Proof: The Temple Mount is Not @ Dome of the Rock

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hi Little Lamb,
Melchidezek -who is Shem- was a priest of the Most High God, in the office of "Firstborn" over earth after Enoch ascended. Enoch was firstborn and priest, descended from Seth, who was in that office.
Noah received that office from Melchidezek. Noah passed it to Shem.

yeshasavedme
Yes, Melchizedek is a fascinating study......

Melchizedek Connection, Royal Priesthood
Jan 21, 2007

We can start from the catholic roman Eucharistic Prayer, that cames from the II century (the OO coptic liturgy is similar in that):
Look with favor on these offerings and accept them as once you accepted the gifts of your servant Abel, the sacrifice of Abraham, our father in faith, and the bread and wine offered by your priest Melchizedek

Let's keep in mind Psalm 110:4: The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, "You are a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek."

It is clear that the sacrifice of Christ, re-newed in the Eucharist, is the fullness of the one of Melchisedek, and NOT of the one of Aaron

More in general we can say that exist many different kind of Priesthood in Christianity (English use a single words for many different ideas):

- the Priesthood of Aaron: they were the priest who served the temple of Jerusalem. It was hereditary (tribe of Levi). Jesus was NOT a priest according Aaron

- the Priesthood of Melchisedek, that is a figure of the Priesthood of Christ. Christ is the Only One High Priest.
His sacrifice was only one, and He was both the Priest and the Victim.

- the Priesthood of all believers: it is our chance, as christians, to unit ourself with Christ on the Cross

- the bishop and presbiters (priests): it is a ministry, the ministry to re-new the sacrifice of the cross in every Eucharistic, in order to let us touch such sacrifice.

LittleLambofJesus said: ↑
http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/priest/RP24.htm
The Royal Priesthood-The Melchizedek Connection

This page is almost rubbish.

This site says that God created two men, Melchisedek and Adam, but while Adam fall in the original sin, Melcisedek did not....rubbish unsuported by the Bible

It is not serious to start from two lines verse in the Bible (and in fact we have ONLY a very few verses in the Bible about that), and to write pages and pages of theories that are not supported by these only verses.

This kind of Bible study is NOT for me. We call this pages: personal revelation

The only think if you want to have more material to study a part the few verses we have, is not to read these pages of personal revelations, but to study in the Jewish and Christian early tradition which was the understanding about Melikisedek.

And the early Christians saw Melikisedek as a figure of the Messiah, of Christ. An allegory. A sign that the the priesthood is something more general than the priesthood of Aaronn.

And, from an historical poit of view, the Bible scolars simply state that Melchisedec reminds the historical moment when the Jews arrived in Palestinia and found there an existing population with his religious customs: and the Jews mixed with such population and took also some of those customs (like the use to settle temples for sacrifices in some fixed places)

Kindgdom Bible Studies Royal Priesthood Part 17
Melchizedek Connection, Royal Priesthood

Genesis 14:18
And Malkiy-Tsedeq, king of Shalem brought forth bread and wine and he a Priest of 'El-Most-High/'Elyown. 19 And he blessing him and he is saying, "being blessed Abram of 'El-most-high/'Elyown possessor of heavens and land 20 And being blessed 'El-most-high/'elyown, who awarded thy foes in thy hand". And he is giving to him a tenth of all.

Hebrews 7:1
For this the Malkiy-Tsedeq/melcisedek <3198>, King of Salem, Priest of the GOD of the most-high, the together-joining Abraham turning-back from the smiting of the kings, and did bless him. [Genesis 14:18]
12 For being changed/translated the Priesthood, out of necessity also, of Law a change is becoming.

One of the most intriguing descriptions of the unique character of the High Priesthood of Jesus is found in Heb. 7:17 wherein it is stated, "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." This one grand statement shows that Jesus is not like any of the other priests who the people of Israel knew so much about. The entire seventh chapter of Hebrews is about THE MELCHIZEDEK CONNECTION, that is, it is about the way Jesus Christ, and thus, His body, the Royal Priesthood, is related to a strange man named Melchizedek. And the connection between Jesus Christ and Melchizedek is worth exploring. Let's take a look at the Melchizedek Connection.

The whole place Melchizedek occupies in sacred history is one of the most remarkable proofs of the inspiration and the unity of Scripture, as written under the direct supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. In the Book of Genesis all we know of him is told in three short, very simple verses. A thousand years later we find a Psalm with just one single verse, in which God Himself is introduced, swearing to His Son that He is to be a High Priest after the Order of Melchizedek. Another thousand years pass, and that single verse becomes the seed of the wondrous exposition, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, of the whole work of redemption in Christ Jesus. All its most remarkable characteristics are found enveloped in this wondrous type. The more we study it the more we exclaim: THIS IS THE LORD'S DOING; IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES.

In Genesis, chapter fourteen, we have one of the most intriguing stories in the Bible, that of Abram's encounter with Melchizedek, king of Salem, and "the priest of the Most High God." In the Genesis story Melchizedek is a strange and mysterious figure. He flashes across the scene like a meteor. There is no heralding of his appearance, nor any mention of its results. He arrives out of the blue; there is no account of his family; there is nothing about his birth, his descent, his life, his work, or his death. He simply arrives. We learn only that he was king of Salem and priest of the Most High God. During the time of Abraham there were no large nations. Instead, there were small cities where families lived or around which a tribe of nomadic people settled. The population of these cities was probably not more than a few hundred - at most a few thousand. Each city was presided over by a king. Often, these city-states were at war with one another. Sometimes cities would form alliances with other cities and form large armies that would then make war upon yet another city or alliance of cities. Such became the case in the lower Jordan where Lot, Abram's nephew, and his family settled. An alliance of Mesopotamian cities drove Lot out of the Canaanite city of Sodom where he lived and took him captive.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Morning Little Lamb.
Your reply has lots of stuff from other writers, who err.
Melche =king. Zedek = righteousness. Shem was the king of righteousness, the priest of the Most High God, and he dwelt at Mount Moriah with Eber, at the time he came out to meet with Abram and gave to Abram the Blessing of Firstborn. In Hebrews 7, Shem is not named because the Holy Spirit morphed him into the “image” of the Son of God, who has neither beginning of days nor end of life, but “made like” =“morphed” into the likeness of the Son of God, who Himself, remains a priest forever. Now that the Priest forever is anointed (at the Baptism unto Righteousness, by John), which was typed in the “Messiah =Anointing” oil the son (sons, after each had fulfilled his temporary office, and another anointed) of Aaron had poured upon him at their baptism of righteousness into the temporary office of the priesthood of the firstborn: there is a High Priest forever, for all nations (for whosoever believeth in His name) who is sitting on the throne in heaven, which Adam forfeited at the fall, when he was cast down from heaven and did not live out his millennial day in his defiled flesh, so as to take his seat as high king and high priest over earth....

But the Redeemer/Kinsman was promised at the fall, and He is indeed the “second creation human being person, who is, by being born out of the womb of the virgin, and in the lineage of Adam, the True Kinsman Redeemer, who had the legal right, and the POWER to ransom His brothers of Adam flesh.
But His flesh is not Adam flesh. It is the second Man, named “Israel” (Isaiah 49), and YHWH in the Person of God the Word, who put that human being creation flesh on like a garment (Isaiah 59); and He will wear that flesh of second creation forever, and will never leave us orphans (as we are in Adam), and He is the High Priest of earth, sitting on the throne of Mercy in heaven, and He is High King of earth who will take His power unto Himself as High King of the earth which He ransomed by His blood poured out upon it at the once for all Atonement, when He returns, which is His second coming.

In Jewish writings they knew Melche Zedek was Shem. That is confirmed history. Jesus was anointed into that office of Firstborn at John’s baptism “unto righteousness”, when the Holy Spirit came upon Him as a dove.
Shem outlived Abraham, BTW, and you can look that up. Abraham had the blessing of the office that Noah had bestowed upon Shem, and Shem bestowed upon Abraham in Genesis 14.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

yeshuasavedme said: ↑
............but when He comes back, all remaining on earth for the Millennial Sabbath will be in Christ, and One spirit in His Living Spirit. That is, those who are left on earth after the rapture of the Church, who come to believe in His name during the tribulation,

More Zionist Futurist Dispensationalist poppy [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], which has been refuted many times on this board.......
Dispensationalism – Grace Online Library

The Lost Thousand Years Between Two Resurrections by Rev. Nollie Malabuyo – Grace Online Library
Evaluating Premillennialism: Part II – Christ’s Return and the Rapture by Cornelis P. Venema – Grace Online Library
No evaluation of Dispensational Premillennialism may ignore its teaching of a two-phased return of Christ, the first phase of which is commonly known as the rapture. This feature is its…

Dispensationalism: A Return to Biblical Theology or Pseudo Christian Cult – Part I by Gospel Plow – Grace Online Library
=======================
Why Jesus won't reign on this Earth for 1,000 years

======================================
A Literal 1000 Year Kingodom on Earth, "Fairy Tale"!

yeshuasavedme said: ↑
Hi Little Lamb,
Melchidezek -who is Shem- was a priest of the Most High God, in the office of "Firstborn" over earth after Enoch ascended. Enoch was firstborn and priest, descended from Seth, who was in that office.
Noah received that office from Melchidezek. Noah passed it to Shem.

yeshasavedme
Yes, Melchizedek is a fascinating study......
==============
One of the most intriguing descriptions of the unique character of the High Priesthood of Jesus is found in Heb. 7:17 wherein it is stated, "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." This one grand statement shows that Jesus is not like any of the other priests who the people of Israel knew so much about. The entire seventh chapter of Hebrews is about THE MELCHIZEDEK CONNECTION,
========

Morning Little Lamb.
Your reply has lots of stuff from other writers, who err.
Melche =king. Zedek = righteousness. Shem was the king of righteousness, the priest of the Most High God, and he dwelt at Mount Moriah with Eber, at the time he came out to meet with Abram and gave to Abram the Blessing of Firstborn.

Hello ysm.
This thread is not about Melchizedek, the 1000yr period or raptures, so perhaps we can get back to the original OP?

Amazing information which was right there in the histories all the time, and has been proven.
The Dome of the Rock was not the Temple site, and the Wailing Wall is the remains of the Roman Fort Antonia, as described by Josephus, where 6,000 Roman soldiers were quartered!
...In actual fact, the Jewish people today at their Wailing Wall are NOT praying at a wall of their former Temples. They are sanctifying the western wall of Fort Antonia that was built by King Herod but taken over by the Romans as their prime fortress in Jerusalem in 6 C.E. at the end of the earlier Herodian dynasty. The shrine on the other side of the Wailing Wall in the time of Jesus was NOT the Temple built by Herod. As a part of the Roman Praetorium, it necessarily possessed a Temple dedicated to the Roman Emperor and the Gods of Rome (or similar accepted divinities of the Roman pantheon) that all encampments of the Romans had near their center section. It is sad to see but the symbolic "heart and soul" of modern Judaism (as Jews are persistently calling it today) is the site of a former Roman Temple dedicated to Jupiter. The place was once holy to the very people who destroyed the real Temple in 70 C.E. This is occurring while the true site of their Temples lies forlorn and languishing in utter ruin and degradation in the Ophel part of the southeastern ridge. How ironic!...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

yeshuasavedme said: ↑
Amazing information which was right there in the histories all the time, and has been proven.
The Dome of the Rock was not the Temple site, and the Wailing Wall is the remains of the Roman Fort Antonia, as described by Josephus, where 6,000 Roman soldiers were quartered!

...In actual fact, the Jewish people today at their Wailing Wall are NOT praying at a wall of their former Temples. They are sanctifying the western wall of Fort Antonia that was built by King Herod but taken over by the Romans as their prime fortress in Jerusalem in 6 C.E. at the end of the earlier Herodian dynasty. The shrine on the other side of the Wailing Wall in the time of Jesus was NOT the Temple built by Herod. As a part of the Roman Praetorium, it necessarily possessed a Temple dedicated to the Roman Emperor and the Gods of Rome (or similar accepted divinities of the Roman pantheon) that all encampments of the Romans had near their center section. It is sad to see but the symbolic "heart and soul" of modern Judaism (as Jews are persistently calling it today) is the site of a former Roman Temple dedicated to Jupiter. The place was once holy to the very people who destroyed the real Temple in 70 C.E. This is occurring while the true site of their Temples lies forlorn and languishing in utter ruin and degradation in the Ophel part of the southeastern ridge. How ironic!...

This is clearly wrong. Though the Jews are for the most part blinded to Messiah...THEY OUGHT TO KNOW WHERE THE TEMPLE STOOD.

Any Jew will tell you the "temple proper" (the structure itself), which is the temple, stood right where the "Dome of the Rock" is.

Even more, when you understand that when the Muslims built it there, they did so with full knowledge that, that is where the temple stood...they did it with the express purpose of it being a RELIGIOUS SLAP IN THE FACE OF ISRAEL.

Do a little more homework yeshuasavedme. You're dead wrong on this!!!

The temple (Herod's temple), is a structure that stands all alone. The walls around it was the last protection of that temple.

Look at any accurate map of "Old Jerusalem" like this:

The website for this (with the legend) is here:
The Model of Ancient Jerusalem

The "Wailing Wall" and "..not stone upon stone left.." Matt, Mark and Luke

There appears to be arguments concerning the Temple/Jerusalem Discourse about the wall that remains in Jerusalem from the 70ad destruction of Jerusalem.
Most theologians believe the Wailing Wall is either part of the Temple wall or that it is the western wall of Fort Antonia.
In either case, since a stone wall is still standing, does that make the 70ad Jerusalem/Temple Discourse concerning "stone upon stone being thrown down" a false prophecy by Jesus?.

Matthew 24 Mount of Olives and Titus' 10th Legion on Mt Olives 70ad

Please visit my "Jewish Wars" thread

Matt 24:6..The Jewish Wars in 1st century...Up to 70ad and Masada

 

[ebedmelech]

LLoJ, that's some good info on both sides. Some of those threads I participated in...and I still stand as I did back then.

 

[Lost4words]

I definitely believe that the jews are worshipping at a non temple wall. It was the fort that occupied the vast area.

 

[ebedmelech]

I definitely believe that the jews are worshipping at a non temple wall. It was the fort that occupied the vast area.

The great discrepancy is the thread title that "The Temple Mount is Not @ The Dome of The Rock".

I actually hold that the Western Wall (Wailing Wall), to be insignificant for the most part because it is not, nor would it be part of the "temple proper". I do understand why it's significant to the Jews praying there though.

 

[Lost4words]

The great discrepancy is the thread title that "The Temple Mount is Not @ The Dome of The Rock".

I actually hold that the Western Wall (Wailing Wall), to be insignificant for the most part because it is not, nor would it be part of the "temple proper". I do understand why it's significant to the Jews praying there though.

And why is it significant to them? Thanks

 

[ebedmelech]

And why is it significant to them? Thanks

Being that most Jews deny Christ as the messiah, they have no proper temple for worship in accordance with the Old Covenant prescription God gave them. They're still looking to restore temple worship. The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

 

[Lost4words]

Being that most Jews deny Christ as the messiah, they have no proper temple for worship in accordance with the Old Covenant prescription God gave them. They're still looking to restore temple worship. The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

Actually, it was not where the Dome is though. They have got that wrong.

That whole area was actually the Roman fort!

 

[ebedmelech]

Actually, it was not where the Dome is though. They have got that wrong.

That whole area was actually the Roman fort!

That's where we differ on the subject. If anyone knows where the temple stood it's the Jews. They missed on who their messiah was, but there's no way with their historical documentation that they would miss on their ancient temple location. Just no way.

 

[BABerean2]

The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

I would respectfully say that the writings of Josephus, and the New Testament, do not agree with your conclusion found above.

In the writings below Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock. Where is that rock today?

The New Testament reveals the fact that the Roman fort was above the Jewish temple.

Fort Antonia (Herod’s Praetorium, Acts 23:35) was built by Herod and given to the Romans. It was used to house the thousands of Roman soldiers needed to police the ancient city of Jerusalem.

In Acts 23:23 the Romans sent 470 soldiers to escort one man. Are we to believe all of the soldiers from the fort were sent with this one man?

During 73 AD the Jewish leader at Masada said the only thing left of Jerusalem was that which belonged to the Romans.

Mar 15:16 Then the soldiers led Him away into the hall called Praetorium, and they called together the whole garrison.

Act_23:35 he said, "I will hear you when your accusers also have come." And he commanded him to be kept in Herod's Praetorium.

Based on Acts 21:31-40, we know the Roman fort was above the temple because the soldiers had to go “down” to rescue Paul from the mob at the temple. Paul later spoke to the crowd below from the steps.

The following comes from Wars of the Jews, by Flavius Josephus, Book 5, Chapter 5, Section 8.

“8. Now as to the tower of Antonia, it was situated at the corner of two cloisters of the court of the temple; of that on the west, and that on the north; it was erected upon a rock of fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice; it was the work of king Herod, wherein he demonstrated his natural magnanimity. In the first place, the rock itself was covered over with smooth pieces of stone, from its foundation, both for ornament, and that any one who would either try to get up or to go down it might not be able to hold his feet upon it. Next to this, and before you come to the edifice of the tower itself, there was a wall three cubits high; but within that wall all the space of the tower of Antonia itself was built upon, to the height of forty cubits. The inward parts had the largeness and form of a palace, it being parted into all kinds of rooms and other conveniences, such as courts, and places for bathing, and broad spaces for camps; insomuch that, by having all conveniences that cities wanted, it might seem to be composed of several cities, but by its magnificence it seemed a palace. And as the entire structure resembled that of a tower, it contained also four other distinct towers at its four corners; whereof the others were but fifty cubits high; whereas that which lay upon the southeast corner was seventy cubits high, that from thence the whole temple might be viewed; but on the corner where it joined to the two cloisters of the temple, it had passages down to them both, through which the guard (for there always lay in this tower a Roman legion) went several ways among the cloisters, with their arms, on the Jewish festivals, in order to watch the people, that they might not there attempt to make any innovations; for the temple was a fortress that guarded the city, as was the tower of Antonia a guard to the temple; and in that tower were the guards of those three (14). There was also a peculiar fortress belonging to the upper city, which was Herod’s palace; but for the hill Bezetha, it was divided from the tower Antonia, as we have already told you; and as that hill on which the tower of Antonia stood was the highest of these three, so did it adjoin to the new city, and was the only place that hindered the sight of the temple on the north. And this shall suffice at present to have spoken about the city and the walls about it, because I have proposed to myself to make a more accurate description of it elsewhere.”

The Jewish historian Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock, on the highest hill, and had passages that went “down” to the temple. Josephus described it as a large structure, instead of what we find in Avi Yonah’s modern model of the fort. Josephus also said the fort blocked the view of the temple on the north side.

In the passage below we find the Romans used Fort Antonia as the base to attack the temple during 70 AD. They had previously gained access to the fort by attacking the foundation for seven days.
(Book 6, Chapter 2, Section 7) The passage proves at least part of Fort Antonia remained intact on the day the Jewish temple was destroyed.

From War of the Jews, by Josephus, Book 6, Chapter 4, sections 4-5.

"4. Now it is true that on this day the Jews were so weary, and under such consternation, that they refrained from any attacks. But on the next day they gathered their whole force together, and ran upon those that guarded the outward court of the temple very boldly, through the east gate, and this about the second hour of the day. These guards received that their attack with great bravery, and by covering themselves with their shields before, as if it were with a wall, they drew their squadron close together; yet was it evident that they could not abide there very long, but would be overborne by the multitude of those that sallied out upon them, and by the heat of their passion. However, Caesar seeing, from the tower of Antonia, that this squadron was likely to give way, he sent some chosen horsemen to support them. Hereupon the Jews found themselves not able to sustain their onset, and upon the slaughter of those in the forefront, many of the rest were put to flight. But as the Romans were going off, the Jews turned upon them, and fought them; and as those Romans came back upon them, they retreated again, until about the fifth hour of the day they were overborne, and shut themselves up in the inner [court of the] temple.

5. So Titus retired into the tower of Antonia, and resolved to storm the temple the next day, early in the morning, with his whole army, and to encamp round about the holy house. But as for that house, God had, for certain, long ago doomed it to the fire; and now that fatal day was come, according to the revolution of ages; it was the tenth day of the month Lous, [Ab,] upon which it was formerly burnt by the king of Babylon; although these flames took their rise from the Jews themselves, and were occasioned by them; for upon Titus’s retiring, the seditious lay still for a little while, and then attacked the Romans again, when those that guarded the holy house fought with those that quenched the fire that was burning the inner [court of the] temple; but these Romans put the Jews to flight, and proceeded as far as the holy house itself. At which time one of the soldiers, without staying for any orders, and without any concern or dread upon him at so great an undertaking, and being hurried on by a certain divine fury, snatched somewhat out of the materials that were on fire, and being lifted up by another soldier, he set fire to a golden window, through which there was a passage to the rooms that were round about the holy house, on the north side of it. As the flames went upward, the Jews made a great clamor, such as so mighty an affliction required, and ran together to prevent it; and now they spared not their lives any longer, nor suffered any thing to restrain their force, since that holy house was perishing, for whose sake it was that they kept such a guard about it."

All of this provides tremendous evidence that the Dome of the Rock is the true location of Fort Antonia. If at least part of Fort Antonia remained on the day the temple was destroyed, where is that part of Fort Antonia now?

Watch the YouTube video… The “Temple Mount” is Roman Fort Antonia, by Leeland Jones, to see the truth with your own eyes.

.

 

[Lost4words]

That's where we differ on the subject. If anyone knows where the temple stood it's the Jews. They missed on who their messiah was, but there's no way with their historical documentation that they would miss on their ancient temple location. Just no way.

See post #52 above

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

ebedmelech said: ↑
The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

I would respectfully say that the writings of Josephus, and the New Testament, do not agree with your conclusion found above.

In the writings below Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock. Where is that rock today?

The New Testament reveals the fact that the Roman fort was above the Jewish temple.

Fort Antonia (Herod’s Praetorium, Acts 23:35) was built by Herod and given to the Romans. It was used to house the thousands of Roman soldiers needed to police the ancient city of Jerusalem........

All of this provides tremendous evidence that the Dome of the Rock is the true location of Fort Antonia. If at least part of Fort Antonia remained on the day the temple was destroyed, where is that part of Fort Antonia now?

Watch the YouTube video… The “Temple Mount” is Roman Fort Antonia, by Leeland Jones, to see the truth with your own eyes.
.

ebedmelech said: ↑
The great discrepancy is the thread title that "The Temple Mount is Not @ The Dome of The Rock".
I actually hold that the Western Wall (Wailing Wall), to be insignificant for the most part because it is not, nor would it be part of the "temple proper". I do understand why it's significant to the Jews praying there though.

And why is it significant to them? Thanks

ebedmelech said: ↑
Being that most Jews deny Christ as the messiah, they have no proper temple for worship in accordance with the Old Covenant prescription God gave them. They're still looking to restore temple worship. The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

Lost4words said: ↑
Actually, it was not where the Dome is though. They have got that wrong.
That whole area was actually the Roman fort!

Do the pictures posted below depict the correct location of the Gold Dome and Western Wall?
======================
The Strange Story of the False Wailing Wall

There is absolute proof that the present site of the Jewish "Wailing Wall" in Jerusalem is NOT any part of the Temple that existed in the time of Herod and Jesus. In fact, that particular location that the Jewish authorities have accepted represents the Western Wall of an early Roman fortress (finally built and enlarged by Herod the Great). King Herod called it Fort Antonia, after the famous Mark Anthony who lived at the end of the first century before Christ.

But how did the present "Wailing Wall" get erroneously selected by the Jewish authorities as a holy place for the Jews? ...................

Deut 28:66 "and becomes lives of thee being hung to thee from in front of, and thou art afraid night and by day, and not thou be sure in lives of thee. 67 In morning thou sayest 'who shall give evening' and in evening thou shalt say 'who shall give morning'. From awe of heart of thee which thou shalt fear and from sight of eyes of thee which thou shalt see"
===============
Aerial view
best aerial view of dome of the rock pictures - Google Search

Visual Timeline of the Roman-Jewish War ARTchive @ PreteristArchive.com

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

History records few events more generally interesting than the destruction of Jerusalem, and the subversion of the Jewish state, by the arms of the Romans. -- Their intimate connexion with the dissolution of the Levitical economy, and the establishment of Christianity in the world;
the striking verification which they afford of so many of the prophecies, both of the Old and New Testament, and the powerful arguments of the divine authority of the Scriptures which are thence derived ;

Jerusalem was built on two mountains. Three celebrated walls surrounded the city on every side, except that which was deemed inaccessible, and there it was defended by one wall only. The most ancient of these walls was remarkable for its great strength, and was, moreover, erected on a hanging rock, and fortified by sixty towers. on the middle wall there were fourteen towers only ; but on the third, which was also distinguished by the extraordinary merit of its architecture, there were no less than ninety. The celebrated tower of Psephinos, before which Titus at first encamped, was erected on this latter wall, and even excelled it in the superior style of its architecture : it was seventy cubits high and had eight angles, each of which commanded most extensive and beautiful prospects. In clear weather, the spectator had from them a view of the Mediterranean sea, of Arabia, and of the whole extent of the Jewish dominions. Besides this there were three other towers of great magnitude, named Hippocos, Phasael, and Mariamne. The two former, famed for their strength and grandeur, were nearly ninety cubits high ; the latter, for its valuable curiosities, beauty and elegance, was about fifty five cubits. They were all built of white marble ; and so exquisite was the workmanship, that each of them appeared as if it had been hewn out of an immense single block of it. Notwithstanding their great elevation, they yet must have appeared, from the surrounding country, far loftier than they really were. The old wall, it has just been remarked, was built upon a high rock : but these towers were erected upon the top of a hill, the summit of which was itself thirty cubits above the top of the old wall ! Such edifices, so situated, it is easy to conceive, must have give to the city a very great degree of grandeur and magnificence. Not far distant from these towers stood the royal palace, of singular beauty and elegance. Its pillars, its porticoes, its galleries, its apartments, were all incredibly costly, splendid and superb ; while the groves, gardens, walks, fountains, and aqueducts, with which it was encompassed, formed the richest and most delightful scenery that can possibly be imagined. The situation of these structures was on the north side of Jerusalem. Its celebrated temple, and the strong fort of Antonia, were on the east side, and directly opposite to the Mount of Olives. This fort was built on a rock fifty cubits in height, and so steep as to be inaccessible on every side ; and to render it still more so, it was faced with thin slabs of marble, which, being slippery, proved at once a defense and an ornament. In the midst of the fort stood the castle of Antonia, the interior parts of which, for grandeur, state, and convenience, resembled more a palace than a fortress. Viewed from a distance it had the appearance of a tower, encompassed by four other towers, situated at the four angles of a square. Of these latter, three were fifty cubits high, and the fourth seventy cubits. The tower last mentioned commanded an excellent view of the whole temple, the riches grandeur, and elegance of which it is not in the power of language to describe. Whether we consider its architecture, its dimensions, its magnificence, its splendor, or the sacred purposes to which it was dedicated, it must equally be regarded as the most astonishing fabric that was ever constructed. It was erected partly on a solid rock, which was originally steep on every side. The foundations of what was called the lower temple were 300 cubits in depth, and the stones of which they were composed, more than sixty feet in length, while the superstructure contained, of the whitest marble, stones nearly sixty-eight feet long, more than seven feet high, and nine broad.

Before their final demolition, however, Titus took, a. survey of the city and its fortifications ; and, while contemplating their impregnable strength, could not help ascribing his success to the peculiar interposition of the ALMIGHTY HIMSELF. "Had not God himself (exclaimed he) aided out operations, and driven the Jews from their fortresses, it would have been absolutely impossible to have taken them ; for what could men, and the force of engines, have done against such towers as these ?" After this he commanded that the city should be commanded razed to its foundations, excepting only the three lofty towers Hippocos, Phasael, and Mariamne, which he suffered to remain as evidences of its strength, and as trophies of his victory. There was left standing, also, a small part of the western wall; as a rampart for a garrison, to keep the surrounding country in subjection. Titus now gave orders that those Jews only who resisted should be slain ; but the soldiers, equally void of pity and remorse, slew even the sick and the aged. The robbers and seditious were all punished with death : the tallest and most beautiful youths, together with several of the Jewish nobles were reserved by Titus to grace his triumphal entry into Rome. After this selection, all above the age of seventeen were sent in chains into Egypt, to be employed there as slaves, or distributed throughout the empire to be sacrificed as gladiators in the amphitheatres ; whilst those who were under this age, were exposed to sale.

Matthew 24 Mount of Olives and Titus' 10th Legion on Mt Olives 70ad

The Siege of Jerusalem (70 AD) - The Fight for the Walls (Part 2/4)

 

[BABerean2]

Do the pictures posted below depict the correct location of the Gold Dome and Western Wall?

It looks correct, based on the New Testament, and the writings of Josephus.

Nice work.

.

 

[Lost4words]

It looks correct, based on the New Testament, and the writings of Josephus.

Nice work.

.

Agreed.

It is very fascinating to see what Josephus wrote. Here we have a witness who describes the Temple, its position, the fort etc. Yet, the Jews disregard this very important information totally!

Why?

 

[BABerean2]

Agreed.

It is very fascinating to see what Josephus wrote. Here we have a witness who describes the Temple, its position, the fort etc. Yet, the Jews disregard this very important information totally!

Why?

Go to time 28:00 in the following video and listen for the lie.

One of these men claims to be a follower of Christ. However, the other is an Orthodox Jew. They are both working to rebuild a temple.

These two claim Josephus said the Roman fort was taken down to nothing, even though we know the Romans were using the fort as a base on the day the temple was destroyed.

Did the Romans destroy part of the foundation of the fort to gain access? Yes.
Did they destroy the whole fort? No.

.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

ebedmelech said: ↑
The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

BABerean2 said: ↑
I would respectfully say that the writings of Josephus, and the New Testament, do not agree with your conclusion found above.
In the writings below Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock. Where is that rock today?
The New Testament reveals the fact that the Roman fort was above the Jewish temple.

Fort Antonia (Herod’s Praetorium, Acts 23:35) was built by Herod and given to the Romans. It was used to house the thousands of Roman soldiers needed to police the ancient city of Jerusalem........
All of this provides tremendous evidence that the Dome of the Rock is the true location of Fort Antonia. If at least part of Fort Antonia remained on the day the temple was destroyed, where is that part of Fort Antonia now?
Watch the YouTube video… The “Temple Mount” is Roman Fort Antonia, by Leeland Jones, to see the truth with your own eyes.

ebedmelech said: ↑
The great discrepancy is the thread title that "The Temple Mount is Not @ The Dome of The Rock".
I actually hold that the Western Wall (Wailing Wall), to be insignificant for the most part because it is not, nor would it be part of the "temple proper". I do understand why it's significant to the Jews praying there though.

Lost4words said: ↑
And why is it significant to them? Thanks

ebedmelech said: ↑
Being that most Jews deny Christ as the messiah, they have no proper temple for worship in accordance with the Old Covenant prescription God gave them. They're still looking to restore temple worship. The Dome of The Rock is sitting where the temple was.

Lost4words said: ↑
Actually, it was not where the Dome is though. They have got that wrong.
That whole area was actually the Roman fort!

LittleLambofJesus said: ↑
Do the pictures posted below depict the correct location of the Gold Dome and Western Wall?

It looks correct, based on the New Testament, and the writings of Josephus.
Nice work.

Agreed.
It is very fascinating to see what Josephus wrote. Here we have a witness who describes the Temple, its position, the fort etc. Yet, the Jews disregard this very important information totally!
Why?

I would pray more spirit led Christians would read his works in relation to Daniel, the Olivet Discourse and Revelation.

Those awe inspiring utube vids of 70ad follow the events depicted by Josephus fairly accurately alonge with the Olivet Discourse and part of Revelation[IMHO]...........
They are almost like listening to Josephus himself...............

Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke's Temple/Jerusalem Discourses harmonized
Matt 24:19 "woe to those pregnant and nursing in those days"
Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke's Temple/Jerusalem Discourses harmonized
Matt 24:20 pray flight not in winter or sabbath

Matthew 24:19 Woe yet to those pregnant,
and to those giving suck in those the days
Mark 13:17 Woe yet to those pregnant,
and to those giving suck in those the days
Luke 21:23 Woe yet to those pregnant,
and to those giving suck in those the days
for there shall be great distress on the land and wrath on this people;
===================
Luke 23: 28 and Jesus having turned unto them, said, 'Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but for yourselves weep ye, and for your children;
29 - for behold! days are coming, in which they shall be declaring, 'Happy the barren, and wombs which not bare, and paps which not nourish;
=========================
Jer 19:9
“And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and everyone shall eat the flesh of his friend in the siege and in the desperation with which their enemies and those who seek their lives shall drive them to despair.” '
===============
Revelation 9:6 [Jeremiah 19:9Luke 21:23]
And in those days the men shall be seeking the death, and not no shall be finding it;
and they shall be desiring/yearning<1937> to be dying, and the death is fleeing from them.
Revelation 13:10 [Luke 21:24]
If any to-captivity into captivity is going away. If any in sword to be killed, is binding him in sword to be killed. Here is the endurance and the faith of the saints
==========================
Visual Timeline of the Roman-Jewish War ARTchive @ PreteristArchive.com, The Internet's Only Balanced Look at Preterist Eschatology and Preterism

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover...........

Meanwhile the horrors of famine grew still more melancholy and afflictive. The Jews, for of food were at length compelled to eat their belts, their sandals, the skins of their shields, dried grass, and even the ordure of oxen.
In the depth or this horrible extremity, a Jewess of noble family urged by the intolerable cravings of hunger, slew her infant child, and prepared it for a meal ; and had actually eaten one half thereof, when the soldiers, allured by tile smell of food, threatened her with instant death if she refused to discover it. 'Intimidated by this menace, she immediately produced the remains of her son, which petrified them with horror. At the recital of this melancholy and affecting occurrence, the whole city stood aghast, and poured forth their congratulations on those whom death had hurried away from such heartrending scenes. Indeed, humanity at once shudders and sickens at the narration, nor can any one of the least sensibility reflect upon the pitiable condition to which the female part of the inhabitants of Jerusalem must at this time have been reduced, without experiencing the tenderest emotions of sympathy, or refrain from tears while he reads our SAVIOUR'S pathetic address to the women who " bewailed him" as he was led to Calvary, wherein he evidently refers to these very calamities : "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but for yourselves and fur your children ; for, behold, the days are coming in which they shall say, 'Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts that never gave suck." Luke xxiii. 29.

While famine continued thus to spread its destructive rage through the city, the Romans, after many ineffectual attempts, at length succeeded in demolishing part of the inner wall, possessed themselves of the great tower of Antonia, and advanced towards the Temple, which Titus, in a council of war had determined to preserve as an ornament to the empire, and as a monument of his success ; but the Almighty had determined otherwise ; for now, in the revolution of ages, was arrived that fatal day, (the 10th of 8th mo.) emphatically called " a day of vengeance," (Luke xxi. 21.) on which the Temple bad formerly been destroyed by the king of Babylon...................
==================================
The creator of these vids has just now completed part 4!

The Siege of Jerusalem (70 AD) - Assault on the Antonia Fortress (Part 3/4)
The Siege of Jerusalem has reached a new stage with the completion of the Roman wall of circumvallation. With this stranglehold in place, Titus now turns his full attention to the assault of the Antonia fortress!

===============================================
===============================================
The Siege of Jerusalem (70 AD) - The Destruction of the Second Temple (Part 4/4)

Invicta Published on Aug 9, 2019

The Siege of Jerusalem came to its climax on August 10th of 70 AD when the Roman Army battled its way across the Temple Mount. Watch the full series here: https://youtu.be/Hen0wmoj5RU This documentary takes you through the final climactic days of the siege from the destruction of the Second Temple to the fall of Jerusalem. Yet the Great Jewish Revolt against the Roman Empire and the Roman Legions would still burn on at the fortress of Masada.

Here is an overview of the documentary episode: -The Temple: Jewish forces hold the line along the Second Temple -Third Battle of the Temple: Jews launch an attack on Roman lines across the Temple Mount -Fourth Battle of the Temple:
On August 10th the Romans manage to push up to the walls of the Second Temple and set it alight -Inferno: The Second Temple burns while the legions cut down all in their path -Last Strongholds: The last line of defense is held atop the Upper City and Herod's palace -Aftermath: The fall of Jerusalem

 

[ebedmelech]

I have the writings of Josephus in my library. That which BAB2 post #52 is not conclusive at all, while being quite descriptive.

What's at issue here is where the temple was located. There are equally those archaeologist that contest the location:
https://www.ritmeyer.com/2015/10/09/the-so-called-elusive-location-of-the-temple-in-jerusalem/

There Was a Temple on the Temple Mount

Equally, a lot of influence on this is political. To deny such is incredulous, because the fact is what archaeologist can't agree on is the actual location of the temple. On this I tend to lean more heavily to the people of this history...the Jews.

These are the theories:
Four Temple Location Theories by Lambert Dolphin

 

[Lost4words]

In those videos though, the Temple is incorrectly positioned?