solomon’s temple

THE TWO BRIDGES

Josephus wrote that the distance between the temple and the Roman fort
was exactly one stade (approximately 600 feet). Josephus recorded that
King Herod built two side-by-side bridges (Jewish Wars, VI.2,6, and
II.15,6) connecting the gap between the temple and the Roman fort (refer
to Cornfeld translation as well as The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot,
p.413). The fort was there to protect the temple by the Romans and also
allow them to keep a watch over the often insubordinate and rebellious
Jews. These two side-by-side colonnades must have looked like two modern
raised narrow freeways (or as "limbs" as Josephus describes them) that
spanned the 600-foot gap between the temple and fort.

According to Ernest Martin, Fort Antonia was located on the north side
of the temple (City of David location). If, in fact, the temple was
positioned in the old City of David then it would fit perfectly with the
two colonnades’ separation that Josephus describes as linking Fort
Antonia at its southwest angle. That would put the whole of the temple’s
northern wall as being parallel to the southern wall of Fort Antonia
with a gap of approximately 600 feet distance (north to south) between
the two.

CITY OF DAVID

Three thousand years ago, the City of David was about 12 acres in size
and had an estimated population of only around 2,000 people. It is a
finger of land just south of the present traditional Temple Mount. As a
former policeman, I would like at this point to lay out a linear case
for the City of David as the one and only place for the temple, but
first a brief history.

The Jebusite fortification was a fortress, albeit a small one, but it
had what David wanted. It was strategically situated, had a high walled
castle-looking complex rising majestically from the Kidron Valley. A
spring flowed abundantly inside with clear pure water which made it even
more desirable.

The Bible tells us that while David and his army were outside looking up
at the Jebusite stronghold, there, standing defiant on the top of the
walls were men hollering down mockingly. Second

Samuel 5:6-10 describes it this way: "You shall not come in here; but
the blind and the lame will repel you," thinking, "David cannot come in
here." Nevertheless David took the stronghold of Zion (that is, the City
of David). Now David said on that day, "Whoever climbs up by way of the
water shaft and defeats the Jebusites (the lame and the blind, who are
hated by David’s soul), he shall be chief and captain. "Therefore they
say, "The blind and the lame shall not come into the house." Then David
dwelt in the stronghold, and called it the City of David.

David took control of what the Bible calls the Stronghold of Zion
(Metsudat Tsion), that is, the City of David. These last two locales
(Stronghold of Zion and the City of David) are the huge keys to solving
the riddle as to where the true temple is located. But to keep on a
straight path regarding the true temple site, let’s go back to David
capturing the City of David from the Jebusites. After he was in his
newly taken fortress, David was visited by an angel of the Lord that
pointed out the desired patch of real estate within the city walls that
David was to purchase from Araunah (Ornan) the Jebusite (2 Samuel
24:18-25). This land purchase was for a threshing floor—usually
comprised of a level area paved with flat stones where grain is tossed
in the air and the wind carries away the lighter chaff (worthless husks
of broken straw) and leaves the heavier kernel of wheat to fall on the
threshing floor. It is interesting that David had captured the 12-acre
fortress by force, yet God was now ordering David to pay money to the
Jebusite owner for a threshing floor. But this comment in Scripture is a
huge clue for the temple location. In 2 Chronicles 3:1 we read: "Now
Solomon began to build the temple at the house of the Lord at
Jerusalem…at the place that David had prepared on the threshing floor of
Ornan the Jebusite." This verse conclusively says that the temple will
be built in the strict boundary of the City of David at the place of the
threshing floor bought from the Jebusite. That can only be in the City
of David and this makes it impossible for the Temples to have been on
the Temple mount.

A CITY LOST

Over time, the temple was built by Solomon in the City of David, but it
was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC, only to have other
successive temples rebuilt in far less grandeur, then finally ending
with Herod building his temple where Christ actually visited on many
occasions. Herod’s temple was destroyed, just as Jesus predicted, down
to the very last stone. Author Ahron Horovitz says, "The City of David
was so completely forgotten that during the Byzantine Period even
Jerusalem’s biblical name "Zion"’ shifted to the southern portion of the
"Western Hill" which is called Mount Zion to this day. The Byzantine
"Church of Holy Zion" (Hagia Zion), built in 390 C.E. reinforced the
mistake."

Since the temple was reduced to rubble in 70 AD, the City of David was
then lost to weeds and abandonment. As time passed, no one knew where it
really was. And since the Stronghold of Zion was in the City of David,
Zion had vanished as well. The City of David was gone; its walls were no
more—and the huge clue for the temple being located by the threshing
floor was erased from history as well. And when something has vanished
that held such huge importance, people will stick a flag of indelible
proclamation in the ground and make said declaration purely out of need.
When you go to the Holy City today, road signs will point to the upper
city and the signs read "Zion," with an arrow pointing away from the
real, original location of Zion in the City of David. For almost two
millennia, Zion and the City of David laid silently together, buried in
a forgotten tomb of earth. In time, it would be a windswept field known
only to the farmer’s plow or a place to dump trash. Zion was forgotten,
that is, until explorers came to Jerusalem with a pick in one hand and a
Bible in the other. These explorers found the forgotten city with its
ancient gurgling Gihon Spring. This hidden subterranean world would cry
out that the City of David has been found and Zion was once more known.

To illustrate that Zion, the City of David, and the temple all intersect
as one, I offer the following synopsis fro Scripture:

2 Samuel 5:7 Zion=City of David

Joel 2:1 Zion=My holy mountain=temple

Joel 3:17 Zion=My holy mountain=temple

Joel 3:21 Zion= where the Lord dwells=temple

Psalm 2:6 Zion=My holy hill=Christ reigning =temple

Psalm 9:11 Zion=where the Lord dwells=temple

Psalm 20:2 Zion=from sanctuary=from temple

Psalm 65:1,4 Zion=Your holy temple

Psalm 102:16,19 Zion=sanctuary=City of David=temple

Psalm 132:8,13 Zion=ark resting place=City of David= temple

Isaiah 2:3 Zion=Mountain of the Lord=House of the God of Jacob=temple

Isaiah 24:23 Zion=Lord of hosts reigning=place of temple

Isaiah 66:20 Zion=My holy Mountain=house of the Lord=temple

When the City of David was missing people in the middle ages looked to
the most attractive feature in Jerusalem as a potential candidate site
for their lost temple. The scant few Jews living in Jerusalem then,
along with the influx of Christian pilgrims and crusaders, began
suggesting that the impressive high-walled fortress of the Dome of the
Rock was the actual foundation stones of Solomon’s temple. After all, it
was the most impressive structure that was still standing in Jerusalem,
so some assumed it must have certain historical prominence—and that
prominence was considered to be the temple itself.

Around 1169 Benjamin Tudela proclaimed emphatically that Muslim Haram
al- Sharif, The Roman Fort Antonia, and the traditional Temple Mount
platform was to be forevermore known as the proper placement of
Solomon’s temple. Tudela made this pronouncement with such surety and
vigor that it was dogmatically adopted and is fervently accepted as
uncontested fact to this day.

Eusebius, from the third and fourth century was curator of the Library
at Caesarea. He was a renowned scholar both then and today.He wrote,
"The hill called Zion and Jerusalem, the building there, that is to say,
the temple, the Holy of Holies, the Altar, and whatever else was there
dedicated to the glory of God have been utterly removed or shaken, in
fulfillment of the word." He further notes only a few lines later that
sadly, after the ruin of Zion (City of David), the very stones from "the
temple itself and from its ancient sanctuary were scavenged from the
temple site in Zion and used for the construction of "idol temples and
of theatres for the populous."

Ancient Hecateus of Abdera also testified that the temple was not only
in Zion, but located "nearly in the very center of the City of David."

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY?

o 2 Samuel 5:7: "Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion (that
is, the City of David)." Zion is undoubtedly within the City of David.

o Joel 3:17: "So shall you know that I am the Lord your God, dwelling in
Zion My holy mountain." "My holy Mountain," (temple) is, without
question, in Zion within the City of David.

o Joel 2:1: "Blow the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in My holy
mountain!" "My holy mountain" is the temple in Zion.

o Psalm 132:8,13: "Arise, O Lord, to Your resting place, You and the ark
of Your strength…For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His
dwelling place." The "ark of Your strength" is the Ark of the Covenant.
The temple will house the ark in prophecy and Zion is God’s chosen place
for that, as well as the temple placement.

o Psalm 2:6: "Yet I have set My King on My holy hill of Zion." The word
King is for Christ in this verse, and holy hill is the temple location
in Zion.

o Psalm 102:16,19: "For the Lord shall build up Zion…For He looked down
from the height of His sanctuary; from heaven the Lord viewed the
earth." Zion and sanctuary/ temple are the same location.

o Isaiah 2:3: "Come let us go up to the mountain of the Lord. To the
house of the God of Jacob…For out of Zion shall go forth the law…"
Mountain of the Lord," is the temple at Zion.

o Isaiah 24:23: "For the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion…" This
is Christ reigning in the temple at Zion.

o Psalm 20:2: "May He send you help from the sanctuary and strengthen
you out of Zion." Sanctuary is the temple at Zion.

o Psalm 9:11: "Sing praises to the Lord, who dwells in Zion!" The Lord
dwells in the temple at Zion.

o Joel 3:21 "For the Lord dwells in Zion." He resides in the temple at Zion.

o Psalm 65:1,4: "Praise is awaiting you, O God, in Zion… We shall be
satisfied with the goodness of Your house, of Your holy temple." The
holy temple is at Zion.

o Isaiah 66:20, "‘…to My holy mountain Jerusalem,’ says the Lord, ‘as
the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the
house of the Lord.’" "My holy mountain" is connected to "the house of
the Lord’s temple" (see Joel 3:17 above). The temple is self-evident as
being in Zion.

o 2 Chronicles 3:1: "Now Solomon began to build the house of the Lord at
Jerusalem…at the place that David had prepared on the threshing floor of
Ornan the Jebusite." This verse conclusively says that the temple will
be built in the strict boundary of the City of David which was the same
boundary of the Jebusite city. Zion is the place which links everything
together. It is the flaming arrow of all clues that flies directly at
the heart of the City of David and the true temple location.

First Kings 1:38-39:"So Zadok the priest, Nathan the prophet, Benaiah
the son of Jehoiada, the Cherethites and the Pelethites went down and
had Solomon ride on King David’s mule and took him to Gihon. Then Zadok,
the priest took a horn of oil from the tabernacle and anointed
Solomon…." The Bible is actually saying here that Solomon was taken to
the Gihon Spring and at that very spot the priest enters the tabernacle
that held the Ark of the Covenant and gets oil to anoint the newly
crowned king." The tabernacle with the ark in its hold was at Gihon
Spring in the City of David at Zion. This event happened at the same
Gihon Spring where David set the tent tabernacle most assuradly in very
close proximity to the threshing floor area.

Aristeas, a visitor from Egypt who recorded a description of the temple
and Jerusalem about fifty years after Alexander the Great. He was
memorialized by Eusebius, who quoted him as observing, "There is an
inexhaustible reservoir of water, as would be expected from an abundant
spring gushing up naturally from within the [temple]."This prodigious
water that was seen by Aristeas in the temple was witnessed long before
the two aqueducts were built in the time of the Hasmoneans (the
Maccabees) as well as Pilate, to channel water to Jerusalem from the
south of Bethlehem.

Tacitus, the Roman historian,400 years after Aristeas and recorded that
the temple at Jerusalem had a natural spring of water that welled from
its interior.Again, these references could only be describing the Gihon
Spring. It is located close to what is referred to as the Ophel, which
is a bulge of the earth abutting the City of David (Zion) laying just to
the south, and roughly about 1,000 feet, from the Temple Mount. There is
no other such spring(s) anywhere else in Jerusalem. However, there is a
place called the En-Rogel which is situated about a third of a mile
southeast of the City of David, but this is not a spring at all, rather
a well. The spring connection, especially a robust gushing spring, seems
to be like a laser pointer aimed at the City of David and not at the
Temple Mount as the temple site.

Another fascinating verse that makes it irrefutable that a
spring/fountain needs to be a fundamental component of the temple
location: "A fountain shall flow from the house of the Lord…" (Joel
3:18). Can it be any clearer that a water source (spring/fountain) flows
from the House of the Lord (temple) which held the Ark of the Covenant?
This verse is more solidly dogmatic in its pronouncements because it
says unequivocally that a spring flows from the temple. The temple would
logically need a prodigious amount of water (Gihon Spring) for cleaning
up after all the animal blood sacrifices. Gihon Spring is the only spot
that has enough water for the temple sacrifices in all of Jerusalem. It
appears that the Roman garrison could not obtain water from this spring
because it was holy water for temple usage. If the Romans even tried to
take one drop, it would result in violent rioting, so they were forced
to bring water from south of Bethlehem, as they did via aqueducts that
fed the many underground cisterns storage at the purported fort.

There is yet another verse containing Zion in connection with a spring
and the ark as well. The psalmist wrote, "And of Zion it will be said…
Both the singers and the players on instruments say, ‘All my springs are
within you.’" (Psalm 87:5,7). This verse has the words singers and
players on instruments which is associated in the Bible with a
processional carrying the ark (Psalm 68). The words springs are within
you would be consistent with the Gihon Spring as well as the word Zion,
which is connected with both the temple and the City of David.

Ezekiel 47:1-2 speaks of a spring as well… "Then he brought me back to
the door of the temple; and there was water, flowing from under the
threshold of the temple faced east; the water was flowing from under the
right side of the temple, south of the alter. He brought me out by way
of the north gate, and led me around on the outside to the outer gateway
that faces east; and there was water running out on the right side."

Hebrew writings, cited in a book by Zev Vilnay, also mention the Gihon
Spring area as the place for the future temple. "…At that time a great
stream shall flow forth from the Holy Temple and its name is Gihon." His
book refers to Jewish writings that specifically declare that the Gihon
Spring was where the high priest immersed in the spring’s water. The
special place was called the Bath of Ishmael and it was used for
purification by the high priest on the Day of Atonement.

THE CLEANSING STREAM

It has been said that High Priest Rabbi Yishmael from the second temple
period used the Gihon as a ritual bath for purification prior to
entering the temple: "Near there is a cave. People go down to it by
stairs. It is full of pure water, and there is a tradition that it is
the ritual bath of Rabbi Yshmael the High Priest." (as quoted in the
name of Rabbi Moshe, in: Moshe Ben Menachem Mendl Reicher, Sharrei
Yerushalayim Shar`ar 8.33). It is interesting that a second temple
period arch has been found above a stone staircase descending to the
Gihon Spring, giving evidence that the spring was in service at the time
of Herod’s temple. It was surmised in the book, The City of David,
written by Ahron Horovitz (p. 213), that the spring served as an
entranceway to those coming to purify themselves at the time of the
second temple era. If this were the case, then a huge question begs
asking: if priests and people purified themselves at the Gihon Spring
prior to entering the temple, why would they then walk almost a quarter
mile to the traditional Temple Mount area? That trek of distance and
likely human/animal interaction would make them unclean and unworthy to
enter any temple precincts. It would be like a doctor scrubbing up for
surgery and then walking a quarter of a mile on dusty streets as well as
coming in contact with unwashed contaminants along the way. Doctors
would not do this and priests, in their holy duties at the temple, would
not be purified in the waters of the Gihon only to later comingle with
potential sullying elements.

Even as far back as Moses and the time of the tabernacle, spring water
was essential in the purification ceremony for priests. Josephus writes
in Jewish Antiquities (Book 3,8.6), "Moses had sprinkled Aaron’s
vestments, himself, and his sons, with the blood of the beasts that were
killed, and had purified them with spring water and ointment, they
became God’s priests." Spring water (moving pure water) and ointments
(olive oil) were absolute essential needs for purification rituals. The
only running water in the desert that was available to Moses was the
water from the split rock—and the only spring water available in
Jerusalem was the Gihon Spring, which was in the City of David, within
the stone wall boundaries of the stronghold of Zion.

THE ARREST OF PAUL

In writing one of my previous books, The Lost Shipwreck of Paul, I spent
years researching this amazing man. In Acts 21, he is the focus of the
story once again: Paul entered the temple in Jerusalem after having
publicly fraternized with his "unclean Gentile friends." Upon hearing
that Paul had walked into this sacred compound with his filthy friends
in tow, the local people quickly formed a mob and descended on the
temple complex. Once inside, the irate throng grabbed Paul and dragged
him out of the gate, beating him with the intent to kill. As news of the
angry rioters reached the Roman commander in the garrison, the officer
rushed with a company of soldiers to take control of the situation.

At that point, something took place that really grabbed my attention. I
read in Acts 21:32. The Roman commander …"immediately took soldiers and
centurions, and ran down to them." (emphasis mine) This verse tells us
that the Roman soldiers went down to get Paul.

This should raise a significant red flag for anyone believing in the
Temple Mount because it is a high-walled fortress-looking edifice. You
can only go down from there. If The Temple Mount was the place of Paul’s
riot scene, then the big question is where would someone go down from to
reach Paul. There would have to be a fort floating somewhere in the
clouds to match the biblical account. And it is even more interesting
later in verse 35, where it reads that when Paul reached the stairs he
had to be carried up by the soldiers. So, according to the Bible, we
have to have stairs descending from the Roman garrison to the lower
temple gates and then they had to carry Paul going back up into the
Roman garrison (traditional Temple Mount platform). This can only apply
if the temple, for instance, is in the old City of David in the area of
the Gihon Spring.

A TRADITION BORN

Roman Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD) rebuilt the destroyed city of
Jerusalem, renamed it Aelia Capitolina, and kept Jews from entering.

 From the time of the Roman Emperor Julian the Apostate (middle of the
fourth century) until the Arabs conquered Jerusalem in 638 AD, the
Temple Mount had remained an abandoned garbage dump.The Crusaders later
seized the Holy City in 1099 and placed a huge gilt cross on the famed
Muslim Dome and called it "Templum Domini " (The Lord’s Temple). Because
of this, a tradition was born!

TIME IS CRUEL TO TRUTH

In the twelfth century, the Muslims took the Dome of the Rock back and
drove out the Christians. They put the crescent symbol of Islam back
atop the Dome where it still sits today. The message all of this sends
is that there have been huge spans of centuries where Romans kicked out
Jews and Christians from the land, as well as Muslims enacting
quarantine on Jews and Christians. During those long periods of
conquest, the Temple Mount, as well as the City of David, were often
lonely, forsaken places that knew only the stench of decaying trash or
the sound of wind sifting through bent weeds.

AN ARCHITECTS PERSPECTIVE

Adding to the controversy surrounding the temple location is an Israeli
architect in Tel Aviv, Tuvia Sagiv. His interesting observations are
based on height and angle of sight and elevations found in historical
accounts of King Herod Agrippa. I am not an architect and have no way of
verifying his claims; however, Sagiv is an expert in his field and has
conducted extensive research of the Temple Mount area and has calculated

its angles and datings. He writes the following in relation to the view
that King Herod Agrippa had into the Temple based upon Flavius Josephus.
"…Agrippa built a huge hole in his palace…The palace had belonged to the
Hasmonean family and was built on a high place. The king was able to
observe from the palace what was happening in the temple. The people of
Jerusalem objected to this because it was not the tradition to observe
what was taking place in the temple, especially the animal sacrifices.
Consequently, they built a high wall in the inner court above the
western arcade…." So what did Agrippa actually see? According to Tuvia
Sagiv, Herod Agrippa’s palace was west of the Temple Mount, at or near
the present day Citadel and Jaffa Gate. "The altar in the temple cannot
be directly seen looking from the west because the temple building
prevents any view. The only way to see something going on in the Temple
Courts is through the passageways between the temple wall and the walls
of the court. If we were high enough, from the north we could see into
the sacrifice-slaughter area, and viewing from the south we could see
the altar’s ramp. Moreover, without knowing exactly the location of
Herod Agrippa’s palace, using vertical sections, we discovered that the
western court wall prevented any view from the western court, even
without the addition of walls. In order to have seen what went on in the
court, a building whose height was 31-47 meters above the ground (10-16
floors) was needed. Without mechanical equipment it would have been very
difficult to climb to such a height, especially when concerning a
building whose purpose was domestic and residential. Even from the
highest towers in Jerusalem, the Phasael and Hippicus Towers, there was
no way to see what was being done in the temple court during the time of
the Second Temple. The height of these towers was 70-90 cubits,
approximately 35-45 meters."5 Tuvia Sagiv concluded that both Agrippa’s
horizontal and vertical angles of sight prove that it is impossible to
locate the Holy of Holies or the altar in the region of the Dome of the
Rock.

UNDERGROUND TREASURE

I Jerusalem I met with Eli Shukron a famed archaeologist. He has since
become a friend of mine. He told me that the Western Wailing wall
believed by every scholar to have been built built by Herod the Great.
Eli said that Herod did not build the wall at all. He told me that he
found a coin dated to 20 AD beneath a huge stone block under the very
lowest layer of foundation stones."

The coin was an ancient bronze and that of Valerius Gratus, Prefect
under Tiberius15-26 AD. The minting date of the coin as well as its
earliest distribution was vintage 20 AD, according to Eli’s explanation.
I did the math, Herod died in 4 BC. Now if Eli had dug out a coin from
under the lowest layer of stones in the Western Wall which dated to 20
AD, Herod died at least 24 years before the coin somehow made its way
under a stone so low in the foundation of the Temple Mount?

Eli also took me and some members of my research team to a recently
unearthed underground sanctuary. He told me that just a few individuals
had ever been allowed there. Eli had found this place about two years
earlier, and since then workers have painstakingly been sifting dirt and
hauling it away. Eli said, "This is a worship area, We do not know
exactly what it is, but it is from the first temple period and possibly
even before." Then waving his hand in a sweeping motion, he told us,
"This is the only worship area in the City of David. Everything is perfect."

Eli then pointed to a carved-out hole in the stone floor and said, "This
is an olive press to make oil." My heart and mind raced. Leviticus 21:12
tells us: "…nor shall he go out of the sanctuary, nor profane the
sanctuary of his God: for the consecration of the anointing oil of his
God is upon him." Once the oil was sprinkled on the priest, he was
forbidden to leave the sanctuary. This sacred place was at ground
zero—right where I thought the temple to be. So, logically, one might
assume that if the priest had the anointing oil present, this well may
be the actual temple location. Eli then walked over and bent down,
pointing to a hand-cut straight channel running the full length of the
room. He stood and said matter-of-fact, even though a sledge hammer
would have had as much subtlety to my brain, "This is a channel for
blood and, as you can see, this room is raised. It is here there was an
altar for sacrificing small animals, such as sheep." His extended hand
showed us the path of draining blood, and he explained, "The blood went
into the floor over there and the animals were tied up here."

He then stepped over to a corner in the stone wall and his fingers poked
through to a hole in the edge of the stone. He told us, "This is where a
ring was set to tie up the animal being slaughtered. Eli smiled, as
proud as if he had made the sanctuary himself. "Everything is perfect;
few people have been in here to see it." Eli continued, "I knew that
something happened here I did not know what? When I started to clean it
(take away the dirt) I began to understand. This is the place of
something huge and we are in the heart of it. This is an area of worship
and praying and a place where people connected with God. And from that
we understand what happened here in the time of the first temple period
and even before." I asked Eli, "How close are we to the Gihon Spring?"
He answered, "About ten meters (30 feet). You have everything together
here close to the spring, close to the water, living water —and we know
that a place of worship to God is near to water." He paused, "This is
the foundation of the earth that connects with God." As he continued to
show our team around, Eli pointed out two small recessed areas about the
size of a low ceiling walk-in closet. One of the spaces was empty but
the other had an upright stone approximately the size of a cemetery
headstone. There was no writing on it, which was typical for ancient
Jews. Eli explained that the fact it was still standing upright after
all these years was a sign that somebody long ago considered this to be
an extremely sacred place.

It was at that moment that the confluence of intellect and emotion
collided. I knew where I was—somewhere in the complex of Solomon’s
temple Eli had said that there were many other areas that needed
excavating, and I assumed that treasures of historic significance were
only a few feet away from where I was standing. More excavations will
follow and I wondered what the dirt was silently holding in its
concealing embrace.

We were in the City of David, the site of the temple. How could we doubt
the significance of this special place? It was right in the well-defined
precincts of the stronghold of Zion. The nearby flowing Gihon Spring
closed the target to a much more defined area. This had to be very near
to the threshing floor that David had bought from the Jebusite. I
believe that this was, is, and shall forever be ground zero of the
temple placement.

(4) Eleazar who led resistance at Masada said Roman fortress was the
only structure left by 73; therefore Wailing Wall is part of Fortress
Antonia

http://www.askelm.com/books/book008.asp

The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot

Associates for Scriptural Knowledge P.O. Box 25000 Portland, OR
97298-0990 Phone: 503-292-4352

In this large world in which we live, no man is ever an island. Each of
us is constantly coming in contact with others from whom we learn many
valuable teachings that cause us to change our minds on some important
occasions. In regard to the discovery of the site of the Temples in
Jerusalem, I have had the pleasure and the good fortune of being brought
into the company of many of the top historians and archaeologists of
Jerusalem over the period of my professional career as a historian and
theologian. My first visit to Jerusalem in 1961 set my mind on solving
the problems that affected the true geographical comprehension of early
Jerusalem throughout all its periods of history. I watched closely how
Professor Benjamin Mazar and Meir Ben Dov (his assistant at the time)
went about their professional duties and this was a great learning
experience. Both of them were more than willing to answer questions for
me in the many private times that I could learn from them. I later met
Professor Mazar's son, Ory, who was the first to recommend to me that
the Temples of Solomon and Zerubbabel were located on the Ophel mound
just to the north of the original Mount Zion on the southeast ridge. He
said that his father was leaning in that direction at the time of his
death. After a study of six months, in 1995 I wrote a preliminary report
that suggested strongly that this theory was indeed correct for the two
earlier Temples. I was then under the impression that Simon the
Hasmonean (along with Herod a century later) moved the Temple from the
Ophel mound to the Dome of the Rock area. Mr. Bill Lavers in England in
reading closely the texts in Josephus mentioned that Herod stated
dogmatically that his Temple (though enlarged to be double in size of
the former Temple) was still located in the same general area as that of
the former Temples. This was also pointed out to me by Dr. James Tabor
and David Sielaff (My historical and compositional editor).


But then I noticed the eyewitness account of Eleazar who led the final
contingent of Jewish resistance to the Romans at Masada. He stated that
the Roman fortress which had long been in Jerusalem was the only
structure left by 73 C.E. With this key in mind, I came to the
conclusion in 1997 that all the Temples were indeed located on the Ophel
mound over the area of the Gihon Spring. It then became clear that the
dimensions of the Temple (with its unique shape and characteristics) was
not the Haram esh-Sharif. We then began to draw (as would an architect)
the Temple at its location over the Gihon Spring. I had the good fortune
of having a professional artist, who was also interested in biblical
matters, draw what Josephus stated in his writings. My thanks go to
Lydia Cooper who provided the pictures showing how the Temple and Fort
Antonia looked in relationship to one another. The illustrations she
provided help make the matter much clearer to those who have only a
limited amount of study into these historical and geographical matters.

This book is a result of my concluding research that shows that the
Temples of God in Jerusalem were indeed located over the Gihon Spring
and not over the Dome of the Rock. What has been  amazing to me is the
vast amount of Jewish, Muslim, and Christian records that remain
available from the first to the sixteenth centuries that clearly
vindicate the conclusions that I have reached in this book of research.
Any information that you readers may have or discover that either
support or detract from the conclusions that I have made in this book,
would be greatly appreciated by me.


Prices Details Reference $29.95 US ASK #: BK08 ISBN: 0-945657-95-1
$34.95 Canadian 486 pages, Softbound Published: 2000 $39.95 Outside US
and Canada Illustrations

Selected Reviews

"This is an unexpected, exceptional analysis of the historical and
archaeological data of the Temples of Jerusalem. This new explanation of
the venue of the First and Second Temples provides the solution to
heretofore incongruous statements in Josephus with the evidence of the
biblical and archaeological records. Not only a work of significant
scholarly impact it may well serve as the awaited stimulus for the
building of Jerusalem's Third Temple by shifting our collective focus
from the Haram esh-Sharif to the area of the Gihon Spring."

- Dr. Michael P. Germano, Editor, bibarch.com. Professor Emeritus
Ambassador University, a graduate of the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, and who holds earned doctorates from the University of
Southern California and the University of La Verne.

He has completed post-graduate study in anthropology, archaeology, and
theology at Southern Methodist University and Texas A&M University at
College Station in Texas. You can contact him at PO Box 2494 Cullowhee,
NC 28723-2494. It is my pleasure to recommend his excellent BibArch Web
Site that explores the world of biblical archaeology. It is fully
scholarly and is at http://www.bibarch.com.

"When I first read of Ernest L. Martin's thesis that both the 1st and
2nd Jewish Temples, those of Solomon and Herod, were located south of
the presently accepted Dome of the Rock location--down in the area of
the ancient City of David over the Ophel spring, my reaction was short
and to the point--impossible, preposterous!!  Having now read his
arguments I am convinced this thesis, however revolutionary and
outlandish it first appears, deserves careful, academic and critical
consideration and evaluation. I am not yet convinced that Martin has
ironed out all the problems or handled all the potential objections, yet
he has set forth a case that should be heard. His arguments regarding
the size of the Fortress Antonia, based on Josephus and other evidence
we have about Roman military encampments, must be addressed. He also
makes a most compelling argument based on Luke, writing a decade or so
after the 70 C.E. destruction, and obviously wanting to report on the
lips of Jesus an accurate prediction of the state of things regarding
"not one stone left upon another" in the post-War city of Jerusalem.
Historians of the Byzantine, Islamic, and Crusader periods are more
qualified to judge his arguments from subsequent epochs, however, my
initial reading of Martin's presentation has left me with the same
impression--all of this evidence needs to be reexamined in the light of
this radical proposal. Martin's thesis is so bold, so utterly
non-conventional, and so potentially upsetting, radically altering
central aspects of the theological, historical, cultural, and political
understanding of Jerusalem and its holy places, it should not be
ignored. I hope Martin's book will begin a most interesting debate and
critical discussion of all relevant issues."

- Prof. James D. Tabor, Dept. of Religious Studies, The University of
North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC
  28223.

Table of Contents

Chapter Page

1 What was the Haram esh-Shariff? 8
2 The Roman Fortress at Jerusalem 33
3 The Largeness of Fort Antonia 50
4 The Conclusion of the Mosaic System 60
5 The Harem esh-Shariff was Fort Antonia 75
6 The Rock and Fortress of Antonia 82
7 The Significance of the "Rock" under the Dome of the Rock 93
8 Many Modern Sites for the Temples in Jerusalem 108
9 The Real Jewish Site of the Temples 142
10 All Jewish Buildings in Jerusalem Destroyed in 70 C.E. 163
11 Every Stone Uprooted from the Temple 168
12 Ruins of the Temple in Southeastern Jerusalem 199
13 The First "Western (Wailing) Wall" 218
14 The Actual Temple Site from 638 to 1099 C.E. 233
15 The Garden of Eden, The Tower of Babel and the Temple of God 248
16 Where did Solomon build the Temple? 262
17 The Centrality of the Early Temples 271
18 The Temple on the Southeast Ridge 277
19 The Prime Position of the Temple 283
20 The Original Temple over the Gihon Spring 288
21 Necessary Spring Waters within the Temples 308
22 Where was the Akra? 322
23 The City of David and the Ophel 331
24 Critical Problems Facing Simon the Hasmonean 340
25 A New Temple had to be Built 356
26 The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Jerusalem of Simon 363
27 Resistance to Simon's Rule 368
28 Simon's Building Projects 381
29 The Temple in the Book of Enoch 387
30 Rebuilding the Temple 396
31 Descriptions of Fort Antonia and the Temple of Herod 410
32 The Colonnades from the Temple to Fort Antonia 423
33 The Temple that Josephus Knew 432
34 The Proper Comparisons of the Temple 456
35 How Could the Rabbis Forget? 471

© 1976-2019 Associates for Scriptural Knowledge

(5) Professor George Wesley Buchanan endorses Ernest L. Martin's book on
Location of Jewish Temples

In Search Of King Solomon’s Temple, by George Wesley Buchanan, Ph.D.,
Litt.D., D.S.L.

http://www.askelm.com/temple/t130901.pdf

(6) How to buy The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot, by Ernest L. Martin

Buy it at http://www.askelm.com/

Or (exact link) at http://www.askelm.com/books/book008.asp