Home Church Community

Statement of Beliefs

Contact Us

Search Our Site

Bible Study Resource



Printer Friendly Version

Basic Worldview:
314 End Times Prophecy (Eschatology)


Premillennial Temple Study

Premillennial Temple Study Part 1
Premillennial Temple Study Part 2
Premillennial Temple Study Part 3
Premillennial Temple Study Part 4
Premillennial Temple Study Part 5
Premillennial Temple Study Part 6
Premillennial Temple Study Part 7
Premillennial Temple Study Part 8
Premillennial Temple Study Part 9
Premillennial Temple Study Part 10
Premillennial Temple Study Part 11
Premillennial Temple Study Part 12
Premillennial Temple Study Part 13
Premillennial Temple Study Part 14
Premillennial Temple Study Part 15


 

The Ditch On the North Side of Antonia

 

In his writings, Josephus mentions a ditch or man-made valley that was originally on the north side of the Fortress of Antonia. Note that Josephus states that this ditch was on the north side of the Roman Fortress of Antonia built by Herod the Great.

 

It was Agrippa who encompassed the parts added to the old city with this wall, which had been all naked before; for as the city grew more populous, it gradually crept beyond its old limits, and those parts of it that stood northward of the temple, and joined that hill to the city, made it considerably larger, and occasioned that hill, which is in number the fourth, and is called "Bezetha," to be inhabited also. It lies over against the tower Antonia, but is divided from it by a deep valley, which was dug on purpose, and that in order to hinder the foundations of the tower of Antonia from joining to this hill, and thereby affording an opportunity for getting to it with ease, and hindering the security that arose from its superior elevation; for which reason also that depth of the ditch made the elevation of the towers more remarkable. This new-built part of the city was called "Bezetha," in our language, which, if interpreted in the Grecian language, may be called "the New City." – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 4, Paragraph 3

Sir Charles Warren reported the existence of a ditch in the area that today is north of the Dome of the Rock. Dan Bahat references the location of Warren’s ditch. It is north of the Dome of the Rock and south of the traditional site of Antonia at the Umariya School.

 

(53:18) In the nineteenth century, Sir Charles Warren, the famous British archeologist, who worked in Jerusalem, discovered that this little [settle] was severed by a moat…(108:04) Here is the small moat discovered by Charles Warren…. And so there is a good order. The ancient Temple Mount, the moat, which protects it, and the fortress, the Baris, which is here, which was later completely raised to the ground by Herod the Great when he built the Antonia,…(117:39) You can see here the Holy of Holies with the Dome of the Rock, north the moat discovered by Charles Warren….in order to protect the Antonia which was here traverses the entire hill as originally was back when the Beera [Baris] was still existing there. Here you can see again, the same picture but upside down, again in the normal way, here you can see the corner. You can see the Temple Mount with the Holy of Holies, the moat dividing between the Temple Mount and that. (122:19)…First of all, this is the upper Temple Mount, where the Temple, the Dome of the Rock is here. Here you can see some rock sticking out, but from this line all the way to this line, this is the ancient moat discovered by Charles Warren….(126:09) The trees which are growing there, which you cannot see in the slide because it is from the top, the trees are actually growing in an enormous flower pot which is actually, this moat filled in with soil. There is no bedrock underneath here. – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, (the approximate times of Bahat’s comments are noted in parenthesis behind within the text,) http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Like Bahat, Tuvia Sagiv also points out the same location of Warren’s ditch between the Dome of the Rock and the Umariyah School where Antonia is conventionally placed. However, as Sagiv explains, there is no ditch north of the traditional site of Antonia at the Umariyah School. As Sagiv explains, if Warren’s ditch is the ditch mentioned by Josephus then the Antonia must be south of this ditch. This means that the traditional placement of Antonia at the Umariyah School north of Warren’s ditch is wrong. Instead, the Antonia would need to be south of this ditch which would place it at the rock beneath the Dome of the Rock. This would mean that the Moriah Platform was the place of Antonia and that the Temple would then have to be south of the platform and not at the Dome of the Rock location where Bahat places it.

 

But I have another problem. In between those two elements there is a ditch, which is covered nowadays. Let us go back to the sources, Josephus Flavius is talking about a ditch. But according to his expression, he says that the ditch was in the north of the Antonia. From the Antonia to the Temple itself you go down by steps. There was no ditch between both of them. So, if this is the ditch Josephus Flavius is talking about, it means that the Antonia should be on the south. Or maybe, there is another ditch here. But there is no ditch there. So, it doesn’t work….So, it’s very strange to find that between the Antonia and the Temple Mount and the Temple itself, a ditch, when he said the ditch was in the north. And it makes sense, the ditch should protect the Antonia and the enemy should come from the north….And the ditch is here in the south. What comes out? That the Dome of the Rock, the rock of the Dome of the Rock, this is the rock of the Antonia. It means all the problems we have are solved immediately. The ditch is in the right place. And the rock is the rock of the Antonia. And the Temple is in the south. – Tuvia Sugiv, 1995, The Coming Temple, Presentation 2, Koinonia House, 46 minutes and 47 seconds, http://store.khouse.org/...

 

Now, I would like to tell you about the famous ditch, the moat Dan Bahat has spoken about which has a lot of connection to Kaufman’s theory. Here you see the Dome of the Rock, the rock on which the Dome of the Rock stands. Here is the Antonia according to the archeologists. And in between these two elements there is a moat, a ditch discovered by Sir Charles Warren. And the question is, how come that there is a ditch in the area itself? Because according to the description of Josephus Flavius from Antonia you entered directly inside the Temple Mount. There is a description of a ditch in Josephus Flavius, but he said that the ditch was in the north of the Antonia. So, let us say if this is the ditch that Josephus Flavius is talking about, Antonia should be in the south. It doesn’t work. And the main question to Professor Kaufman, if you say that the Temple was here, it means that the Temple was in the ditch. It doesn’t make sense. – Tuvia Sagiv, The Southern Location of the Temples, 17 minutes and 19 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Both Dan Bahat and Tuvia Sagiv use Warren’s claim to refute Asher Kaufman’s view which would place the Temple directly on top of or within that ditch.

 

Now, I would like to tell you about the famous ditch, the moat Dan Bahat has spoken about which has a lot of connection to Kaufman’s theory….And the main question to Professor Kaufman, if you say that the Temple was here, it means that the Temple was in the ditch. It doesn’t make sense. – Tuvia Sagiv, The Southern Location of the Temples, 17 minutes and 19 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

If we take the theory of Dr. Asher Kaufman and we put the Holy of Holies where it was it will create a mess of the Temple Mount because the northern half of the Temple will fall down into a very deep valley – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 48 minutes and 27 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Now, if we take again, Asher Kaufman’s suggestion, it will be somewhere here. This is where the Holy of Holies will be. And you understand that the result is, that the entire Temple and the Temple Mount already in such an old date, will be inside the valley instead of being on the top. – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 1 hour, ten minutes, and 19 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Kaufman responds by pointing out that Warren did not dig in the area of the ditch. Instead, according to Kaufman, Warren merely supposed that there was a ditch there because he saw no rock outcroppings in the area.

 

Question: Dan Bahat spoke well of your theory, except he said your Temple would fall off into his mote, which is a flower pot. Would you answer that please?

Kaufman: I thought I’d prove to Dan Bahat that he’s wrong. Just about here there is a claim that there is a moat, that there was a moat there. Warren refers to it in his book of 1884. But he says, he thinks that, and if you read that very carefully, up here, and I haven’t got the statement with me, but apparently there was a moat there. But he couldn’t dig. He surely plans a moat about, in man’s dimensions, about 150 feet wide and I think 20 feet deep. But he couldn’t dig. He wasn’t allowed to dig. So, how did he know? He didn’t know. He just guessed. And I think he guessed because, according to what he thought, between about here and about there, there is no evidence of rock on the surface. Actually, there’s a little bit more, which I’ve discovered. So, Dan Bahat’s idea is built upon false foundations. – Dr. Asher S. Kaufman, The Northern Location of the Temples, 47 minutes and 20 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Kaufman’s explanation of Warren’s assumption parallels Bahat’s support for the ditch. Bahat himself identifies the ditch because there is no bedrock visible at the surface. (Remember that the location of the ditch has not been excavated to see where the bedrock begins below the surface of the Moriah Platform.)

 

Here you can see some rock sticking out, but from this line all the way to this line, this is the ancient moat discovered by Charles Warren….(126:09) The trees which are growing there, which you cannot see in the slide because it is from the top, the trees are actually growing in an enormous flower pot which is actually, this moat filled in with soil. There is no bedrock underneath here. – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, (the approximate times of Bahat’s comments are noted in parenthesis behind within the text,) http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

So, Josephus certainly speaks of the existence of such a ditch that was created for fortification purposes on the north side of Antonia. However, the identification of this ditch today just north of the Dome of the Rock may be disputable. In any case, it is unlikely be resolved without further excavation on the Moriah Platform. However, if Warren’s claim that there is a ditch north of the Dome of the Rock is a valid one and we can identify this with the ditch that Josephus’ says was on the north side of Antonia, then Antonia Fortress was located south of this ditch. This would mean that the Antonia was located on the site of the Dome of the Rock as other historical data indicate. Consequently, Antonia would occupy the southern portion of the Moriah Platform. This would require that the Temple itself was south of the platform.

 

 

 

Aelia Capitolina and Hadrian’s Temple to Jupiter

 

We know from the historical record that Hadrian built a new city on the site of Jerusalem which he called Aelia Capitolina.

 

Aelia CapitolinaAelia Capitolina (Latin in full: Colonia Aelia Capitolina) was a city built by the emperor Hadrian, and occupied by a Roman colony, on the site of Jerusalem, which was still in ruins from the Great Jewish Revolt in 70 A.D. – wikipedia.org

 

Hadrian’s first intention wasn’t to build a Roman city or desecrate the site of the Jewish Temple. Rather, he wanted to rebuild the city of Jerusalem as a gift to the Jews.

 

Aelia Capitolina When Emperor Hadrian vowed to rebuild Jerusalem from the wreckage in 130 A.D., he considered reconstructing Jerusalem as a gift for the Jewish people. The Jews awaited with hope, because Hadrian was considered a moderate. – wikipedia.org

 

However, though Hadrian felt his endeavor was a favor to the Jews, he was not well received by them. The source of this lack of gratitude was two statues that Hadrian had placed in the city and a temple that he had built to the Roman god Jupiter. It is important to note that the placement of these two statues was what began the enmity between Hadrian and the Jews who would revolt. Hadrian did not place the statue as an act of triumph or spite after he had put down the revolt.

 

Temple Mount – Hadrian had intended the construction of the new city as a gift to the Jews, but since he had constructed a giant statue of himself in front of the Temple of Jupiter and the Temple of Jupiter had a huge statue of Jupiter inside of it,…It was also the normal practice of the adherents of the Hellenic religion to sacrifice pigs before their deities. In addition to this, Hadrian issued a decree prohibiting the practice of circumcision. These three factors, the graven images, the sacrifice of pigs before the altar, and the prohibition of circumcision, constituted for non-Hellenized radical Zealot Jews a new abomination of desolation, and thus Bar Kochba launched the Third Jewish Revolt. wikipedia.org

 

After the Jews revolted, Hadrian decided to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina. However, he decided not to restore the Temple. This fact is attested to by Epiphanius of Salamis, in the fourth century AD.

 

Epiphanius of SalamisEpiphanius wrote a work of biblical antiquarianism, called, for one of its sections, On Measures and Weights. It was composed in Constantinople for a Persian priest, in 392.[5] - wikipedia.org

 

It was the second year of his reign when he [Hadrian] went up to Jerusalem, the famous and much-praised city which had been destroyed by Titus the son of Vespasian. He found it utterly destroyed and God’s Holy Temple a ruin, there being nothing where the city had stood but a few dwellings and one small church…[Then] Hadrian decided to restore the city, but not the Temple. – Epiphanius, On Weights and Measures, Dindorf ed., vol IV, pp.17-18.

 

After the revolt, the new city was constructed to the exclusion of Jews who were banned from it. And Hadrian named the city after himself (Aelia) and in dedication to the Roman god Jupiter Capitolina. 

 

Hadrian – Publius Aelius Hadrianus…was emperor of Rome from AD 117 to 138, – wikipedia.org

 

Aelia Capitolina – Aelia came from Hadrian's nomen gentile, Aelius, while Capitolina meant that the new city was dedicated to Jupiter Capitolinus, to whom a temple was built – wikipedia.org

 

After the destruction which occurred under Vespasian and Titus, these Jews rebelled during the reign of Hadrian and tried to go back to the old commonwealth and way of life….when these Jews made their attack against the Emperor, they forced him again to destroy Jerusalem completely. For Hadrian came and utterly subdued them; he obliterated every remnant of their city. To prevent the Jews from making such an impudent attempt in the future, he set up a statue of himself. But he realized that, with the passage of time, his statue would one day fall. – John Chrysostom, Homily V, Section XI,  

http://www.fordham.edu/...

 

Hadrian left his statues in his new Roman city in defiance of the Jews.

 

Through the research of scholars like Tuvia Sagiv, the Moriah Platform is generally held to be the location of Hadrian’s temple to Jupiter. (The first quote below is from the Jerusalem Post.)

 

according to research compiled by Dr. Moshe Sharon…. "Jupiter's Temple in Baalbek had exactly the three features which we find in the Al-Aksa complex: the polygon building in the front where the worshipers assembled, the open space where the god's statue stood and the rectangular main temple. The same symmetrical line which goes through the three components of Jupiter's Temple also goes through the Al-Aksa complex, and both plans fit each other perfectly," writes Sharon. Sharon and Sagiv's theory is potentially incendiary because it suggests the Al-Aksa complex was built on pre-existing foundations and was not designed according to Muhammad's famous Night Journey to Jerusalem. – Alex Sorin, The Shape of the Holy, Jerusalem Post, jpost.com,

 

The Roman Temple at Baalbek, Lebanon When a map of the Baalbek Temple is overlaid on the present structures of the Temple Mount a striking similarity can be seen. – by Lambert Dolphin and Michael Kollen, On The Location of the
First and Second Temples in Jerusalem
, http://templemount.org/theories.html

 

…this is from Baalbek. And this is the wall court of Jupiter Temple which was built in the second century. The height of these stones is approximately, it’s bigger than the stones we have in here, in Jerusalem. But it’s the same style with the curb all around, with the border all around. When I came to Baalbek, I was not there, but I tried to find the books and literature about it. Here you have the plan of a Jupiter temple in Baalbek. You see. Here is the temple itself. Here is the court. And here is the polygon which is an entrance area. When I saw this I said, “Well, wait a moment, I know this.” And now, let’s go to our area and see. You see. Here is the Dome of the Rock, here is the Al-Aqsa Mosque and in between them there is a line, a symmetric line. You see. All the area, you know it’s very strange. All the area is not rectangular exactly. There is no one line which is parallel to another. It’s a lot of elements with no relationship between them. But between these two elements there is a line which combines them together. So, I’ve taken the temple of Baalbek, Jupiter temple in Baalbek. I brought it to the same scale. It’s not only a map on a map. It’s the same scale. You see. It means that what we see in Baalbek, the entrance fits the Dome of the Rock that we see here and the Jupiter temple fits the Al-Aqsa Mosque. It means that what the Arabs built on the elements was the remains of a Roman building, a Roman temple. The court is like Baalbek. And the elements inside is also the same that as Baalbek. Do we have any evidence that in the second century a temple to Jupiter was built in Jerusalem? Yes. It’s very simple. Hadrian, who have a very, very strong fight with Bar Kochba, destroyed Jerusalem, built here a Temple to Jupiter and avoid the Jews to enter Jerusalem, changed the name of the city to Aelia Capitolina. And so, what we have nowadays is the project which was built by this fellow, Hadrian. And it means that the Wailing Wall, what we see, the Wailing Wall, where Jews are praying here, has nothing to do with the Jewish Temple. It’s Jupiter’s wall. And all this project all around is something which was made by the Romans. Now you have to ask me, but why? What’s the reason that Hadrian had built such a huge building in this area at the edge of the empire. Now, we have to understand something about this fellow. Hadrian was an emperor who decided to bring peace to Rome. He gave back area which had been conquered by Julianus. And he decided that he would stop wars. And he decided that the edge of the empire would be, on the east, Israel, Syria, Lebanon and on the west, Britain. And we know on this side the famous Hadrian wall in England, Britain. And in our area he built the temples in order to show that this is the end of the empire. Because he was a very religious person. And he understood that it’s not enough to say this is the border of my empire. The culture, the religious of the Romans, must be the border. And therefore he has a lot of soldiers without any aim nowadays because there were no walls, no more walls. So the only way was to make and build a lot of buildings all over the Roman Empire. Half of Eton in Greece was made by Hadrian. Rome, Rome itself, part of it was made, built by Hadrian. And here in Israel, and in Baalbek, and Damascus, he built these huge temple courts for Jupiter and changed the name of the city to Aelia, which is his private name and Capitolina is the names of the gods he believes. And maybe by this we can solve one of the most important problems we have in Jerusalem. After the Six Days Wars, the archeologists came to Jerusalem and tried to find where is Aelia Capitolina. And they didn’t find it till now. The Cardo, I hope you have seen it is from a later time, the Byzantine period. So, where is Aelia Capitolina? There is no evidence. Only some coins. But the answer is very simple. This is Aelia Capitolina. This is the terminus of the holy place of Aelia Capitolina. And all the problem is solved immediately. And the Jewish Temple is just inside, covered. Because it maybe that Hadrian decided to destroy the Jewish Temple. He knows all the troubles the Romans have from the Jews was from this Temple. And therefore, he covered all the area of the Jewish Temple, which is inside here and build this wonderful court which is in the style of the second century and it’s walls is like Baalbek. And this is Aelia Capitolina. Till now everything I’ve spoke with you, is logical. You can check me. Everything is very simple. The whole difference is the moment you look at it in three dimension system everything jumps out. It’s very simple. – Tuvia Sagiv, The Southern Location of the Temples, 43 minutes and 37 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

There are some historical and archeological grounds for identifying the Moriah Platform with the site of Hadrian’s temple to Jupiter.

 

The most relevant issue is a subsequent claim that Hadrian’s temple to Jupiter was built directly on top of the former site of the Jewish Temple. If this is the case, then it would constitute some evidence that the Jewish Temple was located on the Moriah Platform. However, we must be clear. Simply proving that Hadrian built a temple or camp on the Moriah Platform does not prove that this was the site of the former Temple. What is necessary is to demonstrate that Hadrian built his temple to Jupiter on the site of the Temple itself.

 

Cassius Dio, the Roman historian of the second century AD recorded the history of Hadrian and Jerusalem.

 

Cassius Dio – Lucius Cassius Dio Cocceianus[1][2] (c. AD 155 or 163/164[3] to after 229), known in English as Cassius Dio, Dio Cassius, or Dio (Dione. lib) was a noted Roman historian> and public servant. Dio published a history of Rome in 80 volumes, beginning with the legendary arrival of Aeneas in Italy through the subsequent founding of Rome and then to 229; a period of about 1,400 years. Of the 80 books, written over 22 years, many survive into the modern age intact or as fragments, providing modern scholars with a detailed perspective on Roman history. – wikipedia.org

 

In his chronicle, Cassius Dio makes two relevant statements concerning Hadrian’s constructions at Jerusalem. He first records that Hadrian founded a city in the place of Jerusalem. Similarly, he then states that Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter on the site of the Temple.

 

Chapter 12. 1 At Jerusalem [Hadrian] founded a city in place of the one which had been razed to the ground, naming it Aelia Capitolina, and on the site of the temple of the god he raised a new temple to Jupiter. – HADRIAN'S DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM IN 135 C.E., ROMAN HISTORY, BOOK LXIX, written by CASSIUS DIO COCCEIANUS in c. 222 C.E., Dio's Roman History, Loeb series, Macmillan, 1914-27. Transl. Earnest Cary.

http://homepages.luc.edu/...

 

Cassius Dio’s record indicates a parallel between the construction of Aelia Capitolina and the construction of the temple to Jupiter. Both were built on the site of former Jewish constructions. Aelia Capitolina was built on the site of Jerusalem. And the temple to Jupiter was built on the site of the Jewish Temple.

 

However, as we know, early Jerusalem (at the time of David) was on the southern portion of the Moriah ridge, south of the Moriah Platform. If the Moriah Platform was a part of Hadrian’s reconstruction as Sagiv and others have shown, then it must be the case that Aelia Capitolina did not occupy the exact site of the earliest Jerusalem. Instead, it was further north on the Moriah ridge than the site of ancient Jerusalem.

 

Other historical reports have confirmed that Hadrian’s new city of Aelia Capitolina was built slightly north of earlier, Davidic Jerusalem, which was on the southern portion of the Moriah ridge. One of these reports comes from Azariah dei Rossi, the sixteenth century Jewish commentator.

 

Azariah dei RossiAzariah ben Moses dei Rossi was an Italian-Jewish physician and scholar. He was born at Mantua in 1513 or 1514; and died in 1578. He was descended from an old Jewish family which, according to a tradition, was brought by Titus from Jerusalem. He is known chiefly for his book Me'or Eynaim (Hebrew, Light of the Eyes) in which he used critical methods to test the literal truth of the Aggadah, the non legalistic and narrative portions of the Talmud. His views were sharply criticised by Judah Loew ben Bezalel (the Maharal of Prague) in the latter's Be'er ha-Golah. Dei Rossi's great work, Me'or Enayim ("Light of the Eyes") (Mantua, 1573-75; Berlin, 1794; Vienna, 1829; Vilna, 1863-66), includes the two works already mentioned and a third entitled Imre Binah. The latter is divided into four parts; the first part contains a survey of the Jews at the time of the Second Temple, narrates the origin of the Septuagint, points out the contradictions between some of the beliefs of the Talmudists and the proved results of scientific research, records the origin of the Jewish colonies in Alexandria and Cyrene, chronicles the wars of Bar KokhbaRomans, etc. Dei Rossi quotes from the writings of Philo, whose orthodoxy he questions. He criticizes him for having allegorized Biblical narratives of facts, and points out that the Alexandrian philosopher never gives the traditional interpretation of the Biblical text. In the second part Dei Rossi criticizes a number of the assertions of the Talmudists (many of his criticisms being repeated by later commentators), and gives explanations of various aggadic passages which can not be taken literally (as, for instance, the aggadah which attributes the death of Titus to a gnat which entered his brain while he was returning to Rome). The third part is devoted to a study of Jewish chronology and translations from the writings of Philo, Josephus, and others, with commentaries. The fourth part deals with Jewish archeology, describing the shapes of the priestly garments and the glory of the Second Temple, and giving the history of Queen Helen and her two sons. – wikipedia.org

 

In his book, Light of The Eyes, Dei Rossi discussed the Jewish understanding that Hadrian’s renovations of Jerusalem were north of the original site of the city and not exactly on the same location.

 

De’ Rossi in his book "Light of the Eyes," 35 relates a belief that was widespread in the sixteenth century among scholarly Jews.…De’ Rossi wrote authoritatively to assure the Jews of his time that they were wrong to think that Hadrian had built Aelia several miles north from the original site of the Jerusalem of David and Herod. – Dei Rossi, Light of The Eyes, p. 250, quoted from Dr. Earnest L. Martin, http://www.askelm.com/..., Major "Keys" in Discovering the Lost Temples of Jerusalem

 

Note what De’ Rossi said…Other Jews were saying that "the present site of Mount Moriah [where the Temple was once built] was about five miles away from Jerusalem [north of the original Jerusalem of David and Herod]" (p.250). – Dei Rossi, Light of The Eyes, p. 250, quoted from Dr. Earnest L. Martin, http://www.askelm.com/..., Major "Keys" in Discovering the Lost Temples of Jerusalem

 

Likewise, Dei Rossi only corrected this Jewish understanding by explaining that the site of Hadrian’s new city was the result of incorporating the area that was north of the former city of Jerusalem.

 

De’ Rossi’s exact statement was: "The Gentile historians, whose evidence he cites for the life of Hadrian and restoration of Jerusalem, simply state that he destroyed it and then enlarged it … enlarged it to the north so that the cemeteries which had been an arrow’s shot outside the city came within the walls." – Dei Rossi, Light of The Eyes, quoted from Dr. Earnest L. Martin, http://www.askelm.com/..., Major "Keys" in Discovering the Lost Temples of Jerusalem

 

Most importantly, Dei Rossi stated that the site of the Jewish Temple was not in the area that Hadrian built his new city.

 

De’ Rossi stated: "OUR HOLY SITE [Moriah] HAS NOT BEEN TRANSFORMED INTO A HOUSE OF PRAYER FOR ANY OTHER PEOPLE" (p.250). – Dei Rossi, Light of The Eyes, p. 250, quoted from Dr. Earnest L. Martin, http://www.askelm.com/..., Major "Keys" in Discovering the Lost Temples of Jerusalem

 

Dei Rossi’s observations can be coupled with the biblical and historical fact that early Jerusalem was on the southern portion of the Moriah Platform. Taken together these sources inform us of the meaning of Cassius Dio’s comments. Hadrian did not build Aelia Capitolina directly on top of the exact site occupied by Jerusalem. Instead, Hadrian’s new city was slightly to the north. These historical facts provide at least two reasons that the Jewish Temple was not on the Moriah Platform.

 

First, the Moriah Platform seems to have been included in Hadrian’s new city, Aelia Capitolina. And yet Jewish commentators such as Dei Rossi, Kimchi, and Maimonides, along with Christian historians all report that no Gentile shrine was every built on the site of the Jewish Temple. The idea that the Temple site was in the courtyards of the Roman, Christian, and Muslim holy buildings would be a clear contradiction of the reports of these historians. We must be fair to the intentions of these historians and writers. When they indicated that the site of the Jewish Temple had not been built upon by other nations they were were not hanging the veracity of their reports on a technicality. They weren’t saying that the site of the Temple was within a platform renovated by Gentiles and entirely crowded by the structures of the pagans although the exact, specific spot of the Temple had been narrowly avoided. On the contrary, these writers meant that the site of the Temple had not been incorporated into the pagan shrines and holy places at all. So, while it seems quite valid to identify the Moriah Platform structures with the place of Hadrian’s temple to Jupiter, this only proves that the Moriah Platform is not the site of the Temple.

 

Second, Cassius Dio’s remarks that Hadrian built his temple on the site of the former Jewish Temple must be taken in accordance with other known historical facts. One of these facts is that Aelia Capitolina, which Cassius Dio says was built on the place of Jerusalem, was not actually built on the exact site of Jerusalem. It was instead, slightly to its north as Dei Rossi recounts. Because historical reports indicate that this was the case, we must understand Cassius Dio to merely be saying that Aelia Capitolina was a replacement for the demolished Jerusalem. The new Roman city was in the nearby vicinity of the former city of Jerusalem. However, it was not directly on top the former Jewish metropolis. Likewise, Cassius Dio’s comments on the Temple should be understood in the same way. In other words, Cassius Dio is simply reporting that Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter in his new city of Aelia Capitolina to replace the Jewish Temple of Jerusalem. Therefore, his remarks do not in any way indicate that Aelia Capitolina or the temple to Jupiter occupied the exact spot of the former city of Jerusalem or the Jewish Temple, respectively. His remarks only indicate that Aelia Capitolina and the temple to Jupiter stood as an adjacent replacement of Jerusalem’s place within the region. They were not built at an arbitrary location in Palestine. They were not built near the close-by cities of Bethlehem or Bethany or even Jericho. They were built at Jerusalem, slightly to the north of the original city.

 

 

 

Strato’s Tower Was Part of Antonia and North of the Temple

 

Tuvia Sugiv claims that infrared scans of the Moriah Platform reveal a pentagonal structure beneath the surface of the platform at the Dome of the Rock. This pentagon is part of Sagiv’s means of demonstrating a correlation between the Moriah Platform and the temple at Baalbek, Lebanon.

 

If a pentagonal structure does exist it may represent the remains of the earlier Byzantine church that occupied the site. This would fit well with the fact that the Muslims copied the architecture of the Byzantine structures in their design of the Dome of the Rock.

 

Dome of the Rock - The Dome - Exterior - The Dome is in the shape of a Byzantine martyrium, a structure intended for the housing and veneration of saintly relics, and is an excellent example of middle Byzantine art. - wikipedia.org

 

As we have seen Byzantine churches did, in fact, occupy the current site of the Dome of the Rock.

 

Temple Mount About 325 it is believed that Constantine's mother, St. Helena, built a small church on the Mount in the 4th century, calling it the Church of St. Cyrus and St. John, later on enlarged and called the Church of the Holy Wisdom. The church was later destroyed and on its ruins the Dome of the Rock was built.[9] Since it is known that Helena ordered the Temple of Venus to the west of the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, presumably she also ordered the Temple of Jupiter on the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of St. Cyrus and St. John. – wikipedia.org

 

Of course, the Byzantines copied Roman architectural designs as well. So, evidence of a pentagonal foundation would seem to confirm the earlier presence of both Hadrianic and Byzantine buildings just as historical sources report.

 

The most relevant point is that Sagiv identifies this pentagonal structure at the site of the Dome of the Rock as the structure Josephus’ calls Strato’s Tower.

 

What we saw by the infra-red. So, again, what is the pentagram? I’ve never heard about a pentagram in Jerusalem. But, there is a pentagram in Jerusalem. I tried to look at coins and ceramic remains. Trying to see if there is any stem of pentagrams, or a pentagrama, or something like that. And here we find on ceramic jars a paint of a pentagram and inside, a pentagram. And more than that, you know what’s written here? Jerusalem. And it was found only in the second in the third century before Christus. Only in this period do we find it. Is there any connection between the pentagram we find here and this stems? Maybe it means that all the jars should come to this fortress or whatsoever….So, I’m asking myself, so in the second and the third centuries before Christus in the Hellenistic period maybe there was a tower or a building which had the shape of a pentagram. So, I went back to the source trying to find if there is any temple, and tower which was only in this period, not afterward. And it’s interesting that Josephus Flavius said that Antigonus, the brother of Aristobulus, he was walking in the Jewish Temple and then he was asked to come to Aristobulus, who lived in the Antonia and he went through the Straton Tower and was killed there by the soldiers of Aristobulus. And then in this title, Josephus Flavius said that the same tower was also in Caesarea. Straton Tower was also in Caesarea. So, I say to myself that maybe what we see here is the Straton Tower. So, let us go to Caesarea, maybe we will find there a pentagram. Now, we are going to Caesarea. In Caesarea, here is the Christian period, here is the Herod[ian] period, and here you can see the Straton, the ancient city of Caesarea. And what we can see in Straton, they found the wall of Straton. Here are two towers on the entrance of the city and here, a pentagram. Here is the round tower and here is the pentagram….And now we try to find what’s the meaning of Straton? Straton comes from the name of Ashtoreth, the goddess Ashtoreth, which was well known over all the Asian east. From Ashtoreth came Ishtar and from Ishtar, Strat and from Strat, Straton, Straton’s Tower. So maybe this is a religious tower. And what is it? I tried to read about the Ashtoreth and what is written in the sources is that the star of Ashtoreth is Venus. And the sign of Ashtoreth is pentagram. So maybe we find the remains of the Ashtoreth tower in Caesarea. Do we have any evidence about Ashtoreth tower in Jerusalem? It’s in Hebrew, but I will try to translate it to English. And it’s written here that Joshiyahu [Josiah], one of the last kings of Judah, was very good for God and he destroyed, and read what’s written here, he destroyed the sage which were above Jerusalem in the south of the Moshrite Mountain which were built by Solomon the King to Ashtoreth of the Phoenicians. And we know that in Caesarea, Straton was built by the Phoenicians, too. So, there was an Ashtoreth in Jerusalem, too….And the Phoenicians built Straton in the fourth century. There is a relationship in this project. And Josephus Flavius said, what he says is that Antigonus left the Temple went to the Straton Tower to the Antonia where his brother slept there. So, this is the right position. And this is the Ashtoreth and maybe this is the reason why they didn’t build the Temple on this place. This is a paganic place they put it here. – Tuvia Sugiv, 1995, The Coming Temple, Presentation 2, Koinonia House, 1 hour, 12 minutes, and 49 seconds, http://store.khouse.org/store/...

 

Below is Josephus’ account which Sagiv is discussing. In his account of the murder of Antigonus by his brother Aristobulus, Josephus discusses the particular location within Antonia called Strato’s Tower. According to this account, Aristobulus lay sick in the Antonia when he gave the command for his brother to be killed. He then placed guards in a passage below the Antonia who were to lay in wait for his brother Antigonus. When Antigonus heard of Aristobulus’ illness he headed toward Antonia to see him using this subterranean passage. When he arrived at the section of the passage that was near Strato’s Tower, the guards attacked and killed him.

 

The most important fact provided in the history below is that Josephus reports that Strato’s Tower was within and beneath Antonia Fortress.

 

3. Now Aristobulus, by degrees, and unwillingly, gave credit to these accusations; and accordingly he took care not to discover his suspicion openly, though he provided to be secure against any accidents; so he placed the guards of his body in a certain dark subterranean passage; for he lay sick in a place called formerly the Citadel, though afterwards its name was changed to Antonia; and he gave orders that if Antigonus came unarmed, they should let him alone; but if he came to him in his armor, they should kill him. He also sent some to let him know beforehand that he should come unarmed. But, upon this occasion, the queen very cunningly contrived the matter with those that plotted his ruin, for she persuaded those that were sent to conceal the king's message; but to tell Antigonus how his brother had heard he had got a very the suit of armor made with fine martial ornaments, in Galilee; and because his present sickness hindered him from coming and seeing all that finery, he very much desired to see him now in his armor; because, said he, in a little time thou art going away from me.

4. As soon as Antigonus heard this, the good temper of his brother not allowing him to suspect any harm from him, he came along with his armor on, to show it to his brother; but when he was going along that dark passage which was called Strato's Tower, he was slain by the body guards, and became an eminent instance how calumny destroys all good-will and natural affection, and how none of our good affections are strong enough to resist envy perpetually.

5. And truly any one would be surprised at Judas upon this occasion. He was of the sect of the Essens, and had never failed or deceived men in his predictions before. Now this man saw Antigonus as he was passing along by the temple, and cried out to his acquaintance, (they were not a few who attended upon him as his scholars,) "O strange!" said he, "it is good for me to die now, since truth is dead before me, and somewhat that I have foretold hath proved false; for this Antigonus is this day alive, who ought to hare died this day; and the place where he ought to be slain, according to that fatal decree, was Strato's Tower, which is at the distance of six hundred furlongs from this place; and yet four hours of this day are over already; which point of time renders the prediction impossible to be fill filled." And when the old man had said this, he was dejected in his mind, and so continued. But in a little time news came that Antigonus was slain in a subterraneous place, which was itself also called Strato's Tower, by the same name with that Cesarea which lay by the sea-side; and this ambiguity it was which caused the prophet's disorder. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, Paragraphs 3-5

 

7. There was also an occult passage built for the king; it led from Antonia to the inner temple, at its eastern gate; over which he also erected for himself a tower, that he might have the opportunity of a subterraneous ascent to the temple, in order to guard against any sedition which might be made by the people against their kings. It is also reported, (25) that during the time that the temple was building, it did not rain in the daytime, but that the showers fell in the nights, so that the work was not hindered. And this our fathers have delivered to us; nor is it incredible, if any one have regard to the manifestations of God. And thus was performed the work of the rebuilding of the temple. – Josephus, Antiquities, Book 15, Chapter 10

 

If Sagiv has identified the location of Strato’s Tower at the site of the Dome of the Rock, this constitutes additional proof that the Moriah Platform is the site of Antonia. Since Strato’s Tower was within the confines of the Herodian fortress of Antonia, if Strato’s Tower was on the Moriah Platform, then the Moriah Platform must be the site of Antonia. If this is the case, then the site of the Temple must again be south of the Moriah Platform since the Temple was south of Antonia fortress.

 

What we can conclude at this point is that historical information on the location of Hadrian’s statues, the Jupiter Temple, and Aelia Capitolina is either inconclusive or it confirms that the Moriah Platform is the site of Antonia. This would in turn require that the Temple was located south of the Moriah Platform as other biblical and historical data has indicated.

 

 

 

A Cave Where the Temple Once Stood

 

It is sometimes claimed that the cave beneath the rock of the Dome of the Rock (known as the Well of Souls) can be used to identify the former location of the Temple.

 

Well of Souls – The Well of Souls is the name of a natural cave located immediately beneath the Sakhrah (the Foundation Stone) in the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. In addition to a small well shaped hole in the stone that looks into the cave, there is also an entrance on the southern side, via a set of steps passing through a gap between the stone and the surrounding bedrock.[1] The cave takes the form of a moderately sized room[2] (similar in floor space to the stone), the ceiling curving to the ground gently, and the floor having been flattened and carpeted. The southern end of the cave, through which the steps enter it, has man-made walls[3] to provide structural support to the cave roof above the steps. – wikipedia.org

 

Foundation Stone – The Foundation Stone (Hebrew: translit. Even haShetiya) or Rock (Arabic: translit. Sakhrah, Hebrew: translit.: Sela) is the name of the rock at the heart of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. It is also known as the Pierced Stone due to its having a small hole on the southeastern corner that enters a cavern beneath the rock, known as the Well of Souls. – wikipedia.org

 

Though he identifies the “pierced stone” with another location, Dr. Asher Kaufman reports on the connection others have made between the “pierced stone” mentioned by the Bordeaux Pilgrim and the former site of the Temple.

 

Here is the Dome of the Rock. We’re looking southeast approximately. And this little dome is within the Holy of Holies. It was enforced there, about four and a half meters high, I’m sure you’ve already seen it. Let us look at the floor of this little dome. It’s not completely rock. If you looked at it carefully the rock protrudes on two portions, a little portion here on the southern side. And there’s a much bigger portion on the northern side. But on the eastern side there is a small strip of masonry and there are even two flagstones and they are covering something on the rock as if there is a hole in the rock. One doesn’t know how deep the hole is. But it might be something connection with the Pilgrim from Bordeaux who referred to the foundation stone of the Temple being pierced. Anyway, you do know, that this is the claim, that this is the foundation stone of the Temple. – Dr. Asher S. Kaufman, The Northern Location of the Temples, 38 minutes and 45 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

While presenting his view that the Temple was located at the Dome of the Rock, Dan Bahat also mentions “the Cave” that functioned as a Jewish synagogue.

 

The interesting thing about it is that during the early medieval since it is so near to the Holy of Holies. And you remember, I told you, the Jews were very clean, and were praying always next to the Holy of Holies. The eastern end here, which you see in the slide, you see here, was the nearest possible point for a Jew to get nearest. Since they were not allowed to go onto the Temple Mount, this was the nearest point that they could go to. And this became their own volume of the cistern, became a synagogue and for 450 years it was the main synagogue of the Jews in Jerusalem. It was called “the Cave.” And we know, we’ve got many contemporary sources who tell us about it. Unfortunately, it lost its originally shape with a flat roof and everything which befell Jerusalem in the year 1033. An earthquake, which we’ve got many details of. Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 1 hour, seventeen minutes, and 39 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

 

Dan Bahat summarizes the logic behind these arguments. He indicates that early accounts report the existence of a “pierced stone” or cave near the site of the Temple. One of these accounts comes from the Bordeaux Pilgrim in 333 AD. This account mentions two statues of Hadrian near a cave or “pierced stone” that Jews visited and venerated every year.

 

Itinerarium Burdigalense – The Itinerarium Burdigalense (also known as the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum) is the oldest known Itinerarium, written by an anonymous pilgrim from Burdigala (present-day Bordeaux). It tells of the writer's journey to the Holy Land in 333-4, by land through Northern Italy and the Danube valley to Constantinople, through Asia Minor and Syria to Jerusalem, and then back by way of Macedonia, Otranto, Rome, and Milan. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia: The report of his journey outside Palestine is little more than a dry enumeration of the cities through which he passed, and of the places where he stopped or changed horses, with their respective distances. For the Holy Land he also briefly notes the important events which he believes to be connected with the various places. In this he falls into some strange blunders, as when, for instance, he places the Transfiguration on Mount Olivet. Such errors, however, are also found in subsequent writers. His description of Jerusalem, though short, contains information of great value for the topography of the city. – wikipedia.org

 

The following are the most important notices of Jerusalem from the fourth to the twelfth centuries: The earliest description is that written by the unknown Pilgrim of Bordeaux, who was in Jerusalem in the year 333, while Constantine's Church was being built….There are the two statues of Hadrian, and there is not far from the statues a pierced stone (lapis pertusus), (1) to which coine the Jews every year and anoint it, and bewail themselves with groans, and tear their garments, and thus depart. And there is the house of Hezekiah, King of Judah. – (In process, November 9, 1996, by Michael Kollen), http://www.templemount.org/warren1.html

 

The early pilgrims before 530 A.D. speak, as we have seen, of the Temple enclosure as in ruins. The Bordeaux Pilgrim mentions the vault and tanks, the ramparts and the ‘pierced stone,’ near which was Hadrian's statue. http://templemount.org/warren1.html, Excerpts from The Survey of Western Palestine, by Col. Sir Charles Warren, K.C.M.G., R.E., and Capt. Claude Reigner Conder, R.E.; The Committe of the Palestine Exploration Fund, Inc 1, Adam Street, Adelphi, London, WC., England, 1884. ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF JERUSALEM.

 

Similarly, a short, sixth century work called Breviarius remarks on the site of the Temple and a cave that was located there. Breviarius notes that this site was south of the Byzantine church which was called the Church of the Holy Wisdom (Saint Sophia).

 

Let us now return to the little book by an unknown author which is called the “Breviarius’, i.e. ‘Short Description of Jerusalem’. It is very short, barely 62 lines in all, and the date usually assigned to it is about the same as that of Theodosius, 527-80. – Travel and Travellers of the Middle Ages, Arthur, Percival Newton, E. D. Hunt, p. 50, http://books.google.com/...

 
Footnote 168: In a Christian account of the early 6th century called Breviarius ( a short account) of Jerusalem we are told that south of the Church of the Holy Wisdom “you come to the Temple built by Solomon, but there is nothing left there apart from a single cave.” – Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims Before the Crusades, p. 61, quoted from Earnest L. Martin, the Temples that Jerusalem Forgot, p. 126


At this same period, an account by Antoninus of Piacenza (the Piacenza Pilgrim) also refers to the Byzantine Church of the Holy Wisdom.

Antoninus of Piacenza The sixth-century pilgrim Antoninus of Piacenza who described the holy places of Jerusalem in the 570s is confused often with Saint Antoninus of Piacenza, who is venerated as a saint and martyr in the Roman Catholic Church, with a feast day of 13 November in the Ambrosian calendar. The saint was said to be a member of the legendary Theban Legion and to have been martyred at Piacenza, of which he is reckoned a patron.[1] Of Antoninus, the historical pilgrim, F. Bechtel reported in The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910).[2] "In manuscripts he is sometimes styled Antoninus the Martyr, through ignorant confusion of the writer with the martyr St. Antoninus who is venerated at Piacenza. He is the last writer who saw Palestine before the Moslem conquest. Although he covered in his travels nearly the same extensive territory as the Spanish nun, his work contains but few details not found in other writers; it is, moreover, marred by gross errors and by fabulous tales which betray the most naive credulity." The itinerary of Antoninus is valued by the historian as documenting the extent of the sixth-century trade catering to the pious pilgrims in the Holy Land: "We went to Kana, where our Lord was present at the marriage feast," Antoninus reports, "and we reclined on the very couch." Inspired by such a vivid figuration of Biblical truth, Antoninus indulged the classic tourists' act: "and there, unworthy as I was, I wrote the names of my parents".[3] Antoninus' description of the chalice of onyx that was venerated in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and of the Holy Lance in the Basilica of Mount Zion form early attestations of the cultus of these two relics. 1 e.g. at Patron Saints Index 2 The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "Itineraria" 3 A block of marble found at Elateia, inscribed in Byzantine Greek "This stone is from Kana in in Galilee, where Our Lord Jesus Christ turned the water into wine" and the further inscription "Antoninus", was identified with Antoninus of Poacenza when the block was moved to the Chapel of Saint Eleutherios near the Cathedral, Athens. ("Archaeological News", The American Journal of Archaeology and of the History of the Fine Arts 1885:230. – wikipedia.or

According to the Antoninus of Piacenza, this church was the location of the Praetorium where Pilate heard Jesus case. And at this site there was particular rock feature which had been in the center of the Praetorium.

Praetorium – In the New Testament, praetorium refers to the palace of Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator of Judea. According to the New Testament, this is where Jesus Christ was tried and condemned to death. – wikipedia.org

 

This church is described very well (and accurately) in a sixth century work written by the Piacenza Pilgrim. He said (words in brackets mine): “We also prayed at the Praetorium, where the Lord’s case was heard: what is there now is the basilica of Saint Sophia, which is in front of the Temple of Solomon below the street which runs down to the spring of Siloam outside Solomon’s porch. In this basilica is the seat where Pilate sat to hear the Lord’s case, and there is also the oblong stone which used to be in the center of the Praetorium. The accused person whose case was being heard was made to mount this stone so that everyone could hear and see him. The Lord mounted it when he was heard by Pilate, and his footprints are still on it.” – quoted from Earnest L. Martin, The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot, p. 89

 

So, the Bordeaux Pilgrim indicated that there was a “pierced stone” at or near the former site of the Temple. This pierced stone is taken to be the same as a cave mentioned in other writings of the same period. According to the Breviarius, there was a cave at the former site of the Temple. But, the Temple site was south of the Byzantine Church of the Holy Wisdom. And finally, according to Antoninus of Piacenza, the place of the Church of the Holy Wisdom was the site of the Roman Praetorium where Jesus was tried by Pilate.

 

This Byzantine Church was an enlargement of the earlier Church of St. Cyrus and St. John. It was located at the Dome of the Rock on the Moriah Platform (the former site of Hadrian’s temple to Jupiter). Consequently, the cave associated with the Temple’s location would have to be south of the Dome of the Rock.

 

Temple Mount About 325 it is believed that Constantine's mother, St. Helena, built a small church on the Mount in the 4th century, calling it the Church of St. Cyrus and St. John, later on enlarged and called the Church of the Holy Wisdom. The church was later destroyed and on its ruins the Dome of the Rock was built. [9] Since it is known that Helena ordered the Temple of Venus to the west of the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, presumably she also ordered the Temple of Jupiter on the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of St. Cyrus and St. John. – wikipedia.org

 

By looking at the historical accounts concerning this cave near the Temple we can see that they provide no support for the notion that the Temple was located on the Moriah Platform. Instead, the cave mentioned by the Bordeaux Pilgrim and Breviarius only provide further indications that the Moriah Platform is the site of Antonia and that the Temple was south of this platform.

 

In his book, The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot, Ernest L. Martin reports that the Geniza documents confirm that this important cave was in southeast Jerusalem where Jews felt David had built his altar. This is a reference to the altar David built at the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite which later became the site of the Temple.

 

We now have Jewish documents from the Geniza in Egypt that such a cave was used as a synagogue in southeast Jerusalem (as I will soon show) where Jews felt David had built his altar. – Earnest L. Martin, the Temples that Jerusalem Forgot, p. 126

 

2 Samuel 24:18 And Gad came that day to David, and said unto him, Go up, rear an altar unto the LORD in the threshingfloor of Araunah the Jebusite.

 

In fact, there are a number of caves and tunnels in the area of Davidic Jerusalem and on the Moriah Platform. Excavation at the “City of David” archeological site on the southern portion of the Moriah ridge has revealed a number of caves and tunnels beneath the surface of this ancient area of Davidic Jerusalem.

 

Likewise, it is apparent that Hadrian erected quite a number of statues and shrines to Roman gods throughout his new city. In fact, after the Jewish Revolt, Hadrian intended to completely erase all Jewishness in the area. So, he built Aelia Capitolina and dedicated it to the Roman gods. In addition to the temple of Jupiter (which had two statues) and the statue (or statues) at the site of the Temple, Hadrian built a shrine to Venus. This shrine formerly occupied the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which is very near to the Moriah Platform in the “Old City” area of Jerusalem.

 

Temple Mount Since it is known that Helena ordered the Temple of Venus to the west of the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, presumably she also ordered the Temple of Jupiter on the Temple Mount to be torn down to construct the Church of St. Cyrus and St. John. – wikipedia.org

 

Church of the Holy Sepulchre – In the early second century, the site of the present Church had been a temple of Aphrodite; several ancient writers alternatively describe it as a temple to Venus, the Roman equivalent to Aphrodite.…Although Eusebius does not say as much, the temple of Aphrodite was probably built as part of Hadrian's reconstruction of Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina in 135, following the destruction of the Jewish Revolt of 70 and Bar Kokhba's revolt of 132–135. – wikipedia.org

 

The fact is that Hadrian built a number of statues and shrines to Roman gods in his new city of Aelia Capitolina. And this makes sense since Hadrian dedicated the city to the Roman gods and sought to eradicate any trace of Jewishness by submersing it in Roman culture. Likewise, numerous caves exist beneath the surface of the Moriah ridge’s northern and southern portions. Clearly then, pointing to a cave or the likely former location of Roman statue hardly constitutes proof that any particular site must be the location of the Jewish Temple.

 

Additionally, it is difficult to reconcile the historical record with the idea that Jews were gathering at a cave located beneath the Roman, Byzantine, and Muslim shrines that continuously occupied the Moriah Platform during the long periods when Jews were banned from entering the city. In addition, the idea of a cave venerated by Jews beneath Roman, Byzantine, and Muslim shrines would directly contradict historical records stating that no nation had built a holy place on top of the site of the the Jewish Temple. For these reasons, historical references to a cave near the former site of the Jewish Temples do not provide any support for the conclusion that the Temple was located at the Dome of the Rock or in any other location on the Moriah Platform. To the contrary, when taken in totality and in accordance with other historical statements, references to a cave near the Temple require the opposite conclusion. As such, these issues only provide further evidence that the Temple was located south of the Moriah Platform which was actually the site of the Antonia.

 


Related Images



Aerial Photo Overlays



Overhead Schematics



Elevation
Cross-sections




Temple Model Photos



Photos from the
Mount of Olives




The Rock Under
the Dome Photo