beameup
New member
Superstition? Stubbornness? Poorly educated? Because they have forgotten, over 2 millennia, how much WATER it takes to keep a Temple cleansed. Or perhaps because they never read Josephus or carefully read the Tanakh?
'Western Wall' built long after Herod's death - 'Wailing @ the Wrong Wall'
- Thread starter beameup
- Start date
Superstition? Stubbornness? Poorly educated? Because they have forgotten, over 2 millennia, how much WATER it takes to keep a Temple cleansed. Or perhaps because they never read Josephus or carefully read the Tanakh?
There were water systems built to supply water to the Temple. This is well documented, but has the disadvantage of being connected to reality.
I again suggest that you visit Jerusalem. I believe you would change your mind very quickly about this.
musterion
Well-known member
Sorry, I can't buy it. For all their blindness -- which I readily acknowledge per Romans 9-11 -- ain't no way not ONE realizes such a colossal blunder AND that they need Cornuke and Missler point out (assuming what they say is even true). But we'll find out someday, maybe soon.
Our blindness is actually our clear sight.
but I will never convince you of that. I do find it highly disturbing to be talked about in that fashion.
musterion
Well-known member
The only difficulty is that he didn't do what a messiah is supposed to do. And he hasn't come back- even though he said he would during the lives of his followers.
So, no thanks.
beameup
New member
There is a legitimate reason for the 16th century "colossal blunder", as you say. Actually the MISTAKE was realized centuries ago, but by that time the "tradition" was stubbornly entrenched (sound familiar?).
There were two large aqueducts coming from Bethlehem, but they were to supply the Roman Antonia Fortress (what is now Haram al Sharif).
Actually, the correct information is readily available - "hiding in plain sight" - and is only slightly updated and re-presented by Cornuke. However, "THE ESTABLISHMENT" will have none of this! What? a Goy-boy telling us! How dare him!
But facts are stubborn things.
musterion
Well-known member
So are you expecting a Messiah at all? Some Jews do, some don't. Which kind are you?
Wick Stick
Well-known member
Hi chair,
I don't know much about the guy in the video, but I would encourage you to investigate the claim that the temple was to the south carefully. It is not devoid of merit. Likewise, there seem to be some problems with the traditional view. Think about it from a military viewpoint.
The location of the city of David is to the south. If the temple was the ultimate 'keep' of the ancient city, then it doesn't make much sense that it would be outside the walls of the city.
Likewise, the tunnel Hezekiah built re-directing the waters from Gihon spring takes them so far south as to be OUTSIDE the proposed walls of the City of David. Something is wrong with this picture.
And again, the traditional placement of Solomon's palace would put it outside of the City of David, making it less defensible.
It also puts it on the opposite side of the city from Solomon's pardac, which makes little sense, as we know that one of the chief functions of the gardens was to act as an escape route for the king in the event of a successful siege. We also know that the escape route led to the southeast.
If you fast-forward to the first century, there are similar issues. The traditional site of the Fortress Antonia puts it outside the city of Herod's day. It's highly unlikely that the Romans would not have had a stronghold within the walled city.
Finally, I am curious. What is it that makes you think a tour of the Old City would disprove such a thing? I've been there, and nothing immediately springs to my mind...
Ben Masada
New member
Wow! Solomon's temple, of course! And for more than a thousand years!
I am an odd duck in that regard.
1. I think the Messianic era has already arrived. The State of Israel is the result. The rest is up to us.
2. This means that either the Messiah as a person didn't arrive, or that he was a historical figure, like Herzl or Ben Gurion.
3. I take the Messianic idea much further. It is the drive to always try to improve things. To never be satisfied with the way things are. I think this is deep in the Jewish culture.
Little things like the ceremonial stairs leading into the Temple compound. Or the inscription that fell from the corner of the Temple. Or the abundance of Mikvah's in the area...
But if you are convinced otherwise, I am sure that you can explain everything away.
Yet.
If you came down from Herod's fortress wouldn't you want to bathe?
No. You bath to purify yourself before entering the Temple. These were ritual baths, not Roman baths.
Herod had a temple, the Romans worshiped Mars, the god of war.
I am referring to Jewish ritual baths. They have a specific structure.
Yes, that is the purpose of a mikveh. Those coming from the fortress felt defiled.
John 18:28: "Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium lest they should be defiled but that they might eat the Passover."
Wick Stick
Well-known member
I don't let doctrine define history, so no need.
It seems to me we are talking about several different temples, here. Let's say Herod's was built on the the "temple Mount." That doesn't mean Solomon's or Nehemiah's temples were in the same spot. All indications point to the City of David being south of the current site. Why do we not look for the site of Solomon's temple there?