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

Lost4words said:

In those videos though, the Temple is incorrectly positioned?

Click to expand...

Perhaps the author of them didn't study more on the placements of the 70ad structures? [Unlike today, there were no cameras back then to take pictures]
That aside, I believe he was inspired to make them as was Josephus inspired to write about it.

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

Of the prophecies which have already been fulfilled, few, perhaps, are so interesting in themselves, or so striking in their accomplishment, as those which relate to the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, and the signal calamities which every where befel the Jewish nation. The chief of our Lord's predictions, relative to these events, are contained in Matt. 24 ch. Mark, 13 ch., Luke 21 ch., Ib. 19 ch. 41-44 ; Ib. 23 ch. 27-30 : and we may with confidence appeal to the facts which verify them as conclusive and incontrovertible proofs of the divinity of his mission.
Before, however, we enter upon this illustration, it may be gratifying to the reader, and add considerably to the interest of many of the subsequent pages, to give in this place a brief description of that renowned city and its temple...............
======================================
"Ye will hear of battles and rumors of battles" 1st century Judea
All 3 mention "the End".
Matt 24:8 and Mark 13:8 has "All these are the beginning of sorrows.”
Some versions leave out "pestilences" in Matt 24:7.
===========================
Matthew 24:6
“Yet ye shall be being about to be hearing battles and tidings of battles, be seeing! be not be being troubled<2360>, for is binding to becoming,
but not as yet the End<5056>
Mark 13:7
“Yet whenever ye should be hearing battles and tidings of battles, be seeing! be not be being troubled for is binding to be becoming,
but not as yet the End<5056>
Luke 21:9
“Yet whenever ye should be hearing battles and tumults<181>, no may be being frightened<4422>, for is binding these to be becoming,
but not immediately the End<5056>

This site is best as far as showing the history of 7 yr Jewish Wars in the 1st century [up to Masada in 73ad]:

Visual Timeline of the Roman-Jewish War ARTchive @

CAST OF CHARACTERS: Roman: Emperor Nero | General Vespasian | General Titus | The Roman Army || Jewish: General / Historian Josephus | Factional Leaders in Jerusalem || Administrators of Roman Judea Targets: Jerusalem | Herod's Temple // Maps of the Roman Invasion // Theological Timeline

CHRONOLOGY IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THE WAR

Stage 1: Murder of James the Just, "Opposition High Priest" ; Irrevocable Split: 62
Stage 2: General Revolt in Jerusalem ; Zealot Occupation of Masada: August-September 66
===========================
This video shows the events that led to the Jewish Revolts/War:


Invicta Published on Dec 12, 2016

The Siege of Jerusalem stands out as one of the most brutal examples of Classical Era total war since the fall of Carthage over 200 years earlier! In part 1 we discuss the lead up to the siege as well as the details of the attacking and defending forces.
==================================
I like this version of Josephus and the Destruction of Jerusalem and those 70ad videos appear to follow this version fairly well, IMHO.

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
The Destruction Of JERUSALEM An Absolute and Irresistible PROOF OF THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY: INCLUDING A NARRATIVE OF THE CALAMITIES WHICH BEFEL THE JEWS
So far as they tend to verify OUR LORD'S PREDICTIONS Relative to that event.

"I consider the Prophecy relative to the destruction of the Jewish nation,
if there were nothing else to support Christianity, as absolutely irresistible."
(Mr. Erskine's Speech, at the Trial of Williams, for publishing Paine's Age of Reason)

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........

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover ; and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah ! At this season multitudes came up from all the surrounding country, and from distant parts, to keep the festival. How suitable and how kind, then, was the prophetic admonition of our LORD, and how clearly he into futurity when he said "Let not them that are in the countries enter into Jerusalem." Luke xxi. 21.

Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ; and, according to Josephus this event took place suddenly ; thus, not only fulfilling the predictions of our LORD, that these calamities should come, like the swift-darting lightning" that cometh out of the east and shineth even unto the West," and " as a snare on all of them (the Jews) who dwelt upon the face of the whole earth " (Matt. xxiv. 27, and Luke xxi 35,) but justifying, also, his friendly direction, that those who fled from the place should use the utmost possible expedition.
=========================

Invicta Published on Feb 4, 2017

The Siege of Jerusalem continues to prove that the Jews are always one step ahead of the Romans with clever tactics and bold attacks! In part 2 we follow the legions as they push through two of the outermost defensive layers and almost face defeat.

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

ebedmelech said:

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

Click to expand...

If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock, where it that rock today?

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.”

.

BABerean2 said:

If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock, where it that rock today?

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.”

.

Click to expand...

A living witness. A Jew!

Why do modern Jews believe otherwise?

Fascinating video

Another very interesting factual video

BABerean2 said:

If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock, where it that rock today?

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.”.

Click to expand...

BAB2, as I said, Josephus is quite descriptive...I know this and I have "The Works of Josephus" in my library. All the videos, maps, and writings are simply not convincing to me because no one can say with certainty where the temple was actually located. We do know from Josephus that it was north of the temple...that's a given. Josephus is a great historian.

What I find so strange is why no one can actually prove exactly where the temple was. The scriptures don't even give us much on this. I'm convinced the Jews ought to know where the temple was through their history.

Lastly, the temple is really of no significance now. It's only my fascination with history that leads me to want to know. Based upon Josephus...these views could be just as accurate:





There's much to be learned because Josephus tells us how tall the fort was...but not it's width.

All of this is fascinating but not conclusive enough for me. I really think if Fort Antonia was as big as say this image:


It dwarfs the temple...and I couldn't see scripture not mentioning it. I think a war with Rome would have broken out much earlier because I can't see the Jews allowing it to dwarf the temple.

This is what I believe was the temple location approximately:

ebedmelech said:

BAB2, as I said, Josephus is quite descriptive...I know this and I have "The Works of Josephus" in my library.

Click to expand...

I will respectfully ask the question again.

If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock fifty cubits in height, where it that rock today?

There is one building in modern day Jerusalem which is known for the gigantic rock that lies underneath its dome.
That building is "The Dome of the Rock".

Does that gigantic rock bear witness to the true location of Fort Antonia, to any unbiased witness?

.

BABerean2 said:

I will respectfully ask the question again.

If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock fifty cubits in height, where it that rock today?

There is one building in modern day Jerusalem which is known for the gigantic rock that lies underneath its dome.
That building is "The Dome of the Rock".

Does that gigantic rock bear witness to the true location of Fort Antonia, to any unbiased witness?

.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

One would have to know the size orientation of the "gigantic rock" before the fort was built. Josephus said the fort had towers and none of those exist today, just as none of the temple exist today. What's a "gigantic rock' to Josephus may or may not be what you insist it is? He gives no width but he does give height...so there's information left to presumption

I submit again that the answer lies beneath the Dome of the Rock and it doesn't seem that's going to be excavated anytime soon.

Let me add the dimensions of the temple includes courts for women and Gentiles...where were those located?

ebedmelech said:

Not necessarily.

One would have to know the size orientation of the "gigantic rock" before the fort was built. Josephus said the fort had towers and none of those exist today, just as none of the temple exist today. What's a "gigantic rock' to Josephus may or may not be what you insist it is? He gives no width but he does give height...so there's information left to presumption

Click to expand...

At the beginning of the following passage, Josephus said the rock was fifty cubits in height, and was also on a high place.

Toward the end of the passage he says the Roman Fort was on the highest hill in the area, and that it blocked the sight of the temple on the North side.

Therefore, we know Fort Antonia had to be above the Jewish temple.


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 following passage written by Luke confirms much of what Josephus said above.
The Roman soldiers "ran down" to rescue Paul from the mob at the temple.
Later Paul spoke to the crowd at the temple from the steps.
Paul would have to be above the crowd in order for them to see him from the steps.

Therefore, we have two first century witnesses which agree with each other, and confirm the fact that the Roman Fort was higher than the Jewish temple.


Act 21:31 And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
Act 21:32 Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them: and when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.
Act 21:33 Then the chief captain came near, and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and demanded who he was, and what he had done.
Act 21:34 And some cried one thing, some another, among the multitude: and when he could not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him to be carried into the castle.
Act 21:35 And when he came upon the stairs, so it was, that he was borne of the soldiers for the violence of the people.
Act 21:36 For the multitude of the people followed after, crying, Away with him.
Act 21:37 And as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek?
Act 21:38 Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Act 21:39 But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people.
Act 21:40 And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,


In his YouTube video of the underground portion of what is now known as "The Wailing Wall", Leeland Jones shows the symbol of the scorpion carved into the wall. The scorpion was the symbol of the Tenth Roman Legion.

Go to time 17:20, and 19:30, and 22:56 for the symbol of the scorpion.


Why would the symbol of the Tenth Roman Legion be carved into the Jewish Temple?

.

.

BABerean2 said: ↑

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........

Click to expand...

LittleLambofJesus said:

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? ...................

Click to expand...

BABerean2 said:

At the beginning of the following passage, Josephus said the rock was fifty cubits in height, and was also on a high place.


Why would the symbol of the Tenth Roman Legion be carved into the Jewish Temple?
.

Click to expand...

This person just finished part 4 of his 4 part series on 70ad. [shown at bottom]
He has also compiled all 4 of the 70ad vids into 1

Click to expand...

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

Ezekiel 22:
1 And there is a word of Yahweh unto me, saying, 2 ‘And thou, son of adam! dost thou judge? dost thou judge the City of blood? then thou hast caused it to know all its abominations, 19 Therefore, thus said Adonay Yahweh: Because of your all becoming dross, Therefore, behold!
I am gathering you unto the midst of Jerusalem,
20 A gathering of silver, and brass, and iron, and lead, and tin, Unto the midst of a furnace — to blow on it fire, to melt it,
So do I gather in Mine anger and in My fury, And I have let rest, and have melted you.
21 And I have heaped you up, And blown on you in the fire of My wrath<5678>, And ye have been melted<5413> in its midst.
22 As the melting of silver in the midst of a furnace, So are ye melted in its midst, And ye have known that I, Yahweh, I have poured out My fury<2534> upon you.’

Click to expand...

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

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.

A Roman soldier, urged, as he declared, by a divine impulse, regardless of the command of Titus climbed on the shoulders of another, and threw a flaming brand into the golden window of the Temple, which instantly set the building on fire. The Jews, anxious above all things to save that sacred edifice, in which they superstitiously trusted for security , with a dreadful outcry, rushed in to extinguish the flames.

The Romans, wilfully deaf instead of extinguishing the flames, spread them wider and wider.

Amongst the tragical events which at this time occured, the following is more particularly deserving of notice : a false prophet, pretending to a divine commission, affirmed that, if the people would repair to the Temple, they should behold signs of their speedy deliverance. Accordingly about six thousand persons, chiefly women and children, assembled in a gallery, that was yet standing, on the outside of the building. Whilst they waited in anxious expectation of the promised miracle, the Romans with the most wanton barbarity, set fire to the gallery ; from which, multitudes; rendered frantic by their horrible situation, precipitated themselves on the ruins below, and were killed by the fall : while, awful to relate, the rest, without a single exception, perished in the flames. So necessary was our Lord's second premonition not to give credit to "false prophets," who should pretend "to shew great signs and wonders." In this last caution, as the connexion of the prophecy demonstrates, he evidently refers to the period of the siege, but in the former to the interval immediately preceeding the Jewish war. (Vide Matt. xxiv. Compare 5, and 23, 24, 25, 26, verses.)

Click to expand...

Finding it impossible to restrain the impetuosity and cruelty of his soldiers, the Commander in chief proceeded, with some of his superior officers, to take a survey of those parts of the edifice which were still uninjured by the conflagration. It had not, at this time, reached the inner Temple, which Titus entered, and viewed with silent admiration.
.

Click to expand...

The Temple now presented little more than a heap of ruins ; and the Roman army as in triumph on the event, came and reared their ensigns against a fragment of the eastern gate, and, with sacrifices of thanksgiving, proclaimed the imperial majesty of Titus, with every possible demonstration of joy.

For five days after the destruction of the Temple, the priests who had escaped, sat, pining with hunger, on the top of one of its broken walls; at length, they came down, and humbly asked the pardon of Titus, which, however, he refused to grant them, saying, that, "as the Temple, for the sake of which he would have spared them, was destroyed, it was but fit that its priests should parish also:" -whereupon he commanded that they should be put to death.
Thus terminated the glory and existence of this sacred and venerable Edifice, which from its stupendous size, its massy solidity, and astonishing strength, seemed formed to resist the most violent operations of human force, and to stand, like the pyramids, amid the shocks of successive ages, until the final dissolution of the globe

Click to expand...

Matthew 24:1
And Jesus coming out, departed from the Temple.
And His Disciples approached Him to show to Him the buildings of the Temple.
2 And Jesus said to them, “ are ye not seeing all these?
Amen I am saying to ye,
not no may be being left here stone upon stone, which not shall be being thrown-down<2647>.”
Mark 13:1
And He going forth out of the Temple,
Luke 21:5
and of some saying concerning the Temple,

BABerean2 said:

At the beginning of the following passage, Josephus said the rock was fifty cubits in height, and was also on a high place.

Toward the end of the passage he says the Roman Fort was on the highest hill in the area, and that it blocked the sight of the temple on the North side.

Therefore, we know Fort Antonia had to be above the Jewish temple.


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 following passage written by Luke confirms much of what Josephus said above.
The Roman soldiers "ran down" to rescue Paul from the mob at the temple.
Later Paul spoke to the crowd at the temple from the steps.
Paul would have to be above the crowd in order for them to see him from the steps.

Therefore, we have two first century witnesses which agree with each other, and confirm the fact that the Roman Fort was higher than the Jewish temple.


Act 21:31 And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
Act 21:32 Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them: and when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.
Act 21:33 Then the chief captain came near, and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and demanded who he was, and what he had done.
Act 21:34 And some cried one thing, some another, among the multitude: and when he could not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him to be carried into the castle.
Act 21:35 And when he came upon the stairs, so it was, that he was borne of the soldiers for the violence of the people.
Act 21:36 For the multitude of the people followed after, crying, Away with him.
Act 21:37 And as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek?
Act 21:38 Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Act 21:39 But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people.
Act 21:40 And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,


In his YouTube video of the underground portion of what is now known as "The Wailing Wall", Leeland Jones shows the symbol of the scorpion carved into the wall. The scorpion was the symbol of the Tenth Roman Legion.

Go to time 17:20, and 19:30, and 22:56 for the symbol of the scorpion.

Why would the symbol of the Tenth Roman Legion be carved into the Jewish Temple?

Click to expand...

BAB2, it's obvious you're pretty convinced about this subject however, I'm completely opposite about it.

How about you read Josephus description of the temple? I've done that and the strangest thing is he doesn't mention Fort Antonia dwarfing the temple at all.

There's not one conclusive statement to convince me your way. I have to stand with Jewish history, unless concrete proof shows otherwise. Like this pic of the Antonia Fortress in the Irsael Museum from Wiki:

BABerean2 said:

I will respectfully ask the question again.
If Josephus said Fort Antonia was built upon a gigantic rock fifty cubits in height, where it that rock today?
There is one building in modern day Jerusalem which is known for the gigantic rock that lies underneath its dome.
That building is "The Dome of the Rock".
Does that gigantic rock bear witness to the true location of Fort Antonia, to any unbiased witness?
.

Click to expand...

ebedmelech said:

Not necessarily.
One would have to know the size orientation of the "gigantic rock" before the fort was built. Josephus said the fort had towers and none of those exist today, just as none of the temple exist today. What's a "gigantic rock' to Josephus may or may not be what you insist it is? He gives no width but he does give height...so there's information left to presumption
I submit again that the answer lies beneath the Dome of the Rock and it doesn't seem that's going to be excavated anytime soon.
Let me add the dimensions of the temple includes courts for women and Gentiles...where were those located?

Click to expand...

BABerean2 said: ↑
At the beginning of the following passage, Josephus said the rock was fifty cubits in height, and was also on a high place.

Toward the end of the passage he says the Roman Fort was on the highest hill in the area, and that it blocked the sight of the temple on the North side.

Click to expand...

ebedmelech said:

BAB2, it's obvious you're pretty convinced about this subject however, I'm completely opposite about it.
How about you read Josephus description of the temple? I've done that and the strangest thing is he doesn't mention Fort Antonia dwarfing the temple at all.
There's not one conclusive statement to convince me your way. I have to stand with Jewish history, unless concrete proof shows otherwise. Like this pic of the Antonia Fortress in the Irsael Museum from Wiki:

Click to expand...

Hello ebedmelech.
Very interesting picture.

ebedmelech said:

I have to stand with Jewish history, unless concrete proof shows otherwise. Like this pic of the Antonia Fortress in the Irsael Museum from Wiki:

Click to expand...

If you can show from the writings of Josephus, or the New Testament, that this modern model of Fort Antonia is correct, I will be glad to take a look at it. Please show us how the 10th Roman Legion can fit into that tiny structure. Please show us the gigantic rock upon which it is built.

I have already given concrete evidence from the writings of Josephus, and from the New Testament, which show modern Orthodox Judaism's viewpoint of the temple location to be in error.

"Jewish history" also denies that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah predicted in the Hebrew scriptures...

.

The Temple wasn't at the top of the mount, the fort was. That Mosque is built where Islamics thought the Temple had been, they were and are mistaken. Christians take for granted the accuracies of the Old Testament prophesies, others do not. They actually bricked up the east gate leading to the mount of Olives because the Messiah is predicted to touch down on the Mount of Olives and enter the city through that gate, I just think that's silly.

As a matter of fact the Jews don't even need a Temple, a tent (tabranacle) worked for hundreds of years until Solomon. As a matter of fact I get the distinct impression God didn't want a Temple anyway.

The Temple sat lower, below the walls of the fortress which was a lot like a Mediaeval keep. God will and has built a much bigger and better Temple, in fact an entire city.

We concern ourselves with exact locations, I really don't see the fascination.

mark kennedy said:

The Temple wasn't at the top of the mount, the fort was. That Mosque is built where Islamics thought the Temple had been, they were and are mistaken. Christians take for granted the accuracies of the Old Testament prophesies, others do not. They actually bricked up the east gate leading to the mount of Olives because the Messiah is predicted to touch down on the Mount of Olives and enter the city through that gate, I just think that's silly.
As a matter of fact the Jews don't even need a Temple, a tent (tabranacle) worked for hundreds of years until Solomon. As a matter of fact I get the distinct impression God didn't want a Temple anyway.
The Temple sat lower, below the walls of the fortress which was a lot like a Mediaeval keep. God will and has built a much bigger and better Temple, in fact an entire city.
We concern ourselves with exact locations, I really don't see the fascination.

Click to expand...

Interesting.
According to the site below, there was a bridge going across the Kidron Valley starting from the Eastern Gate and crossing over to the Mt of Olives.

Some sources say Jesus was led across the bridge and crucified on Mt of Olives?
Was this bridge there when Titus camped on the Mt of Olives in 70ad?

Jerusalem's Old City Gates

Golden (Mercy) Gate
Facing the Mount of Olives on the eastern side of the Old City, this gate was constructed in the post-Byzantine period.
According to Jewish tradition, the Messiah will enter Jerusalem through this gate. To prevent this, the Muslims sealed the gate during the rule of Suleiman.
========================


Everyone should be watching developments in Israel

The Righterzpen said:

There's an interesting book called "Secrets of Golgotha" by Ernst Martin (and I don't agree with every thing he says) but I think he's dead on about where the temple actually was and where Jesus was crucified.
He was crucified on the Mt. of Olives. We know this because the Scriptures state that the Roman centurion and the soldiers witnessed the veil of the temple being torn, and they could only do this if they were facing it. The temple faced east, so they had to be east of it, facing west; which would have put them on the Mount of Olives, somewhere in the vicinity of the red heifer bridge.

Click to expand...

Jesus not only gave His 70ad Olivet Discourse from there, that is also where Caesar's famed 10th Legion under Titus camp in 70ad!

Matthew 24 Mount of Olives and Titus's 10th Legion on Mt Olives 70ad
Titus and Mount of Olives
==================
Link to a site showing some pictures of that bridge...
[I may make a thread on this]

The Red Heifer Bridge by Norma Robertson

This is important because the angle from the end of the bridge, on the lower part of the Mt of Olives, to the Holy of Holies must allow for a person to see through the East Gate, the inner east gate, and through the Temple door, seeing the veil that hung before the Holy of Holies.
Also the Priest performing the Red Heifer sacrifice at the top of the Mount of Olives needed to be able to see the Temple sanctuary to know when to begin the sacrifice. So in this case he would need to be able to see over the top of the East gate and also over the inner east gate.

The bridge is approximately 1,000 feet long and at around a 3 percent grade from the end of the bridge up to Triple gate (Solomon's Portico, which had the entrance to the East Gate within it).

The way the bridge was constructed it allowed for air to be between the priest and the graves below.
Purity was demanded.

Living water had to be carried up the Mount to the Place of the Red Heifer Sacrifice. For this reason hollows (tunnels/caverns) were cut into the bedrock. Chosen women gave birth there, and the boys born in the hollow grew up there, never allowed to venture out, for fear of them walking over a grave. To get the water to the top of the Mt of Olives these boys were carried on large doors up the Mountain while holding rock hewn bowls full of living water. Can you imagine being under such strict laws like this?

If the Jews in the time of Solomon used a smaller cubit to measure out the 2000 cu, or if they measured down into the Kidron valley rather than over the bridge, then the red heifer altar would have been built a little lower down on the Mt of Olives. This is always a possibility, however it is written that the altar was on the summit (top of the Mount as being directly east of the Temple).
===========================
A 4 part series on the Red Heifer from a favorite commentator of mine:

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/tablecontents.htm
Kindgdom Bible Studies Ashes of a Red Heifer Part 1

"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ASHES OF AN HEIFER sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies to the purifying of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God" (Heb. 9:13-14).

In the worship of the Old Testament great principles of truth and eternal spiritual realities were conveyed through outward signs and symbols. The eye is quicker than the ear. And there is therefore no language so expressive as the language of symbols. The multitude will better catch your meaning by one apt symbol than by a thousand words. The mind shrinks from the intellectual effort of grappling with the subtle essences of things, and loves to have truth wrapped up in a form which can easily be taken in by the eye, the ear, the sense of touch.
This explains why there is such a tendency towards ritualism in the apostate Churches. Where man's spiritual life is strong, it is independent of the outward form; but when it is weak it leans feebly on external aids. And it was because the children of Israel were in so childish a condition that God enshrined His deep and holy thoughts in outward forms and material patterns.
The untutored and unspiritual people must have spiritual truth expressed in symbols, which appealed to the most obtuse. For fifteen hundred years, therefore, the Israelitish worship gathered round the most splendid ceremonial that the world has ever seen.


Numbers 19 is a most unusual chapter in the Old Testament.
All the offerings in the Bible are bullocks and rams, but here there is an exception - a heifer, a female cow who has never given birth. All the offerings in the Old Testament are slaughtered and offered to God, but this offering of the red heifer, though killed and burned, is very different from the rest.
While all others are offered to God to meet current claims - that is, the sin-offering, the burnt offering, or the peace offering according to the need of the day - the red heifer alone was not for the present need. It was offered to meet future needs.
The ordinance of the red heifer stands alone. While other sacrifices are often brought before us, this one is recorded in no other part of Israel's history.

The cleansing for which these red cow ashes were prescribed, were of a peculiar kind, namely, specially for those who became CEREMONIALLY UNCLEAN by coming into contact with DEATH. It is called a "sin-offering" only in the sense that a ceremonially unclean person came under the jurisdiction of the law, with penalty if he were not properly cleansed according to law. The ashes of the heifer were not designed to remove MORAL SIN, it was only a ceremonial cleansing, called by the writer of Hebrews that which "sanctifies to the purifying of the flesh" (Heb. 9:13). Bullocks were offered by people who had committed sin in its usual sense - moral sin. If I were Israelite, and had sinned against my neighbor, or against God, I could bring a bullock or sheep to God and offer it as a sin-offering because I had wronged or offended either man or God. But the offering of the red heifer was different. In relation to its purifying work no man had been wronged, nor had God been disobeyed!

Click to expand...

LittleLambofJesus said:

Interesting.
According to the site below, there was a bridge going across the Kidron Valley starting from the Eastern Gate and crossing over to the Mt of Olives.

Some sources say Jesus was led across the bridge and crucified on Mt of Olives?
Was this bridge there when Titus camped on the Mt of Olives in 70ad?

Jerusalem's Old City Gates

Golden (Mercy) Gate
Facing the Mount of Olives on the eastern side of the Old City, this gate was constructed in the post-Byzantine period.
According to Jewish tradition, the Messiah will enter Jerusalem through this gate. To prevent this, the Muslims sealed the gate during the rule of Suleiman.
========================

Everyone should be watching developments in Israel

Jesus not only gave His 70ad Olivet Discourse from there, that is also where Caesar's famed 10th Legion under Titus camp in 70ad!

Matthew 24 Mount of Olives and Titus's 10th Legion on Mt Olives 70ad
Titus and Mount of Olives
==================
Link to a site showing some pictures of that bridge...
[I may make a thread on this]

The Red Heifer Bridge by Norma Robertson

This is important because the angle from the end of the bridge, on the lower part of the Mt of Olives, to the Holy of Holies must allow for a person to see through the East Gate, the inner east gate, and through the Temple door, seeing the veil that hung before the Holy of Holies.
Also the Priest performing the Red Heifer sacrifice at the top of the Mount of Olives needed to be able to see the Temple sanctuary to know when to begin the sacrifice. So in this case he would need to be able to see over the top of the East gate and also over the inner east gate.

The bridge is approximately 1,000 feet long and at around a 3 percent grade from the end of the bridge up to Triple gate (Solomon's Portico, which had the entrance to the East Gate within it).

The way the bridge was constructed it allowed for air to be between the priest and the graves below.
Purity was demanded.

Living water had to be carried up the Mount to the Place of the Red Heifer Sacrifice. For this reason hollows (tunnels/caverns) were cut into the bedrock. Chosen women gave birth there, and the boys born in the hollow grew up there, never allowed to venture out, for fear of them walking over a grave. To get the water to the top of the Mt of Olives these boys were carried on large doors up the Mountain while holding rock hewn bowls full of living water. Can you imagine being under such strict laws like this?

If the Jews in the time of Solomon used a smaller cubit to measure out the 2000 cu, or if they measured down into the Kidron valley rather than over the bridge, then the red heifer altar would have been built a little lower down on the Mt of Olives. This is always a possibility, however it is written that the altar was on the summit (top of the Mount as being directly east of the Temple).
===========================
A 4 part series on the Red Heifer from a favorite commentator of mine:

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/tablecontents.htm
Kindgdom Bible Studies Ashes of a Red Heifer Part 1

"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ASHES OF AN HEIFER sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies to the purifying of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God" (Heb. 9:13-14).

Click to expand...

That's all very strange to me, golgotha was west of the city, the Kidron and Mt of Olives is outside the east gate. I don't know anything about a bridge, there will be a road called holiness during the Millienial kingdom.

I guess I have a different attitude about all this, and certainly of the history of the Kidron valley and Mt of Olives. The return of Jesus in power and glory, every eye shall see him and the kings of the earth shal mourn because of him. This is manifest early in the tribulation and everyone knows it's Jesus the entire 7 years. I don't even care how they know. "Behold you scoffers, wonder and perish. I will do a work in you midst that you will never believe, even if I tell you before hand" (Acts 13:41).

It reminds me of Psalm 2, Let us cast his bands assunder...he who sits enthroned shall laugh. We forget the most important thing here, this isn't about geography and sacrifices, it's about thinking they can fight God at the return of Christ and with, the slaughter is over in an instant and Christ enters Jerusalm through the east gate.

mark kennedy said:

That's all very strange to me, golgotha was west of the city, the Kidron and Mt of Olives is outside the east gate. I don't know anything about a bridge, there will be a road called holiness during the Millienial kingdom.
.

Click to expand...

How about the layout of the Temple and Antonia in that picture.
It appears to show Antonia slightly higher than the Temple Mount............?

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

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

Click to expand...

Great video here:

BABerean2 said:

If you can show from the writings of Josephus, or the New Testament, that this modern model of Fort Antonia is correct, I will be glad to take a look at it. Please show us how the 10th Roman Legion can fit into that tiny structure. Please show us the gigantic rock upon which it is built.

I have already given concrete evidence from the writings of Josephus, and from the New Testament, which show modern Orthodox Judaism's viewpoint of the temple location to be in error.

"Jewish history" also denies that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah predicted in the Hebrew scriptures...it

.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm not as interested about this as you are BAB2. While I look into it...it's not on my list of important things because should the Jews build a temple...what does it benefit them? Christ is ALL IN ALL!!!

What I do know is just as Jesus said about the temple..."not one stone remained upon another."

ebedmelech said:

I guess I'm not as interested about this as you are BAB2. While I look into it...it's not on my list of important things because should the Jews build a temple...what does it benefit them? Christ is ALL IN ALL!!!

What I do know is just as Jesus said about the temple..."not one stone remained upon another."

Click to expand...

This is why it was built in the City of David as not one stone stands upon another there of the Temple.

One cannot say that about the 'temple mount'