Brother and sisters I hear you! And so does father he hears us and when our hearts grow together for some reason the earth and the Animals as well then the Lord will weigh everything!
The two Hebrew Temples were situated in 'the City of David' which is synonymous with 'Mount Zion.' 'The Holy Scriptures' more than abundantly confirm this. That entire rectangular platform in Jerusalem - which people annoyingly, erroneously identify as 'the temple mount' - is the full-sized 'Fort Antonia,' built by the Imperial Romans and later renovated by the Ottomans. The archaeological site of these cisterns in this video quite possibly meet the requirement of updated Roman civil engineering projects. During the time of Herod, there was an above-ground aqueduct that meandered through the city from west to east, stopping at the general area, but west of this location, and just south of 'the western wall.' Included with such feats of construction is the transporting of fresh spring water in to holding ponds above grade and cisterns below grade. But, even more so, this location just south and below the rectangular platform is where King David's palace was located. Palatial residences always include private gardens and water sources for hygiene and basic survival. The actual Gihon Spring, flowing exclusively underground, was used for the two previous temples whilst these cisterns, if they existed during David's reign and lifetime, were used for the royal residence, the northernmost boundary of 'the City of David.' Furthermore, 'Mount Moriah' is the highest topographical summit west of the Kidron Valley and north of David's palace. 'Mount Moriah' is known for many sacred and special Biblical and historic events. Its original earthen peak is now below the center of the rectangular platform, at or near the spot of 'the Dome of the Rock.' People need to stop believing and trusting in 'Jewish fables' and so-called 'traditional sites' and actually defer to 'the Holy Scriptures' and reliable ancient archaeology supported by honest history.
Well written. The answer given in this video is evidence enough that there was NO NATURAL and constant water supply in this location for the Temple system to rely on. What we do have however is a great form of Roman construction to ensure supply for its forces. I remain sceptical that the so-called 'Temple Mount' is the original location, but I reserve any confidence either way.
Thank you for brining perspective to the arguments that were made. I was very sceptical at accepting the narrative presented in these videos mainly because it's source relies heavily on the Writings of Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus. Two pieces of critical evidence is key, the first is the threshing-floor of Orna the Jebusite that King David purchased and built an Altart to the Most High where also he first sacrificed. The second is the Gion Springs in Gion where King Solomon was Anointed according to the Instruction of King David.
Trying to stay attached to tradition is a huge stumbling block that we must overcome if we are going to move forward. May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob open our eyes so we can see and know what He wants us to learn.
The Roman Historian Tacitus said 'a spring of never-failing water' came from the Jewish temple in his writings below. The Jews Book Five (1-13) of The Histories by Tacitus 12. The Temple was like a citadel and had its own walls, which had been even more laboriously and skilfully constructed than the rest. The porticoes around it constituted in themselves an excellent defensive position. To these advantages must be added a spring of never-failing water, chambers cut in the living rock, and tanks and cisterns for the storage of rainwater. Its builders had foreseen only too well that the strange practices of the Jews would lead to continual fighting. Hence everything was available for a siege, however long. Moreover, after Pompey's capture of Jerusalem, fear and experience taught them many lessons. So taking advantage of the money-grubbing instincts of the Claudian period, they purchased permission to fortify the city, and in the days of peace built walls meant for war. Already the home of a motley concourse, its population had been swollen by the fall of the other Jewish cities, for the most determined partisan leaders escaped to the capital, and thereby added to the turmoil. There were three different leaders and three armies. The long outer perimeter of the walls was held by Simon, the central part of the city by John, and the Temple by Eleazar. John and Simon could rely on numbers and equipment, Eleazar on his strategic position. But it was upon each other that they turned the weapons of battle, ambush and fire, and great stocks of corn went up in flames. Then John sent off a party of men, ostensibly to offer sacrifice but in reality to cut Eleazar and his followers to pieces, thus gaining possession of the Temple. Hence-forward, therefore, Jerusalem was divided between two factions, until, on the approach of the Romans, fighting the foreigner healed the breach between them. 13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure. Few people placed a sinister interpretation upon this. The majority were convinced that the ancient scriptures of their priests alluded to the present as the very time when the Orient would triumph and from Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world. This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth. We are told that the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000. All who could bear arms did so, and more than their numbers warranted had the courage necessary. They displayed an inflexible determination, women no less than men, and the thought that they might be compelled to leave their home made them more afraid of living than of dying. This, then, was the city and nation which Titus faced. Since a headlong assault and the element of surprise were ruled out by the lie of the ground, he proposed to employ earthworks and mantlets. Each legion had its allotted task, and there was a lull in the fighting while they pushed on with the construction of every conceivable device for storming Cities, whether invented long ago or due to the ingenuity of modern times. In the writings of Josephus below he reveals Titus used Fort Antonia as his base of operations on the day the temple was burned. It proves the Romans did attack the foundations of the fort to gain access to the fort, but they did not destroy the entire fort as some have claimed. 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."
I appreciate the tacitus reference, wasn't aware of that. It does parallel with the letter to aristeas though which also speaks of constant flowing streams among other very interesting statements in that letter.
@@blaksimba The word "Gihon" means "gusher". I heard a geologist say it is believed the Gihon Spring is a very rare "Siphon Spring", which is fed by an underground cavern. When the cavern fills to a certain level the spring could actually pump water uphill for some time, very similar to an artesian well. A simple pipe system could have transported the water into the temple if it was close by. During the time of David, the Jebusites had a waterspout that exited outside the gate to their fortress. One of David's men climbed up the waterspout and got into the fortress. The spring fed the Pool of Siloam, which is now being completely excavated. During the siege of 70 AD the city never ran out of water, because of this spring.
As a observant Jewish lady, I can tell you even if you go to a mikveh today, there is an opening to the roof with a trough that takes in fresh rain water into the pool. "Let the waters beneath the sky be collected in one place." Genesis 1:9
The Roman Historian Tacitus said 'a spring of never-failing water' came from the Jewish temple in his writings below.
The Jews Book Five (1-13) of The Histories by Tacitus 12. The Temple was like a citadel and had its own walls, which had been even more laboriously and skilfully constructed than the rest. The porticoes around it constituted in themselves an excellent defensive position. To these advantages must be added a spring of never-failing water, chambers cut in the living rock, and tanks and cisterns for the storage of rainwater. Its builders had foreseen only too well that the strange practices of the Jews would lead to continual fighting. Hence everything was available for a siege, however long. Moreover, after Pompey's capture of Jerusalem, fear and experience taught them many lessons. So taking advantage of the money-grubbing instincts of the Claudian period, they purchased permission to fortify the city, and in the days of peace built walls meant for war. Already the home of a motley concourse, its population had been swollen by the fall of the other Jewish cities, for the most determined partisan leaders escaped to the capital, and thereby added to the turmoil. There were three different leaders and three armies. The long outer perimeter of the walls was held by Simon, the central part of the city by John, and the Temple by Eleazar. John and Simon could rely on numbers and equipment, Eleazar on his strategic position. But it was upon each other that they turned the weapons of battle, ambush and fire, and great stocks of corn went up in flames. Then John sent off a party of men, ostensibly to offer sacrifice but in reality to cut Eleazar and his followers to pieces, thus gaining possession of the Temple. Hence-forward, therefore, Jerusalem was divided between two factions, until, on the approach of the Romans, fighting the foreigner healed the breach between them. 13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure. Few people placed a sinister interpretation upon this. The majority were convinced that the ancient scriptures of their priests alluded to the present as the very time when the Orient would triumph and from Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world. This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth. We are told that the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000. All who could bear arms did so, and more than their numbers warranted had the courage necessary. They displayed an inflexible determination, women no less than men, and the thought that they might be compelled to leave their home made them more afraid of living than of dying. This, then, was the city and nation which Titus faced. Since a headlong assault and the element of surprise were ruled out by the lie of the ground, he proposed to employ earthworks and mantlets. Each legion had its allotted task, and there was a lull in the fighting while they pushed on with the construction of every conceivable device for storming Cities, whether invented long ago or due to the ingenuity of modern times.
Bob Canuke has investigated other stories and the sites associated with them. He claims to have been a police detective or some such, thus having the skills that others lack. Perhaps he has been correct with some of his finds but he's now looking for alternates for other traditional sites. He makes the claim that the site of Jesus death and burial could be the Mount of Olives. You can see the burial caves from across the valley, below the houses. I can't see how he justifies this with the descriptions in the Bible. Perhaps pride is now getting in the way of common sense.
@@SpotterVideo I hadn't realised that there was a contemporary Roman historian who had also written about this. And corroborating what Josephus had written for some have dismissed Josephus as a historian.
What did Christ prophesy in Matthew 24 about Jerusalem including the temple? Read the first 2 verses. Men know nothing!. Christ said the temple would be totally destroyed ALL of it nothing left standing. Was this not fulfilled on AD 90? Yes it was. Therefore, the Western or Wailing Wall is MOT part of the temple. Believing men who speculate for a living is dangerous. Believing the word of God is liberating.
If we go back in time to when the First Temple was built, which cisterns were already there? How long did it take to dig them out? Where was the water stored in the meantime? What was the process for cleansing while there was no water up on what would become the Mount? Again, the only water available is the Gihon- so carried up over a quarter mile to the Rock? has there been any evidence (writings, oral traditions, etc) of water transportation up there? This would have been a constant issue as sacrifices were performed daily. As cisterns were dug out, then they had to wait for them to fill. and again- if animal droppings/dead animals/etc get into a cistern, is the whole cistern now contaminated, and must be emptied and sanitized before use again in a mikveh? Is there a process or writings anywhere on that? What dates were the aqueducts added? how long did it take to build them? then after built, make the necessary corrections/adjustments to move the water efficiently? What was done for water while they were being built? Do we have any writings on the building of them, and activities on the Mount prior to that water arriving via aqueduct? Or, was the Temple over an existing water source that was constant and pushing 158+ million gallons of water annually? Again- Im asking serious questions because I do not have all the data. I am asking for the data if you have it, or some explanation that is feasible, attainable for those people at that time, and reasonable. Without any feasible, attainable, reasonable explanation or evidence that there was a system to resolve all these issues at once (like having a natural strong spring of water already in place) then the Temple could not have been located up on that mount. Additionally, at the suggested location of the Fortress Antonia according to your video, where are the remains? the latrines, sewer, water source for that barracks (goes back to water usage for those men, animals, work tasks). Is there evidence of that? Has anyone researched the Roman records of this area- seen what they said. Those guys wrote everything down, didnt they?
Hi Gary, don't have time to respond to all of this right now, but here are a few thoughts. Unfortunately there is a lot of historical data that we don't have. Some things were written down and lost. Some things were never written down. The first cisterns on the Temple Mount were likely dug by King Solomon before the Temple was built. We do know from historical data that these cisterns were tightly sealed and had complex methods for drawing the water up for use. Historical sources tell us that this was the water source for the first Temple, there is no mention of the Gihon spring. The aqueduct system was built by the Maccabeean dynasty. The water from this system fed the Temple Mount and other major parts of Jerusalem including I believe the Antonia fortress. As far as the archaeology of the Antonia Fortress, unfortunately there has never been great opportunity to dig over there due to the crazy politics involved, so we don't know a whole lot of specifics. It is just the assumed location based off of descriptions by Josephus. When you really look into the data, there is really no possible way the Temple can have been located in the City of David. One major overlook reason being that the upper part of the City of David has been excavated but archaeologist and the entire area is covered in layers of houses and palaces dating all the way through first and second periods. They and a Temple can't exist on the same location for the same date period, it's physically impossible. This is a major aspect Cornuke and other propionates of this theory completely ignore.
Not to mention I read a long time ago, Solomons Stalls are near the location of the cisterns and in the side of the temple mount foundation.. Maybe the Cisterns were military water sources, and to water horses and livestock. Maybe some Cisterns held grain for food, or wheat after threshing . .
I did that Shomron tour with Josh after the JPB ‘24. I didn’t know about you guys before that. I’m enjoying your channel. Give a shout out to Dern for me too!
In 325 AD Constantine tore down the Temple of Jupiter and assumed Hadrian built the temple of Jupiter on top of the spot where the temple of Solomon once stood. Constantine built an octagon church on the site. In 700 AD the Muslims found the foundations of Constantine's octagon church and built the dome of the Rock we see today.
The loaded archeological "gun" that the Temple was on top of the T. Mt. is the Pilgrimage Road from the Pool of Shiloach until the Southern Wall ancient entrance, an entire upward ascent of two short steps followed by a long step. The entire Road of Ascent is the same so that the Pilgrim can think and watch his steps from the Pool at the bottom to the Southern Wall of the Temple Mt. It is basic Pilgrimage Road 101.
Bingo, great comment! Right on! Some people are trying to rewrite history to take away the Jewish People's right to the Temple Mt., but the truth is so clear. Thanks!
Absolutely. We were hoping to do an episode dedicated to this, but the we couldn't get access to the road during our filming time due to construction. Maybe we'll get to it in the future!
@@TheIsraelGuys The existence of the so-called “pilgrimage road” does not necessarily mean the temple was located on the Temple Mount. There are many reasons why a road like that would have been desirable to build (for example, it may have been leading up to fortress Antonia). It’s also worth considering that the road was not built by the Jews or even Herod, as coins found under the road dated its construction to after 30 AD (meaning it was built by the Romans and not the Jews). So if we accept this is truly a “pilgrimage” road, how exactly did pilgrims reach the temple prior to this road being built in 30 AD? And let’s not forget that this road also had a drainage channel running below it, which would have certainly been defiling to any Jews walking above it that wanted to visit the Temple. Personally, I believe that regardless of the temple’s exact location, the 2nd-temple-era pool of Siloam was more likely used by the Jews as a reservoir and Roman-style public swimming pool with ritual bathing saved for mikvehs much closer to the Temple.
There is a fresh water source, known as Zedekiah's tears, which is said to be close to the Temple Mount, inside Zedekiah's cave. I believe that when the Temple is rebuilt, a spring is prophesied to flow from it towards the Dead Sea. Given that earthquakes have altered the course of underground rivers before (The Gihon spring's water is now brackish after an earthquake but previously was fresh, indicating a change in it's course), perhaps when the Temple gets it's spring Zedekiah's tears will cease ...
Josh, when you were speaking about the Mikveh pools and then going up to the Temple, it made me think about Psalm 24:3-6, "Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who shall stand in His holy place? He that has clean hands, and a pure heart; who has not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation"...... Since ascend is to go up, and this did not take place until your hands were clean, it made me think [positionally], of the pools being slightly lower. Then, after washing (mikveh), a person would ascend. Thank you to all the Israel Guy TEAM for these two presentations
The temple was also described as having upper courts with flights of steps leading up to the higher inner areas. So, temple visitors would have needed to “ascend” within the Temple complex whether they washed in the pool of Siloam at the bottom of the hill or in a mikvah closer to the temple walls.
Ezekiel 47 speaks of water flowing out from below the threshold of the Temple. As a preterist I do not see this as literal, yet I would still see it as a symbolic reference to the Gihon springs.
Have you ever wondered?... Normally, the People have to Build or Purchase the HOUSE first, before procuring the requirements inside the house such as furniture, appliances, curtains, lighting/ plumbing fixtures, etc... In Jerusalem, Israel the Jews had already prepared all the requirements needed for the 3rd Temple, such as the Red Heifers (Cows as sacrifices), Standard Clothes of the High Priest, Silver Utensils, Temple's Traditional Instruments, Jewish Candlestands (Menorah), the Holy Scriptures Written in Scrolls (Books of Torah and Tanakh), including the Temple Plans, Scaled Building Model, etc... except for the Actual Physical Building itself... Ironically, the 3rd Stonewall Temple is nowhere to be found... Not yet built and still debating and negotiating up to now where EXACTLY the location of the 2nd Temple that was completely and totally destroyed except for the gate walls (obviously) in around 70 A.D... Christ said, "NOT ONE (TEMPLE) STONE WILL BE LEFT UNTURNED." ...(Luke 21:6)... "NO TRACES" found? That this means that God does not really want the 3rd Temple to be REBUILT for God does not want any more animal sacrifices after His own Son's Sacrificial Death on the Cross and Resurrection had already been fulfilled (Finished)?...
Naturally I have questions that would go towards both theories here... has anyone done a logistical estimate of how much water would be needed daily for the city? Going off 6,000 soldiers vs 600, with horses (300 Cavalry in a Legion) plus officers, work horses, water needed tor equipment maintenance, bathing, cooking for both 6000 and 600 or so soldiers), then add all the support staff for both a legion and cohort (or whatever it is defined as if not a full legion)? then add in the amount of water needed for each mikveh (when does the water in a mikveh become 'no longer cleansing? does it have to be changed out if it is not running water? how often? how many gallons/liters). Also, how much water was needed to cleanse the sacrificial areas daily? how was it transported from those cisterns in your video up to the temple? how many people were needed? did they have to cleanse themselves as well before transporting the water? Also (again), how much of those cisterns supplied water to the general population of Jerusalem? How many gallons/liters did the average citizen drink per day? cook with per day? wash/bath per day? then add in the flocks and livestock, work animals, etc. Also add in for festivals, holidays, flocks of animals being sacrificed (they still need to be watered daily I would think). I am asking in an honest way here- it is one thing to say 'they collected water' versus 'there is a fresh running water supply already here.' Speaking of that, what is the volume of water supplied by the Gihon Spring? Could it have provided for all the sacrificing/mikvehs in addition to Roman usage/population usage? Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics. Right now I am up in the air about where the Temple actually stood. If on top of the Temple Mount, then logistically there need to be answers instead of 'here is a cistern.' If in the City of David as Bob Cornuke says, could the Gihon support such activities on a daily basis.
Cornuke has kind of won me over. But the Bible DOES say that the Temple was in the City of David. From what archaeologists have discovered, there wasn't a natural source of water where the Roman fortress was located. They had to pipe it in. OK, maybe those 'cisterns' were holding places for the water. There was a conduit underground that brought water in from another source. This IS a desert region, after all. But the Gihon Springs was a natural source and made sense for the temple to be located where Cornuke thinks. We MUST look at what the Bible says and take our cues from there. Of course what was then and what we observe now is much different. The land was vacated with "Nothing" for such a very long time. Naturally, everything is now underground as later on the area was built upon.
I think I can help you with how a mikvah is supposed to work -water has to be flowing in and flowing out simultaneously, it's not like a bathtub as we know. The synagogue here in Cheyenne was built over a naturally occurring spring and there's a mikveh in the basement and when a lady takes her mikvah, the water is flowing in as fast as it's flowing out. What's interesting about the synagogue here in Cheyenne is that they had no idea that spring was there till they started digging to create the basement and foundation and came across a natural spring by accident.
On the Temple Mount he (Hadrian) erected a temple to Jupiter with an equestrian statue of himself in front of it." (The temple of Jerusalem, Joan Comay, 1975, p199) Where was the threshing floor on the temple mount? Tuvia Sagiv's theory focuses on Hadrian building a Temple of Jupiter on the temple mount in 135 AD. Hadrian had built many large scale projects including the Jupiter on the Temple in Baalbek, Lebanon, that is still standing to this day. Sagiv, being an architect by trade, noticed that both the Temple of Jupiter in Baalbek and the Islamic buildings we see on the temple mount today, were almost an exact match in both design and scale. The similarity between a hexagon shaped Jupiter "Forecourt" with the Dome of the Rock and the Jupiter Temple with the Al-Aqsa mosque is nothing short of stunning.
jesus also said "no one of this generation shall pass till you witness the coming of the kingdom"... he also said “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat, So you must be careful to do everything they tell you" matthew 23 verses 2&3. [Other version: "The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses, So practice and obey whatever they tell you,"] In fact, the God of Israel already commanded this in Deuteronomy 17 verses 10-13.
No stone of the Temple is standing. The walls you see are simply the retaining walls to hold dirt around Mt Moriah to be able to have a flat surface. I bet you believe dinosaurs lived millions of years ago too.
Solomon built the temple on the threshing floor David bought. The Dome of the rock is the highest point of the temple mount. Threshing floors were never built on hills, but in curved valleys, like directly under the Al Kas Fountain. Under the dome of the Rock, was where the Fortress of Antonia stood. In 135 AD, Hadrian filled in about 50 feet of earth over top of where the temple stood and enlarged the temple mount and built a temple of Jupiter where we see the Dome of the rock today.
Perhaps I will only show my ignorance but is there any chance that Herod did not rebuild the temple in the City of David but rather on the traditional temple mount in order to make his temple more grand than that of Solomon. His personality, as scripture suggests, was a man who liked aggrandizement. Just wondering.
I remember seeing in other videos, where the mosque is on the mount, there occurred an earthquake. With the rebuilding that had to be done to make the structure safe, they discovered the remains of a water pool. Yes, the Gihon spring is in the city of David. However, there was a pool that was used for the needs of the temple. It seems water had to be carried up there to make the needs of the temple. The city of David is not a big place. Yes, there were some places there that seemed to be used for sacrifice as shown in your video. Of course, from what I have seen in videos, the place u present is not big enough to do all the sacrifices of the temple. As a matter of fact, the place u choose to show us is very small & from what I recall only a small amount of sacrifices could occur there. I walked up a tunnel from the Kidron valley to the temple mount. My take on the tunnel was made for the dispersion of the blood that was spilled from the animals into the Kidron valley. I still have one problem with my writing above. Where is Fort Antonia where the soldier's barracks resided?
You said there weren't mikvehs down in the City of David, but is this correct? Isn't the Pool of Siloam down there? If so, then the Pool of Siloam could serve as the mikveh for the Temple in the alternative location. You should have at least addressed that. That was one of the major points of Bob Cornuke's thesis. I don't think you fairly evaluated this matter in this episode because you didn't mention the Pool of Siloam in the City of David. It is large enough to have served as the Mikveh for the Temple.
That passage works perfectly with the traditional location. The Antonia was a tower in the Northwest corner of the Temple Mount. The soldiers would have run down the stairs into the temple courtyard and rescued Paul. Paul then would have addressed the crowd probably from the stairs to the tower. If the temple was in the City of David, then this wouldn't really have worked.
But the Dome of the Rock is more likely patterned after Constantine's octagonal church that he built on the temple site. Perhaps Constantine built this church on what he knew was the place where Jesus was condemned at the fortress of Antonia.
We agree with you guys and thank you for making this series of videos! Too bad Bob C. had to make such a fuss so he could sell some books & dvd's, and give a reason to doubt the Jewish People have a right to the Temple Mount. And the uncovering of the street from the pool of Siloam up to the Temple Mount is further proof of where Herod's Temple was. Keep up the great work!
Interestingly, you guys use the number '200 million gallons' of water held in the cisterns. Going off Wikipedia (for how accurate that is lol) the Gihon pushes approx 600,000 cubic meters of water per year, which translates to 158,503,230 US gallons per year, so very comparable in the City of David. The logistics again come into it- and then the question again of stagnant water vs 'living water.' Also, if located over the Gihon, no transport was needed- the water was already there, and it is living water. Again- i am asking seriously here, as I have no idea where the Temple was. But you can see i hope why Bob Cornuke puts so much emphasis on the Gihon.
YES! Plus, the Bible says the temple was located IN the City of David. Cornuke's points on water sold me on his argument. Archaeologists say there was an aqueduct water-delivery system to the Roman fortress. Even more, if the temple really is where Cornuke says it is, then that changes the location where the crucifixion occurred. It's very fascinating indeed
Josephus' never ending spring of water could be the Gihon. Ezekiel 47 tells us the future of the Gihon spring. The Gospels state that Jesus said not one stone will be left on top of another. A huge plaza could have also existed in the City of David, but all its stones could have been carted away, not leaving a trace...
Mikveh water must come from spring eventually going to ocean or from rain water from sky . I built one orthodox mikveh in NY. Samaratins claim Temple was on Mt Gerizim.. bizarre.
You're right. I believe the First Temple was in The City of David and the The Second is in The Traditional Temple Mount site. Mountains collapse and that's possibly why the land platform is not big enough in The City of David.
@@user-ln5il4un3x The Temple could never be in the City of David. There's not enough room. The royal cubit is just over 20 inches. To have the Temple on the land of the City of David, the cubit would have to be 6 inches. Please see any of Joseph Good's videos, who was featured in this one, about the Temple. IT MATTERS. To think that the Jews would somehow forget or move the site is ludicrous, absolutely ludicrous.
30 + Cisterns, 200 million gallons of water, to serve... a Roman Legion and its support team. Also, when the priesthood prepares the offerings, I do not think they would want to use other peoples ritual bath water.
Read 2nd Chronicles 32:30, Song of Solomon 4:12, Ezekiel 47:5 They are talking about the Well of Souls… Why do you people think the Temple had a Fountain Gate?
I think the whole reason Cornuke wants you to believe the temple was somewhere else is because, he wants the third temple to be built so Jesus will return. If he can convince enough people and so on, it would be built. Only in the wrong place.
The next Temple must be in Jerusalem. The original site has been lost to history/politics. Biblical prophecy just says the next Temple will be in JERUSALEM. That is all that matters. So Israel build the Temple.
I was leaning towards Karnukes version till I watched this..What about the the temple being in Zion, the city of David? The cisterns and the N/W wall pretty good evidence and the word for 600 men instead of legion....What did you think of Karnuke finding Paul's shipwreck on Malta and the 4 anchors.. He did well on that.
Cornuke makes a really big deal about the Bible saying the Temple was on Mount Zion, and he is correct. His assumption about the City of David being Mount Zion is completely wrong though. The Bible and Jewish tradition has always called all of Jerusalem, the City of David, and the Temple Mount "Zion" interchangeably.
@@TheIsraelGuys I since asked the question of a temple expert (John Schmidt) and he said there is some archeological evidence that there were some viaducts built to bring water to the mount too, similar to the Romans viaduct work in other parts of the world.
6:00 The point you are trying to make here falls flat when you consider that these mikvahs are just as suitable to a temple location closer to the city of David. They would just be north of the temple rather than south of it.
The 24 chapter of Matthew, the Lord Jesus Christ states that concerning the temple there would be left not one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down, so how is there a western wall of the temple from that time period still standing? Now are they saying Christ told a lie, if he did, which is a lie, he is the Truth, it is an open attack on his deity as the Lord from Heaven, the true temple has to be somewhere els.
Did you watch episode 3 of this series? ua-cam.com/video/RZ9gzIV8qHQ/v-deo.html Jesus also made the same prophecy about all of Jerusalem. Either the prophecy was false, or Jesus was using a figure of speech (we go with the figure of speech option)
1:10, "Never had a drop up there" HUM! Perhaps this is the termed Mount Ararat where the arc is supposedly sitting, landed! But what if in reality that entire section there is where the ark sits, spiritually speaking of course! Thank you for your information appreciate you both and crew
How do you explain the stables? It makes no sense to me for there to be a stables as part of the temple area, but part of a Roman Fortress. There is no room for horses in the tower that they claim is Antonio.
Right where the pilgrimage road begins they found a pool down there that would be big enough for all kinds of people debate ritualistically and I know that because I saw the video from the watchmen Eric Steckel back
Absolutely. This is something we didn't get time to talk about in the series, but there is an amazing pilgrimage road discovered by Eli Shukron that leads from the Siloam pool up to the Temple Mount, not the City of David
These small mikvahs could have been used throughout the year But on the 3 major holidays, they would have immersed for ritial cleansing in the Pool of Siloam, then followed the pilgrimage road (ascending) to the Temple Mount. The Pool pf Siloam is at the bottom of the City of David, it was fed by the Gihon spring.
Have you guys heard about the ' hewers of wood and fetchers of water ' Also where did the Temple get all the wood to consume all these sacrifices. Jerusalem being a barren hilltop (a treeless hill ).
Not sure if this is where they got the wood for the Temple service, but if you read Josephus, Jerusalem used to be surrounded by forests. The Romans cut the trees down for the siege of Jerusalem in 70AD
Ron Wyatt found the rock that was split and it was huge, he saw a creekbed that flowed from it to form a lake. He even showed in his video the rock, dry creekbed and the dry lakebed, so they had plenty of water for about an estimated 2 million people from the Exodus.
@@robertsanders5355 Anyway water can be carried few hundred meters to the tabernacle. There shouldn't be problem to have a temple in the traditional location.
I am NOT wanting to disagree or cast doubt, but how did they pump the water up from the cisterns, and where is the "sewage" drains for all the blood and water from the sacrifices? - just asking. Love the videos!
They had efficient wheel pumps. The sewer drained the blood into the kidron valley. The soil mixed with blood was excellent potters clay, we see the “potters field” mentioned in the NT.
@@tradarcher7311 Thank you! I'm not doubting or disagreeing with you, BUT, are there any archeological findings of these? If so, where? I would love to check it out!
The Mikvas outside the Temple had their own cisterns for collecting water (first Temple) and many of the other Mikvas (second Temple) were filled from the aqueduct system built by the Maccabees. The Temple used a machine to draw water from the cisterns
As an historian, interesting videos you guys have made on the true site of the Temple of Jerusalem. Unfortunately, you ignored some of the most critical historical information which was given by Josephus and other historical figures. There are a couple of very critical passages in Josephus regarding the Temple which you completely ignore as well as some of the visual evidence on the so called "Temple Mount." Historical Methodology requires that the historian consider "all the pertinent information" before coming to a conclusion. As SpotterVideo points out, you also ignore the reference in Tacitus which definitely implies a location other than the so called Temple Mount. Carbon 14 dating on rock is not as reliable as people have been led to believe over the past decades. A good example of this is the Shroud of Turin. Carbon dating shows it to be from the Medieval period. However, further examination discovered pollen from a plant that only grew in the Levant and specifically in Israel during and prior to the ministry of Christ. By the time of the Medieval period, that particular plant was no longer found in the Levant. Eli Shukron's claims about the Carbon 14 dating is questionable because he can't say with certainty what historically happened in the rock structure he claims is a cistern. A number of environmental issues can impact the veracity of the carbon footprint of a site or object. The statements made by those supporting the traditional view regarding acquaducts are also suspect given come of the scholarship in the last twenty years on the acquaducts in Jerusalem. You guys still have some homework and research to do on this subject. To make a claim as to the validity of any academic theory, you need to include all of the evidence; Cherry picking historical evidence is not doing good history or archaeology. It is the fasted way to have someone question your methodology. Hope you take this seriously.
Thank you for the hard investigations on this very touchy topic. It's not easy to go into this one at all from what I understand. Tradition is one of the best and worst parts about all of it. I'm not for or against either one. But we will find out when the prophecies come to pass in the next years to come (Or less etc). Also please try to remember everything that is proposed to be for a large amount of peoples needs such as room in general and water bathing needs is equally valid for both the Roman fort idea and the Temple idea. Romans were coming and going actually living in the fort so needs are almost all the same. It seems to be overlooked that Roman soldiers have and use many HORSES, HORSES, HORSES! Plus a few dogs and animals for food for sure! Housing Soldiers is a huge resource problem even if they are not numbering over a thousand. Plus servants and ANiMALS! 9:19 It does somewhat bother me when I hear statements like this one saying "There is more than enough water for the temples requirements" (Paraphrased) and it's never added that the fact is it should be said "Or for a large number of Roman soldiers". Or something similar. Be cause if they are looking without bias as much as they can they should be including these view points just as much. Both Bob Cornuke (Mr Corncob LOL) and these very smart men need to be searching for the TRUTH not the one they want to be true. Thank you for addressing some of the issues no one else seems to include in their rebuttals that I've seen up until now. I'm not yet convinced of either one and I'm thinking it very well may be that a mixture of both might be the facts. All love and blessings to you in Christ Jesus!
The Isrealites worshipped God on their 'High PLaces', suggesting the altar would be on top of the highest spot - ie Dome of the Rock in the Antonian Fortress. But maybe their Temple was built below so that it could be built on a large flat place. However, SOMEONE built the Antonia fortress foundations with their massive stone blocks that the Romans were not capable of lifting and moving. Maybe the Romans invaded first the fortress/garrison, and later destroyed a separate Temple nearby. I would point out however, that a 'completely different location' for the Temple would have not be REALLY different place, not just nextdoor in Jerusalem!
There are, however, other signs that the southern part of the Temple Mount was used at that time. A large monastery, the so-called Monastery of the Virgin, was excavated near the Triple Gate. In its courtyard, a three-seater toilet was found that was flushed with the water of one of the Temple Mount cisterns, namely Cistern 10.
This is all theory too. I'm just saying... If we are looking for facts, this fact is a certainty, the third temple will be build somewhere in Jerusalem. Where that will be remains to determined. It is interesting all the theories about where it was.
@@TheIsraelGuys Haha, that is semi ridiculous, what was the power source for this 'machine'? Horses? Slaves? I demand to see your sources and call B. to the S.
Finally, on the inside of the southeast corner of the Temple Mount that has been preserved to a great height, is the chapel of the so-called Cradle of Jesus (Arabic: Sidna Issa). There is a small shrine inside this room. The photo below shows the small Muslim dome that was built over a Byzantine altar that has four marble pillars and a reliquary underneath. This may have been the shrine where the nuns of the Monastery of the Virgin came to commemorate the birth of Jesus.
That is not the Temple Mount it is the remains of the Roman Fort Antonia. Which was it's own municipality unlinked from Jerusalem. The Jews had baths outside of Antonia because they considered it unclean & bathed themselves on the way out.
Did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem? If so. Why wouldn't the first place of worship and sacrifice be in The City of David? Concentrate on First Temple....wouldn't that be the site of the next temple?
The scripture says David brought the ark up to Jerusalem. Then when Solomon built the Temple, it specifically says he brought the ark up from the City of David and placed it in the Temple on Mount Moriah
The answer to the question, why if Jesus claimed that not one stone would be left upon another and there are stones left, means you are wrong and are not understanding something right. A little advice. NEVER assume the Bible is wrong. That Book has this uncanny way of turning out right every time. Archeology has questioned that Book on many occasions in the past. And the Bible has proven right every time because somebody was overlooking something. I don't know what the answer is right now about the exact location of the Temple. But read the Bible. Find it's location from there. Once everything is figured out, guaranteed it will be exactly where the Bible said it was and as described.
I watched "Jesus of Nazareth" and when they are making their way to the temple, they went DOWN the mount to the temple, which in my book it shows how they got it right. They looked down onto the Temple.
Yes if you were to be able to pass through the present day blocked Eastern Gate it leads you down to the location of the Jewish second temple was in the City of David. Next to the spring, and Solomon pool.
The tunnels through Warrens Gate were indicated to have been filled with water…..which means there is water under the Temple Mount. The question is, how much?
I never get tired of Israel history, the amazing land. Looking forward to Yeshua return and his kingdom.. Blessings to you all
Only the true Messiah as promised in the holy Hebrew scriptures is coming
Brother and sisters I hear you! And so does father he hears us and when our hearts grow together for some reason the earth and the Animals as well then the Lord will weigh everything!
I've heard that the red heffer is almost ready for the sacrifice. 5 were just donated for that purpose.
the truth is this is Palestine Not Israel way you believe it
@@nabeelhantouli3793 Not as long as you Pal's keep getting your ass kicked.
The two Hebrew Temples were situated in 'the City of David' which is synonymous with 'Mount Zion.' 'The Holy Scriptures' more than abundantly confirm this. That entire rectangular platform in Jerusalem - which people annoyingly, erroneously identify as 'the temple mount' - is the full-sized 'Fort Antonia,' built by the Imperial Romans and later renovated by the Ottomans. The archaeological site of these cisterns in this video quite possibly meet the requirement of updated Roman civil engineering projects. During the time of Herod, there was an above-ground aqueduct that meandered through the city from west to east, stopping at the general area, but west of this location, and just south of 'the western wall.' Included with such feats of construction is the transporting of fresh spring water in to holding ponds above grade and cisterns below grade. But, even more so, this location just south and below the rectangular platform is where King David's palace was located. Palatial residences always include private gardens and water sources for hygiene and basic survival. The actual Gihon Spring, flowing exclusively underground, was used for the two previous temples whilst these cisterns, if they existed during David's reign and lifetime, were used for the royal residence, the northernmost boundary of 'the City of David.' Furthermore, 'Mount Moriah' is the highest topographical summit west of the Kidron Valley and north of David's palace. 'Mount Moriah' is known for many sacred and special Biblical and historic events. Its original earthen peak is now below the center of the rectangular platform, at or near the spot of 'the Dome of the Rock.' People need to stop believing and trusting in 'Jewish fables' and so-called 'traditional sites' and actually defer to 'the Holy Scriptures' and reliable ancient archaeology supported by honest history.
Well written. The answer given in this video is evidence enough that there was NO NATURAL and constant water supply in this location for the Temple system to rely on. What we do have however is a great form of Roman construction to ensure supply for its forces. I remain sceptical that the so-called 'Temple Mount' is the original location, but I reserve any confidence either way.
Thank you for brining perspective to the arguments that were made. I was very sceptical at accepting the narrative presented in these videos mainly because it's source relies heavily on the Writings of Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus. Two pieces of critical evidence is key, the first is the threshing-floor of Orna the Jebusite that King David purchased and built an Altart to the Most High where also he first sacrificed. The second is the Gion Springs in Gion where King Solomon was Anointed according to the Instruction of King David.
Trying to stay attached to tradition is a huge stumbling block that we must overcome if we are going to move forward. May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob open our eyes so we can see and know what He wants us to learn.
World peace starts from free strong PALESTINE 🇵🇸
The Roman Historian Tacitus said 'a spring of never-failing water' came from the Jewish temple in his writings below.
The Jews
Book Five (1-13) of The Histories by Tacitus
12. The Temple was like a citadel and had its own walls, which had been even more laboriously and skilfully constructed than the rest. The porticoes around it constituted in themselves an excellent defensive position. To these advantages must be added a spring of never-failing water, chambers cut in the living rock, and tanks and cisterns for the storage of rainwater. Its builders had foreseen only too well that the strange practices of the Jews would lead to continual fighting. Hence everything was available for a siege, however long. Moreover, after Pompey's capture of Jerusalem, fear and experience taught them many lessons. So taking advantage of the money-grubbing instincts of the Claudian period, they purchased permission to fortify the city, and in the days of peace built walls meant for war. Already the home of a motley concourse, its population had been swollen by the fall of the other Jewish cities, for the most determined partisan leaders escaped to the capital, and thereby added to the turmoil. There were three different leaders and three armies. The long outer perimeter of the walls was held by Simon, the central part of the city by John, and the Temple by Eleazar. John and Simon could rely on numbers and equipment, Eleazar on his strategic position. But it was upon each other that they turned the weapons of battle, ambush and fire, and great stocks of corn went up in flames. Then John sent off a party of men, ostensibly to offer sacrifice but in reality to cut Eleazar and his followers to pieces, thus gaining possession of the Temple. Hence-forward, therefore, Jerusalem was divided between two factions, until, on the approach of the Romans, fighting the foreigner healed the breach between them.
13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure. Few people placed a sinister interpretation upon this. The majority were convinced that the ancient scriptures of their priests alluded to the present as the very time when the Orient would triumph and from Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world. This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth.
We are told that the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000. All who could bear arms did so, and more than their numbers warranted had the courage necessary. They displayed an inflexible determination, women no less than men, and the thought that they might be compelled to leave their home made them more afraid of living than of dying.
This, then, was the city and nation which Titus faced. Since a headlong assault and the element of surprise were ruled out by the lie of the ground, he proposed to employ earthworks and mantlets. Each legion had its allotted task, and there was a lull in the fighting while they pushed on with the construction of every conceivable device for storming Cities, whether invented long ago or due to the ingenuity of modern times.
In the writings of Josephus below he reveals Titus used Fort Antonia as his base of operations on the day the temple was burned. It proves the Romans did attack the foundations of the fort to gain access to the fort, but they did not destroy the entire fort as some have claimed.
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."
I appreciate the tacitus reference, wasn't aware of that. It does parallel with the letter to aristeas though which also speaks of constant flowing streams among other very interesting statements in that letter.
@@blaksimba The word "Gihon" means "gusher". I heard a geologist say it is believed the Gihon Spring is a very rare "Siphon Spring", which is fed by an underground cavern. When the cavern fills to a certain level the spring could actually pump water uphill for some time, very similar to an artesian well. A simple pipe system could have transported the water into the temple if it was close by.
During the time of David, the Jebusites had a waterspout that exited outside the gate to their fortress. One of David's men climbed up the waterspout and got into the fortress. The spring fed the Pool of Siloam, which is now being completely excavated.
During the siege of 70 AD the city never ran out of water, because of this spring.
As a observant Jewish lady, I can tell you even if you go to a mikveh today, there is an opening to the roof with a trough that takes in fresh rain water into the pool. "Let the waters beneath the sky be collected in one place." Genesis 1:9
Loved the way the deniers of the truth of the Temple Mount are so easily debunked. I almost feel sorry for them.
Good job!
The Roman Historian Tacitus said 'a spring of never-failing water' came from the Jewish temple in his writings below.
The Jews
Book Five (1-13) of The Histories by Tacitus
12. The Temple was like a citadel and had its own walls, which had been even more laboriously and skilfully constructed than the rest. The porticoes around it constituted in themselves an excellent defensive position. To these advantages must be added a spring of never-failing water, chambers cut in the living rock, and tanks and cisterns for the storage of rainwater. Its builders had foreseen only too well that the strange practices of the Jews would lead to continual fighting. Hence everything was available for a siege, however long. Moreover, after Pompey's capture of Jerusalem, fear and experience taught them many lessons. So taking advantage of the money-grubbing instincts of the Claudian period, they purchased permission to fortify the city, and in the days of peace built walls meant for war. Already the home of a motley concourse, its population had been swollen by the fall of the other Jewish cities, for the most determined partisan leaders escaped to the capital, and thereby added to the turmoil. There were three different leaders and three armies. The long outer perimeter of the walls was held by Simon, the central part of the city by John, and the Temple by Eleazar. John and Simon could rely on numbers and equipment, Eleazar on his strategic position. But it was upon each other that they turned the weapons of battle, ambush and fire, and great stocks of corn went up in flames. Then John sent off a party of men, ostensibly to offer sacrifice but in reality to cut Eleazar and his followers to pieces, thus gaining possession of the Temple. Hence-forward, therefore, Jerusalem was divided between two factions, until, on the approach of the Romans, fighting the foreigner healed the breach between them.
13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure. Few people placed a sinister interpretation upon this. The majority were convinced that the ancient scriptures of their priests alluded to the present as the very time when the Orient would triumph and from Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world. This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth.
We are told that the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000. All who could bear arms did so, and more than their numbers warranted had the courage necessary. They displayed an inflexible determination, women no less than men, and the thought that they might be compelled to leave their home made them more afraid of living than of dying.
This, then, was the city and nation which Titus faced. Since a headlong assault and the element of surprise were ruled out by the lie of the ground, he proposed to employ earthworks and mantlets. Each legion had its allotted task, and there was a lull in the fighting while they pushed on with the construction of every conceivable device for storming Cities, whether invented long ago or due to the ingenuity of modern times.
Bob Canuke has investigated other stories and the sites associated with them. He claims to have been a police detective or some such, thus having the skills that others lack.
Perhaps he has been correct with some of his finds but he's now looking for alternates for other traditional sites.
He makes the claim that the site of Jesus death and burial could be the Mount of Olives. You can see the burial caves from across the valley, below the houses. I can't see how he justifies this with the descriptions in the Bible. Perhaps pride is now getting in the way of common sense.
@@SpotterVideo I hadn't realised that there was a contemporary Roman historian who had also written about this. And corroborating what Josephus had written for some have dismissed Josephus as a historian.
What did Christ prophesy in Matthew 24 about Jerusalem including the temple? Read the first 2 verses. Men know nothing!. Christ said the temple would be totally destroyed ALL of it nothing left standing. Was this not fulfilled on AD 90? Yes it was. Therefore, the Western or Wailing Wall is MOT part of the temple. Believing men who speculate for a living is dangerous. Believing the word of God is liberating.
Thank you guys for sharing this video with me!. I enjoyed the second episode very much!. Very nicely presented!. 🇮🇱
If we go back in time to when the First Temple was built, which cisterns were already there? How long did it take to dig them out? Where was the water stored in the meantime? What was the process for cleansing while there was no water up on what would become the Mount? Again, the only water available is the Gihon- so carried up over a quarter mile to the Rock? has there been any evidence (writings, oral traditions, etc) of water transportation up there? This would have been a constant issue as sacrifices were performed daily. As cisterns were dug out, then they had to wait for them to fill. and again- if animal droppings/dead animals/etc get into a cistern, is the whole cistern now contaminated, and must be emptied and sanitized before use again in a mikveh? Is there a process or writings anywhere on that?
What dates were the aqueducts added? how long did it take to build them? then after built, make the necessary corrections/adjustments to move the water efficiently? What was done for water while they were being built? Do we have any writings on the building of them, and activities on the Mount prior to that water arriving via aqueduct?
Or, was the Temple over an existing water source that was constant and pushing 158+ million gallons of water annually? Again- Im asking serious questions because I do not have all the data. I am asking for the data if you have it, or some explanation that is feasible, attainable for those people at that time, and reasonable. Without any feasible, attainable, reasonable explanation or evidence that there was a system to resolve all these issues at once (like having a natural strong spring of water already in place) then the Temple could not have been located up on that mount.
Additionally, at the suggested location of the Fortress Antonia according to your video, where are the remains? the latrines, sewer, water source for that barracks (goes back to water usage for those men, animals, work tasks). Is there evidence of that? Has anyone researched the Roman records of this area- seen what they said. Those guys wrote everything down, didnt they?
Hi Gary, don't have time to respond to all of this right now, but here are a few thoughts.
Unfortunately there is a lot of historical data that we don't have. Some things were written down and lost. Some things were never written down.
The first cisterns on the Temple Mount were likely dug by King Solomon before the Temple was built. We do know from historical data that these cisterns were tightly sealed and had complex methods for drawing the water up for use. Historical sources tell us that this was the water source for the first Temple, there is no mention of the Gihon spring.
The aqueduct system was built by the Maccabeean dynasty. The water from this system fed the Temple Mount and other major parts of Jerusalem including I believe the Antonia fortress.
As far as the archaeology of the Antonia Fortress, unfortunately there has never been great opportunity to dig over there due to the crazy politics involved, so we don't know a whole lot of specifics. It is just the assumed location based off of descriptions by Josephus.
When you really look into the data, there is really no possible way the Temple can have been located in the City of David. One major overlook reason being that the upper part of the City of David has been excavated but archaeologist and the entire area is covered in layers of houses and palaces dating all the way through first and second periods. They and a Temple can't exist on the same location for the same date period, it's physically impossible. This is a major aspect Cornuke and other propionates of this theory completely ignore.
I agree the amount of water would have to be tremendous especially during the festivals with 3 million people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not to mention I read a long time ago, Solomons Stalls are near the location of the cisterns and in the side of the temple mount foundation..
Maybe the Cisterns were military water sources, and to water horses and livestock. Maybe some Cisterns held grain for food, or wheat after threshing . .
Interesting. Looking forward to learning everything you have discovered regarding the Temple Mount. 🇮🇱
I did that Shomron tour with Josh after the JPB ‘24. I didn’t know about you guys before that. I’m enjoying your channel. Give a shout out to Dern for me too!
I love Jewish Temple so much and Both You do great job to support Israel and Jewish Patriots Dear Israel Guys.😊😇🥰😍🤗🙏💙✝✡🕎☦☮
Great Video which pretty well destroys the "City of David " theory! Learned alot from these video's.
In 325 AD Constantine tore down the Temple of Jupiter and assumed Hadrian built the temple of Jupiter on top of the spot where the temple of Solomon once stood. Constantine built an octagon church on the site. In 700 AD the Muslims found the foundations of Constantine's octagon church and built the dome of the Rock we see today.
God bless you brothers, thank you for sharing the information
The loaded archeological "gun" that the Temple was on top of the T. Mt. is the Pilgrimage Road from the Pool of Shiloach until the Southern Wall ancient entrance, an entire upward ascent of two short steps followed by a long step. The entire Road of Ascent is the same so that the Pilgrim can think and watch his steps from the Pool at the bottom to the Southern Wall of the Temple Mt. It is basic Pilgrimage Road 101.
Bingo, great comment! Right on! Some people are trying to rewrite history to take away the Jewish People's right to the Temple Mt., but the truth is so clear. Thanks!
Absolutely. We were hoping to do an episode dedicated to this, but the we couldn't get access to the road during our filming time due to construction. Maybe we'll get to it in the future!
@@TheIsraelGuys The existence of the so-called “pilgrimage road” does not necessarily mean the temple was located on the Temple Mount. There are many reasons why a road like that would have been desirable to build (for example, it may have been leading up to fortress Antonia). It’s also worth considering that the road was not built by the Jews or even Herod, as coins found under the road dated its construction to after 30 AD (meaning it was built by the Romans and not the Jews). So if we accept this is truly a “pilgrimage” road, how exactly did pilgrims reach the temple prior to this road being built in 30 AD? And let’s not forget that this road also had a drainage channel running below it, which would have certainly been defiling to any Jews walking above it that wanted to visit the Temple. Personally, I believe that regardless of the temple’s exact location, the 2nd-temple-era pool of Siloam was more likely used by the Jews as a reservoir and Roman-style public swimming pool with ritual bathing saved for mikvehs much closer to the Temple.
Points well taken. Well done. First rate presentations on this timely subject.👍
Glad you liked it!
Thanks guys.
Very interesting Abba is revealing the truth to those that listen 🙏⛺🙌
Great report. When I was in Israel, we attended the City of David House of Prayer.
What a wonderful encounter with God there!
There is a fresh water source, known as Zedekiah's tears, which is said to be close to the Temple Mount, inside Zedekiah's cave. I believe that when the Temple is rebuilt, a spring is prophesied to flow from it towards the Dead Sea. Given that earthquakes have altered the course of underground rivers before (The Gihon spring's water is now brackish after an earthquake but previously was fresh, indicating a change in it's course), perhaps when the Temple gets it's spring Zedekiah's tears will cease ...
We will know everything in the time of the end
❤❤❤❤get ready for the New Temple I'm going to come visit next before it all happens 😊
Josh, when you were speaking about the Mikveh pools and then going up to the Temple, it made me think about Psalm 24:3-6, "Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who shall stand in His holy place? He that has clean hands, and a pure heart; who has not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation"......
Since ascend is to go up, and this did not take place until your hands were clean, it made me think [positionally], of the pools being slightly lower. Then, after washing (mikveh), a person would ascend. Thank you to all the Israel Guy TEAM for these two presentations
Absolutely
The temple was also described as having upper courts with flights of steps leading up to the higher inner areas. So, temple visitors would have needed to “ascend” within the Temple complex whether they washed in the pool of Siloam at the bottom of the hill or in a mikvah closer to the temple walls.
Ezekiel 47 speaks of water flowing out from below the threshold of the Temple. As a preterist I do not see this as literal, yet I would still see it as a symbolic reference to the Gihon springs.
What about the threshing floor? There's no way one could have existed under the dome. Just look @ the unevenness of it.
Thank you so much 💖
You are so welcome
Hi guys . Thanks for this great videos.
Love Israel history!
🤔 what history 73 years isn't enough to make a history
@@Ahmedkhaled-ct2be 4,000+ years old history of the Hebrews. YOUR history, however, might be 75 years old.
Eñjoy the tour of the Temple grounds
Have you ever wondered?... Normally, the People have to Build or Purchase the HOUSE first, before procuring the requirements inside the house such as furniture, appliances, curtains, lighting/ plumbing fixtures, etc... In Jerusalem, Israel the Jews had already prepared all the requirements needed for the 3rd Temple, such as the Red Heifers (Cows as sacrifices), Standard Clothes of the High Priest, Silver Utensils, Temple's Traditional Instruments, Jewish Candlestands (Menorah), the Holy Scriptures Written in Scrolls (Books of Torah and Tanakh), including the Temple Plans, Scaled Building Model, etc... except for the Actual Physical Building itself...
Ironically, the 3rd Stonewall Temple is nowhere to be found... Not yet built and still debating and negotiating up to now where EXACTLY the location of the 2nd Temple that was completely and totally destroyed except for the gate walls (obviously) in around 70 A.D... Christ said, "NOT ONE (TEMPLE) STONE WILL BE LEFT UNTURNED." ...(Luke 21:6)... "NO TRACES" found?
That this means that God does not really want the 3rd Temple to be REBUILT for God does not want any more animal sacrifices after His own Son's Sacrificial Death on the Cross and Resurrection had already been fulfilled (Finished)?...
Naturally I have questions that would go towards both theories here... has anyone done a logistical estimate of how much water would be needed daily for the city? Going off 6,000 soldiers vs 600, with horses (300 Cavalry in a Legion) plus officers, work horses, water needed tor equipment maintenance, bathing, cooking for both 6000 and 600 or so soldiers), then add all the support staff for both a legion and cohort (or whatever it is defined as if not a full legion)? then add in the amount of water needed for each mikveh (when does the water in a mikveh become 'no longer cleansing? does it have to be changed out if it is not running water? how often? how many gallons/liters). Also, how much water was needed to cleanse the sacrificial areas daily? how was it transported from those cisterns in your video up to the temple? how many people were needed? did they have to cleanse themselves as well before transporting the water? Also (again), how much of those cisterns supplied water to the general population of Jerusalem? How many gallons/liters did the average citizen drink per day? cook with per day? wash/bath per day? then add in the flocks and livestock, work animals, etc. Also add in for festivals, holidays, flocks of animals being sacrificed (they still need to be watered daily I would think). I am asking in an honest way here- it is one thing to say 'they collected water' versus 'there is a fresh running water supply already here.' Speaking of that, what is the volume of water supplied by the Gihon Spring? Could it have provided for all the sacrificing/mikvehs in addition to Roman usage/population usage?
Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics. Right now I am up in the air about where the Temple actually stood. If on top of the Temple Mount, then logistically there need to be answers instead of 'here is a cistern.' If in the City of David as Bob Cornuke says, could the Gihon support such activities on a daily basis.
Cornuke has kind of won me over. But the Bible DOES say that the Temple was in the City of David. From what archaeologists have discovered, there wasn't a natural source of water where the Roman fortress was located. They had to pipe it in. OK, maybe those 'cisterns' were holding places for the water. There was a conduit underground that brought water in from another source. This IS a desert region, after all. But the Gihon Springs was a natural source and made sense for the temple to be located where Cornuke thinks. We MUST look at what the Bible says and take our cues from there. Of course what was then and what we observe now is much different. The land was vacated with "Nothing" for such a very long time. Naturally, everything is now underground as later on the area was built upon.
I think I can help you with how a mikvah is supposed to work -water has to be flowing in and flowing out simultaneously, it's not like a bathtub as we know. The synagogue here in Cheyenne was built over a naturally occurring spring and there's a mikveh in the basement and when a lady takes her mikvah, the water is flowing in as fast as it's flowing out. What's interesting about the synagogue here in Cheyenne is that they had no idea that spring was there till they started digging to create the basement and foundation and came across a natural spring by accident.
There will not be one stone on another.
Jesus was referring to the Temple not the walls
On the Temple Mount he (Hadrian) erected a temple to Jupiter with an equestrian statue of himself in front of it." (The temple of Jerusalem, Joan Comay, 1975, p199)
Where was the threshing floor on the temple mount?
Tuvia Sagiv's theory focuses on Hadrian building a Temple of Jupiter on the temple mount in 135 AD. Hadrian had built many large scale projects including the Jupiter on the Temple in Baalbek, Lebanon, that is still standing to this day. Sagiv, being an architect by trade, noticed that both the Temple of Jupiter in Baalbek and the Islamic buildings we see on the temple mount today, were almost an exact match in both design and scale. The similarity between a hexagon shaped Jupiter "Forecourt" with the Dome of the Rock and the Jupiter Temple with the Al-Aqsa mosque is nothing short of stunning.
You guys deserve more views
I never understood the Temple Mount. It contradicts Jesus saying no stone would be on another.
jesus also said "no one of this generation shall pass till you witness the coming of the kingdom"... he also said “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat, So you must be careful to do everything they tell you" matthew 23 verses 2&3.
[Other version: "The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses, So practice and obey whatever they tell you,"]
In fact, the God of Israel already commanded this in Deuteronomy 17 verses 10-13.
We're going to address this quote by Jesus in episode 3. There's some things you might find really surprising
@@Yehonatan521 When you get the correct Hebrew text, Yeshua said to do what Moses said, but the religious leaders.
See Nehemia Gordon.
@@Yehonatan521 The context of "this generation" is that the generation that sees these things will not pass away. That could be ours!
No stone of the Temple is standing.
The walls you see are simply the retaining walls to hold dirt around Mt Moriah to be able to have a flat surface.
I bet you believe dinosaurs lived millions of years ago too.
Don't forget that the act of Christian baptism is a direct inheritor of the Jewish ritual bathing in the mikveh.
Jurusalem was land for person who worship God. Land for all
Great stuff, you’ve explained it very well
Glad it was helpful!
Solomon built the temple on the threshing floor David bought. The Dome of the rock is the highest point of the temple mount. Threshing floors were never built on hills, but in curved valleys, like directly under the Al Kas Fountain. Under the dome of the Rock, was where the Fortress of Antonia stood. In 135 AD, Hadrian filled in about 50 feet of earth over top of where the temple stood and enlarged the temple mount and built a temple of Jupiter where we see the Dome of the rock today.
Perhaps I will only show my ignorance but is there any chance that Herod did not rebuild the temple in the City of David but rather on the traditional temple mount in order to make his temple more grand than that of Solomon. His personality, as scripture suggests, was a man who liked aggrandizement. Just wondering.
I remember seeing in other videos, where the mosque is on the mount, there occurred an earthquake. With the rebuilding that had to be done to make the structure safe, they discovered the remains of a water pool. Yes, the Gihon spring is in the city of David. However, there was a pool that was used for the needs of the temple. It seems water had to be carried up there to make the needs of the temple. The city of David is not a big place. Yes, there were some places there that seemed to be used for sacrifice as shown in your video. Of course, from what I have seen in videos, the place u present is not big enough to do all the sacrifices of the temple. As a matter of fact, the place u choose to show us is very small & from what I recall only a small amount of sacrifices could occur there. I walked up a tunnel from the Kidron valley to the temple mount. My take on the tunnel was made for the dispersion of the blood that was spilled from the animals into the Kidron valley. I still have one problem with my writing above. Where is Fort Antonia where the soldier's barracks resided?
You guys should sit and chat with Rabbi Tovia Singer, you do great work and I enjoy your videos.
You said there weren't mikvehs down in the City of David, but is this correct? Isn't the Pool of Siloam down there? If so, then the Pool of Siloam could serve as the mikveh for the Temple in the alternative location. You should have at least addressed that. That was one of the major points of Bob Cornuke's thesis.
I don't think you fairly evaluated this matter in this episode because you didn't mention the Pool of Siloam in the City of David. It is large enough to have served as the Mikveh for the Temple.
The cistern that you showed are not cistern but tombs of the Kings, check out Expedition Bible by Archeologist Joel Kamer.
Okay, now explain Acts 21, where Paul was rescued by the Roman soldiers.
That passage works perfectly with the traditional location. The Antonia was a tower in the Northwest corner of the Temple Mount. The soldiers would have run down the stairs into the temple courtyard and rescued Paul. Paul then would have addressed the crowd probably from the stairs to the tower. If the temple was in the City of David, then this wouldn't really have worked.
@@TheIsraelGuys How many Roman soldiers were stationed in Jerusalem?
When the 3rd Temple is built, it will be almost time.
But the Dome of the Rock is more likely patterned after Constantine's octagonal church that he built on the temple site. Perhaps Constantine built this church on what he knew was the place where Jesus was condemned at the fortress of Antonia.
Bible cm alive when you physically step in to holy land,,I just watching on UA-cam but can feel it 😇😇😇😍🤩
We agree with you guys and thank you for making this series of videos! Too bad Bob C. had to make such a fuss so he could sell some books & dvd's, and give a reason to doubt the Jewish People have a right to the Temple Mount. And the uncovering of the street from the pool of Siloam up to the Temple Mount is further proof of where Herod's Temple was. Keep up the great work!
Interestingly, you guys use the number '200 million gallons' of water held in the cisterns. Going off Wikipedia (for how accurate that is lol) the Gihon pushes approx 600,000 cubic meters of water per year, which translates to 158,503,230 US gallons per year, so very comparable in the City of David. The logistics again come into it- and then the question again of stagnant water vs 'living water.' Also, if located over the Gihon, no transport was needed- the water was already there, and it is living water. Again- i am asking seriously here, as I have no idea where the Temple was. But you can see i hope why Bob Cornuke puts so much emphasis on the Gihon.
YES! Plus, the Bible says the temple was located IN the City of David. Cornuke's points on water sold me on his argument. Archaeologists say there was an aqueduct water-delivery system to the Roman fortress. Even more, if the temple really is where Cornuke says it is, then that changes the location where the crucifixion occurred. It's very fascinating indeed
Josephus' never ending spring of water could be the Gihon.
Ezekiel 47 tells us the future of the Gihon spring. The Gospels state that Jesus said not one stone will be left on top of another. A huge plaza could have also existed in the City of David, but all its stones could have been carted away, not leaving a trace...
just a question. Were those cisterns used to keep water during attacks or just temple use?
Mikveh water must come from spring eventually going to ocean or from rain water from sky .
I built one orthodox mikveh in NY.
Samaratins claim Temple was on Mt Gerizim.. bizarre.
You're right. I believe the First Temple was in The City of David and the The Second is in The Traditional Temple Mount site. Mountains collapse and that's possibly why the land platform is not big enough in The City of David.
@@user-ln5il4un3x The Temple could never be in the City of David. There's not enough room.
The royal cubit is just over 20 inches.
To have the Temple on the land of the City of David, the cubit would have to be 6 inches.
Please see any of Joseph Good's videos, who was featured in this one, about the Temple.
IT MATTERS.
To think that the Jews would somehow forget or move the site is ludicrous, absolutely ludicrous.
@@sigalsmadar4547 Remember they came back from captivity and The Temple had been destroyed by The Babylonians.
@@user-ln5il4un3x except there is archeology under Kotel Second temple stones down deep if you tour Western wall area .
@@MitzvosGolem1 Because Herod's Temple is a renovation of Zerubabel's Temple. The location of Solomon's Temple is still unknown.
30 + Cisterns, 200 million gallons of water, to serve... a Roman Legion and its support team. Also, when the priesthood prepares the offerings, I do not think they would want to use other peoples ritual bath water.
Read 2nd Chronicles 32:30, Song of Solomon 4:12, Ezekiel 47:5 They are talking about the Well of Souls… Why do you people think the Temple had a Fountain Gate?
I think the whole reason Cornuke wants you to believe the temple was somewhere else is because, he wants the third temple to be built so Jesus will return. If he can convince enough people and so on, it would be built. Only in the wrong place.
Maybe so. Either that or book sales
What would they do to make sure the water wasn't stagnant and stuff grew in it??
the temple was built over the gihon spring
If the Temple was in use on a daily basis just the activity alone of constantly drawing water out of the cisterns could have kept it from stagnating.
The next Temple must be in Jerusalem. The original site has been lost to history/politics. Biblical prophecy just says the next Temple will be in JERUSALEM. That is all that matters. So Israel build the Temple.
Where did the water come from that filled the cisterns in the first temple period since the aqueducts did not exist?
Rain water draining off of the 35 acre platform
Solomon's pools as a reservoir, and the slightly sloped aqueduct?
Question, why do you say michvahs instead of michvot?
I was leaning towards Karnukes version till I watched this..What about the the temple being in Zion, the city of David? The cisterns and the N/W wall pretty good evidence and the word for 600 men instead of legion....What did you think of Karnuke finding Paul's shipwreck on Malta and the 4 anchors.. He did well on that.
Cornuke makes a really big deal about the Bible saying the Temple was on Mount Zion, and he is correct. His assumption about the City of David being Mount Zion is completely wrong though. The Bible and Jewish tradition has always called all of Jerusalem, the City of David, and the Temple Mount "Zion" interchangeably.
not sure if you covered this...but since these cisterns hold millions of gallons of water, where did that water come from?
Rain water that would collect from the 35 acre platform draining into the cisterns.
@@TheIsraelGuys I since asked the question of a temple expert (John Schmidt) and he said there is some archeological evidence that there were some viaducts built to bring water to the mount too, similar to the Romans viaduct work in other parts of the world.
I Love ISRAEL 🕎 my GOD IS the GOD of ISRAEL 🕎 the HOLY ONE OF ISRAEL, THE MESSIAH👑🕯️✝️
6:00 The point you are trying to make here falls flat when you consider that these mikvahs are just as suitable to a temple location closer to the city of David. They would just be north of the temple rather than south of it.
Beautiful stuff, guys!
Thanks so much!
@@TheIsraelGuys May the God of Israel bless you and yours for eternity! Incredible work!
The 24 chapter of Matthew, the Lord Jesus Christ states that concerning the temple there would be left not one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down, so how is there a western wall of the temple from that time period still standing? Now are they saying Christ told a lie, if he did, which is a lie, he is the Truth, it is an open attack on his deity as the Lord from Heaven, the true temple has to be somewhere els.
Did you watch episode 3 of this series? ua-cam.com/video/RZ9gzIV8qHQ/v-deo.html
Jesus also made the same prophecy about all of Jerusalem. Either the prophecy was false, or Jesus was using a figure of speech (we go with the figure of speech option)
Interesting ideas. Remember Moses got water from a rock on the mountain in the desert
1:10, "Never had a drop up there" HUM! Perhaps this is the termed Mount Ararat where the arc is supposedly sitting, landed! But what if in reality that entire section there is where the ark sits, spiritually speaking of course! Thank you for your information appreciate you both and crew
Pls as a Nigerian muslim can i be allowed tọ travel tọ Masjid Al aqsa
Love it
How do you explain the stables? It makes no sense to me for there to be a stables as part of the temple area, but part of a Roman Fortress. There is no room for horses in the tower that they claim is Antonio.
The stable is from crusader times, it actually has nothing to do with Solomon
Right where the pilgrimage road begins they found a pool down there that would be big enough for all kinds of people debate ritualistically and I know that because I saw the video from the watchmen Eric Steckel back
Absolutely. This is something we didn't get time to talk about in the series, but there is an amazing pilgrimage road discovered by Eli Shukron that leads from the Siloam pool up to the Temple Mount, not the City of David
These small mikvahs could have been used throughout the year
But on the 3 major holidays, they would have immersed for ritial cleansing in the Pool of Siloam, then followed the pilgrimage road (ascending) to the Temple Mount. The Pool pf Siloam is at the bottom of the City of David, it was fed by the Gihon spring.
Have you guys heard about the ' hewers of wood and fetchers of water '
Also where did the Temple get all the wood to consume all these sacrifices. Jerusalem being a barren hilltop (a treeless hill ).
Not sure if this is where they got the wood for the Temple service, but if you read Josephus, Jerusalem used to be surrounded by forests. The Romans cut the trees down for the siege of Jerusalem in 70AD
They needed water for the tabernacle in the desert too, so I think water can be carried some distance.
They had water with them everywhere in the desert read the text
@@yosefgreen3130 In one case Moses hit the rock, and they had water. It didn't follow them all the time. If that reads in Bible, then fine.
@@petrikoivukangas Numbers 20 is written like that for a reason
Ron Wyatt found the rock that was split and it was huge, he saw a creekbed that flowed from it to form a lake. He even showed in his video the rock, dry creekbed and the dry lakebed, so they had plenty of water for about an estimated 2 million people from the Exodus.
@@robertsanders5355 Anyway water can be carried few hundred meters to the tabernacle. There shouldn't be problem to have a temple in the traditional location.
I am NOT wanting to disagree or cast doubt, but how did they pump the water up from the cisterns, and where is the "sewage" drains for all the blood and water from the sacrifices? - just asking. Love the videos!
They had efficient wheel pumps.
The sewer drained the blood into the kidron valley. The soil mixed with blood was excellent potters clay, we see the “potters field” mentioned in the NT.
@@tradarcher7311 Thank you! I'm not doubting or disagreeing with you, BUT, are there any archeological findings of these? If so, where? I would love to check it out!
How did they get the water up out of the cisterns to the mikvah?
The Mikvas outside the Temple had their own cisterns for collecting water (first Temple) and many of the other Mikvas (second Temple) were filled from the aqueduct system built by the Maccabees. The Temple used a machine to draw water from the cisterns
As an historian, interesting videos you guys have made on the true site of the Temple of Jerusalem. Unfortunately, you ignored some of the most critical historical information which was given by Josephus and other historical figures.
There are a couple of very critical passages in Josephus regarding the Temple which you completely ignore as well as some of the visual evidence on the so called "Temple Mount." Historical Methodology requires that the historian consider "all the pertinent information" before coming to a conclusion. As SpotterVideo points out, you also ignore the reference in Tacitus which definitely implies a location other than the so called Temple Mount. Carbon 14 dating on rock is not as reliable as people have been led to believe over the past decades. A good example of this is the Shroud of Turin. Carbon dating shows it to be from the Medieval period. However, further examination discovered pollen from a plant that only grew in the Levant and specifically in Israel during and prior to the ministry of Christ. By the time of the Medieval period, that particular plant was no longer found in the Levant. Eli Shukron's claims about the Carbon 14 dating is questionable because he can't say with certainty what historically happened in the rock structure he claims is a cistern. A number of environmental issues can impact the veracity of the carbon footprint of a site or object. The statements made by those supporting the traditional view regarding acquaducts are also suspect given come of the scholarship in the last twenty years on the acquaducts in Jerusalem.
You guys still have some homework and research to do on this subject. To make a claim as to the validity of any academic theory, you need to include all of the evidence; Cherry picking historical evidence is not doing good history or archaeology. It is the fasted way to have someone question your methodology. Hope you take this seriously.
Thank you for the hard investigations on this very touchy topic. It's not easy to go into this one at all from what I understand. Tradition is one of the best and worst parts about all of it. I'm not for or against either one. But we will find out when the prophecies come to pass in the next years to come (Or less etc). Also please try to remember everything that is proposed to be for a large amount of peoples needs such as room in general and water bathing needs is equally valid for both the Roman fort idea and the Temple idea. Romans were coming and going actually living in the fort so needs are almost all the same. It seems to be overlooked that Roman soldiers have and use many HORSES, HORSES, HORSES! Plus a few dogs and animals for food for sure! Housing Soldiers is a huge resource problem even if they are not numbering over a thousand. Plus servants and ANiMALS! 9:19 It does somewhat bother me when I hear statements like this one saying "There is more than enough water for the temples requirements" (Paraphrased) and it's never added that the fact is it should be said "Or for a large number of Roman soldiers". Or something similar. Be cause if they are looking without bias as much as they can they should be including these view points just as much. Both Bob Cornuke (Mr Corncob LOL) and these very smart men need to be searching for the TRUTH not the one they want to be true. Thank you for addressing some of the issues no one else seems to include in their rebuttals that I've seen up until now. I'm not yet convinced of either one and I'm thinking it very well may be that a mixture of both might be the facts. All love and blessings to you in Christ Jesus!
The Isrealites worshipped God on their 'High PLaces', suggesting the altar would be on top of the highest spot - ie Dome of the Rock in the Antonian Fortress. But maybe their Temple was built below so that it could be built on a large flat place. However, SOMEONE built the Antonia fortress foundations with their massive stone blocks that the Romans were not capable of lifting and moving. Maybe the Romans invaded first the fortress/garrison, and later destroyed a separate Temple nearby. I would point out however, that a 'completely different location' for the Temple would have not be REALLY different place, not just nextdoor in Jerusalem!
Purely water
When were the cisterns constructed?
There are, however, other signs that the southern part of the Temple Mount was used at that time. A large monastery, the so-called Monastery of the Virgin, was excavated near the Triple Gate. In its courtyard, a three-seater toilet was found that was flushed with the water of one of the Temple Mount cisterns, namely Cistern 10.
Very Good!... #250 ✝ {9-30-2022}
This is all theory too. I'm just saying... If we are looking for facts, this fact is a certainty, the third temple will be build somewhere in Jerusalem. Where that will be remains to determined. It is interesting all the theories about where it was.
I think I'm misunderstanding. You've got water below the TM itself but not on top. How would they bring water up there?
They used a machine to draw it up. There are detailed descriptions of it in Jewish history sources
@@TheIsraelGuys Haha, that is semi ridiculous, what was the power source for this 'machine'? Horses? Slaves? I demand to see your sources and call B. to the S.
Finally, on the inside of the southeast corner of the Temple Mount that has been preserved to a great height, is the chapel of the so-called Cradle of Jesus (Arabic: Sidna Issa). There is a small shrine inside this room. The photo below shows the small Muslim dome that was built over a Byzantine altar that has four marble pillars and a reliquary underneath. This may have been the shrine where the nuns of the Monastery of the Virgin came to commemorate the birth of Jesus.
That is not the Temple Mount it is the remains of the Roman Fort Antonia. Which was it's own municipality unlinked from Jerusalem. The Jews had baths outside of Antonia because they considered it unclean & bathed themselves on the way out.
We talk about that in episode 1, there really isn't any reason to think that the Temple Mount is the Antonia Fortress
In 2016 we found this out. 2Samuel 24, the Temples were in the City Of King David.
2nd Chronicles 3:1-2
The only water that can be used for Jewish ceremonial bathing must come from the sky and collected, just as with the Mikvahs.
Why are all these cisterns and mikvahs bone dry?
Did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem? If so. Why wouldn't the first place of worship and sacrifice be in The City of David? Concentrate on First Temple....wouldn't that be the site of the next temple?
The scripture says David brought the ark up to Jerusalem. Then when Solomon built the Temple, it specifically says he brought the ark up from the City of David and placed it in the Temple on Mount Moriah
2nd Chronicles 3:1-2
The answer to the question, why if Jesus claimed that not one stone would be left upon another and there are stones left, means you are wrong and are not understanding something right.
A little advice. NEVER assume the Bible is wrong. That Book has this uncanny way of turning out right every time. Archeology has questioned that Book on many occasions in the past. And the Bible has proven right every time because somebody was overlooking something.
I don't know what the answer is right now about the exact location of the Temple. But read the Bible. Find it's location from there. Once everything is figured out, guaranteed it will be exactly where the Bible said it was and as described.
What about Hashem says that my temple shall only be built in Tsion - isn’t that the city of David!
Why can't tourists see the water sources? The Ghion springs
I watched "Jesus of Nazareth" and when they are making their way to the temple, they went DOWN the mount to the temple, which in my book it shows how they got it right. They looked down onto the Temple.
Yes if you were to be able to pass through the present day blocked Eastern Gate it leads you down to the location of the Jewish second temple was in the City of David. Next to the spring, and Solomon pool.
I missed #1 . Where can I find it?
You can watch the first episode right here on our channel! ua-cam.com/video/5S5GoufYQO4/v-deo.html&ab_channel=TheIsraelGuys
The Zam Zam well in Saudia Mecca is a copy of the well beneath the temple Altar in Jerusalem... More Jay Smith Pfander Films on You Tube
The tunnels through Warrens Gate were indicated to have been filled with water…..which means there is water under the Temple Mount. The question is, how much?
I've heard that they built an aqueduct water-delivery system to pipe the water in.