The Temple
O-D Lyrics

Jump to: Overall Meaning ↴ Line by Line Meaning ↴

How much is your salvation? I paid the price
Temple of your redemption was mortified
Three days agree to scripture, but before the fight
You were guaranteed a victor: welcome to life
(Warning)
We finally won
(For more information)
(Warning)

We’re finally one
(For more information)
And though you might forget it (just know)
I’m still around (still hanging on)
Don’t be so hard on yourself
You’re just a child
Not nineteen nor ninety nine, all digits
Please know this: I just want you to be alright
I should be selfish cause I’m much too good for you
But this castle’s still been building; that’s the good news
Wishing you someday see it: feel so amused
Time approaching is now existing, there’s nothing to lose (can’t lose it)
(Warning)
We already won
(For more information)
(Warning)
We’re already one
And though you might forget it (just know)
I’m still around (still hanging on)
Don’t be so hard on yourself
You’re just a child
Not nineteen nor ninety nine, all digits
You will be alright (it is well)
Just know I’m around
And though you might forget it (just know)
I’m still around (still hanging on)
Don’t be so hard on yourself
You’re just a child
Not nineteen nor ninety nine, all digits
You will be alright (it is well)
Just know I’m around
Just know I’m around (just know)
Just know I’m around (still hanging on)

Just know I’m around (All is well)
Just know I’m around

Overall Meaning

The first lines of the song, "How much is your salvation? I paid the price. Temple of your redemption was mortified" suggests that the singer has gone through a difficult journey in order to achieve spiritual salvation. The singer seems to have paid a high price for this redemption, with the line "I paid the price". The metaphor of the Temple being mortified implies that the singer has experienced some sort of inner turmoil or spiritual revelation that has led them to a place of higher understanding. The next line, "Three days agree to scripture, but before the fight, You were guaranteed a victor: welcome to life", is a reference to the biblical story of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection. The "three days" refers to the amount of time Jesus spent in the tomb before being resurrected. The line "You were guaranteed a victor" is referring to the fact that Jesus' resurrection was predestined, and therefore he was guaranteed to be victorious. The line "Welcome to life" could imply that the singer has also been reborn or has achieved a sense of renewed life through their own struggles.

The chorus of the song, "And though you might forget it (just know) I’m still around (still hanging on) Don’t be so hard on yourself You’re just a child Not nineteen nor ninety nine, all digits", suggests that the singer is trying to offer encouragement and support to someone who is struggling. The line "Don’t be so hard on yourself" implies that the person is being overly critical or harsh on themselves, and the line "You’re just a child" suggests that they are young or inexperienced. The use of "Not nineteen nor ninety-nine, all digits" could imply that age is irrelevant - the singer is simply trying to offer comfort to someone who is struggling, regardless of their age.

Overall, the song appears to be about struggling with one's own spiritual journey and coming out the other side. The singer is offering support and encouragement to someone who is also going through a tough time, perhaps someone who is struggling with their own faith or hardships.

Line by Line Meaning

How much is your salvation? I paid the price
I put in the effort and hard work to help you find your salvation, so it came at a cost.

Temple of your redemption was mortified
I had to go through difficult and painful experiences to make you realize your redemption (or the need for it).

Three days agree to scripture, but before the fight
According to religious texts, a significant event happened three days before the fight or the struggle, which is usually taken as a sign of hope or divine intervention.

You were guaranteed a victor: welcome to life
You were promised a winner or a champion, so welcome to the journey of life where you can discover your own victories.

We finally won
We finally achieved our goal or reached a desired outcome.

We’re finally one
We finally became united or connected in some way.

And though you might forget it (just know) I’m still around (still hanging on)
Even if you forget or ignore my presence, I am still here and still holding on or persevering.

Don’t be so hard on yourself You’re just a child Not nineteen nor ninety nine, all digits
Don't put too much pressure on yourself because you're still young and have a lot to learn and experience.

Please know this: I just want you to be alright
My main priority is your well-being and happiness, so please understand that.

I should be selfish cause I’m much too good for you But this castle’s still been building; that’s the good news Wishing you someday see it: feel so amused
I could be selfish because I have a lot to offer, but I choose not to be. Instead, I am still working on building a life with you that will bring us both joy and satisfaction.

Time approaching is now existing, there’s nothing to lose (can’t lose it)
The time for action is here and now, and there's really nothing to lose (or at least nothing that can't be regained or replaced).

We already won
We have already achieved our victory or success.

And though you might forget it (just know) I’m still around (still hanging on)
Even if you forget or overlook me, I am still here and still persevering.

You will be alright (it is well) Just know I’m around
You will be okay and everything will work out in the end. And remember, I am still here for you.

Just know I’m around (just know) Just know I’m around (still hanging on) Just know I’m around (All is well) Just know I’m around
The repetition of this line emphasizes the singer's commitment to being there for the listener, no matter what happens or how they feel.

Lyrics © DistroKid
Written by: Charles Omoregbee

Lyrics Licensed & Provided by LyricFind

To comment on or correct specific content, highlight it

TRACKS

No Related Genres

More Genres

No Artists Found

More Artists Load All

No Albums Found

More Albums Load All

No Tracks Found

01Danksgiving (Intro)2:16

02Laser Cats1:46

03(Be) Still2:15

04Strata East1:20

05Enter Mind Travel2:00

06Omniverse1:22

07Electric Meditation1:51

08Gangster Electro Invasion2:07

09Sufi Voices1:58

10Midtempo Marauders0:58

PT2M8S

Genre not found

Artist not found

Album not found

Search results not found

Song not found

Most interesting comments from YouTube:

Dn Zach

There were no Roman legions stationed in Jerusalem before the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD. If anyone thinks there were, then ask them to identify which legion(s) were located there and document that assertion by the Roman military records that indicates where the various Legions were located.

There was a time when the 10th legion was located (and camping a few nights) just north of the Temple Mount. This was during conquest of Jerusalem in 70 AD, at the time that Titus had the 10th destroy the fortress Antonia (from the foundations) to gain a northern entrance onto the Temple Mount, where the Jewish Zealots were holding out.

Interesting to consider that after the Romans had defeated and taken Jerusalem (70 AD), the camp for the 10th legion was in the old lower city, west of the Temple Mount.

Be Well,
DZ

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Dear@YunaOnHome ,
LOL !!! "who crucified Jesus"

You don't know the Story ?? In answer to you question.

The Jewish leaders
The Jewish leaders clearly decided that Jesus was be put to death. (Matt. 26:66) The Jewish leaders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus.(Matt. 27:20). The Jewish people (under the influence of the Jewish leaders) accepted, “His blood be on us and on our children!”. They took responsibility for the death of Jesus.

Herod
Herod did not find Jesus guilty of any of the charges (Luke 23:15)

Pilate
The Roman governor Pontius Pilate who did not find Jesus guilty of charges and nothing deserving death. Pilate wanted to punish and release him (Luke 23:13-16, 20, 22)
Yet, the Jews insisted that Jesus be executed (Luke 23:23), so Pilate give in to the Jewish leaders and to pacify the Jewish leaders, delivered Jesus over to their will. and allowed them to have their way. Pilate washed is hands of the decision to kill Jesus (Matt. 27:24)

Essentially, the Roman soldiers were required to carry out the actual process of the crucifixion of Jesus, because the Jewish leaders were no allowed by Rome to execute without permission. However the Jewish leaders were responsible for the death of Jesus.

From a theological perspective, all humans are responsible fro the death of Jesus because his death was made a a sacrifice for the atonement for our sins.

Just so you do not misunderstand, I am not advocating that there were no Roman soldiers in Jerusalem in the early first century. There were Roman Soldiers at the Fortress Antonia and Roman soldiers stationed at the fortress at Herod's Palace, so there were two fortresses in Jerusalem where Roman solders were stationed, so there were plenty of Roman soldiers that could have crucified Jesus.

I would like to remind you that "It does not take a whole Roman Legion to crucify Jesus and there was emphatically not a Roman legion in Jerusalem at that time to do this.

So then "who crucified Jesus ?" Well some Roman soldiers pounded the nails into him and crucified Him, because of the desire of the Jewish leaders.

BUT, ...... it didn't take a Roman legion to crucify Jesus. LOL !
Be Well,
DZ

Darrell Moore

HERE is Our TRUE Savior

YaH The Heavenly FATHER HIMSELF was Who they Crucified for our sins and “HERE IS THE PROOF”

From the Ancient Semitic Scroll:
"Yad He Vav He" is what Moses wrote, when Moses asked YaH His Name (Exodus 3)

Ancient Semitic Direct Translation
Yad - "Behold The Hand"
He - "Behold the Breath"
Vav - "Behold The NAIL" <— YaH’s Crucifixion
He - "Behold the Breath"

“Behold the HAND that Beholds The NAIL”

PROVES - YAH The Heavenly Father HIMSELF was Who they Crucified

That is EXACTLY what Moses Wrote

Here is what they mean

YaH's Name:
(Ya)d + (H)e, as YaH is what Moses called Him and YaH Declared: "this is My Name, this is My Name for all generations" (Exodus 3)

YaH is The Creator of “MAN”:
Yad He, (HAND BREATH), as YaH's "HAND" Formed man from the dust of the Earth and His "BREATH" made him a living being (Adam)

YaH's Sacrifice of Crucifixion for “MAN”:
Vav He (NAIL BREATH), the "NAIL" through YaH’s "HAND", in Sacrifice of Crucifixion, that whosoever shall call YaH Savior, His “BREATH” brings forth life (Salvation)

How YaH arrives:
YaH arrives via the Tent of Meeting (Exodus 33:7:11, Isaiah 54, 55), where a Tent is erected outside the city, a cloud descends upon the entrance of the Tent and YaH appears...

Why they demanded YaH to be Crucified:
YaH was Crucified according to Hebrew law (Deuteronomy 21), to be Hung on an Almond Tree for BLASPHEMY as it was for His NAME they demanded Him Crucified. The Messiah claimed He was YaH...

HE WAS YaH!!!

HalleluYAH translates “Praise ye YaH”

The Hebrew Book of Isaiah

Isaiah 42:8
"I am YaH; that is my Name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.

Isaiah 43:11
I, I am YAH, and there is no other Savior but Me.

Isaiah 45:5
I am YaH, and there is none else.

Darrell Moore

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Dear @Paul Nandico,
There is nothing in Scripture that indicates or implies that the foundations of the Temple Mount was destroyed. I encourage you to look at the text carefully !
"As some of the disciples were remarking how the temple was adorned with
beautiful stones and consecrated gifts, Jesus said, “As for what you see here,
the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one will be
thrown down.” " (Luke 21:5-6)

Here the disciples were commenting on the stones of the Temple (Note: not the Mount). Jesus then informs them that "not one stone will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.” The clear context here is that Jesus is referring to the stones of the Temple (no mention of the stones of the Mount).

A parallel verse give a little more information -
"Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to
him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you
not ? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will
not be thrown down.”" (Matt 24:1-2)

In this record of the text, apparently one of the disciples also mentioned not only the Temple, but the other "buildings" on the Temple Mount. Here, the context addressed by Jesus, refers to the idea that all the "buildings" on the Temple Mount will be destroyed. Jesus specifically says, "You see all these," and that is clearly referring to the "buildings" that the disciples were commenting about. This would include not only the Temple, but all the buildings (Solomon's Porch, The Royal Stoa, Inner Temple Precincts, etc.)
Nothing is said about the Temple Mount being destroyed, clearly just the "buildings".

It is very significant to note that there are no first century buildings left, existing on the Temple Mount, but plenty of evidence that the Temple Mount itself existed during the first century. That is an undeniable fact.

Jesus also said all the stones on the Temple Mount will be "thrown down" ! This is what actually happened because all of the stones of those buildings were thrown down, off of the Temple Mount, and even today some stones lay at the bottom of the Temple Mount. Very unfortunately, It is forbidden to excavate that area because the Muslims have placed grave sites there.
However ! On the south side of the Temple Mount, excavations there have found evidence of first century inscriptions relating to the Temple, at the bottom of the Temple Mount where they were "thrown over" (see the Trumpeting Place Inscription). Stones that were "thrown down" .

The Fortess Antonia
It is clear that Josephus indicates that Titus ordered that the foundations of the Antonia Fortress be destroyed to gain entrance onto the Temple Mount from the North, to take the Temple where the Jewish Zealots where holding out. We know that is how Titus got his Roman forces onto the Temple Mount. The Fortress Antonia no longer exists, but the Temple Mount does exist.
So if the Fortress Antonia was destroyed from the foundations and it was adjoined to the northwest corner of the Temple Mount (as Josephus clearly states) then the present Temple Mount was certainly not the Fortress Antonia. The present Temple Mount was the Temple Mount where the Temples of the Jewish people were located.

Bottom line: You need to follow established principles of hermeneutics and exegesis so you can more accurately interpret the Scriptures and avoid reading into the scriptures suppositions that support your hypothesis. If your church has never taught you a class in basic hermeneutical and exegetical principles, then tell your pastor there are gaps in your basic education of Christianity. Those are tools every serious Christian who takes the Scriptures seriously, should be competent in.
Be Well,
DZ

Miguel Salazar

2y↑3

I love your channel and the great work you all are doing. I found out about you through the forest-planting initiative, which greatly impressed me by your determination and spirit. I am also a subscriber. So I had high hopes when I saw this thumbnail, but I felt very disappointed by this video.

If you are going to try to debunk the "City of David Temple Theory", you SHOULD have started from the beginning with your opposition's STRONGEST argument. This would be in my opinion: the "complete and total destruction of Jerusalem but the maintenance of the Roman garrison" argument, which is based on the account of the destruction of the city by the Romans and the accounts from travelers afterwards.

For example, you already cited Josephus (he is the prime historic authority on the subject after-all) , but look at "War of the Jews", Book 7, Ch. 1. Here, Josephus describes how the Romans UTTERLY and COMPLETELY DESTROYED the Jewish city of Jerusalem, especially the TEMPLE. (This fulfilled the prophecy of Jesus Christ who had said several decades earlier that there would not be one stone left on another (Matt 24:2). What do you think about This Witness? However, the ONLY THING the Romans did NOT destroy was their own Fort Antonia. Here it says the Romans left a garrison of a legion, presumedly to make sure no one tried to come back and rebuild. (And at that point it does not matter if it was a cohort or legion because the Temple is all destroyed anyway and the Fort was the only thing left standing.)

This is in my opinion the strongest argument for the "City of David Temple Theory" because it explains the facts most completely. That is why what we see is the stone platform in the exact shape and size of Roman Forts found across Europe. That is why there was found Roman coinage BENEATH the oldest stones in the Wailing Wall. That is why there is absolutely no trace of the Temple of Herod. The Romans completely demolished the City of Jerusalem that Jesus knew, especially including the Temple (not a stone was left on top of another), and left intact their own military base alone surrounded by the rubble to show their might.

After dealing honestly with this argument, then you should turn to the host of very convincing pieces of evidence sited by your opposition and see which theory explains them all the best....
- Roman coins from 18AD found buried BENEATH the bottom foundation stones of the Wailing Wall. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2065254/Coins-Jerusalems-Western-Wall-hints-sacred-site-older-Herod.html
- the Muslim "Dome of the Rock" was built over a big rock that was found on the platform. The rock to this day has crosses etched all over the surface by early Christian pilgrims who believed it was the site of the praetorium, where Jesus was judged and scourged by the Romans.
- Look at what the first Muslim conquerers and Early Christians, and later Crusaders thought about the temple mount.

Maybe you will end up getting to these points in future episodes, and I will be interested to see if you do. But here you ended up skewing the discussion in your favor from the beginning and failing to really confront the strongest points of your opponent from the start.

Darrell Moore

SpotterVideo

2y↑6

Read what the Roman Historian Tacitus said below about a spring of "never-failing water" coming from the ancient Jewish temple, which reveals the true location of the temple.

(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.

What did Josephus say below about Titus using Fort Antonia as his base of operations on the day the temple burned? This proves the entire fort was not destroyed when they attacked the foundations earlier to gain access to the fort.

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."

Darrell Moore

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Dear @Jayne zoboski,
Where one believes the Temple should belong, or where one wants the Temple to belong is nowhere important as where Scripture says it was located.
If Scripture says the Temple was not located in the City of David then we must accept that regardless of where we believe it should be or want it to be.

Scripture quite clearly eliminates the City of David as being a viable option for the actual location of the Temple Solomon built.
If Scripture is authoritative and historically reliable, then we must accept the conclusion of Scripture over the various pop-theories that are circulating in our culture.

Scripture confirms that Solomon built the Temple, outside of the City of David, on top of Mt. Moriah which is where the current Temple Mount is presently located. Lets accept what the Scriptures say !!
Be Well, DZ

Dn Zach

Fortress Antonia was destroy to the foundations by Titus as described by Josephus. What is left is the actual Temple Mount which is on top of Mt. Moriah where Scripture clearly states the Temple was built (2 Chron. 3:1).

There was NO Christian church ever built on Fortress Antonia. there is presently a school built on the rock outcrop that Antonia once stood.

It is believed that at one time there was a Byzantine church on the Rock tat covers the present Dome of the Rock. The Dome of the Rock is NOT a Mosque.

Where in the Tanakh do you think the text states the Temple was built over the Gihon Spring ? Please document your assertion with objective references !

The Scriptures do confirm that the Temple was not built in the City of David but up the hill, apparently north of the City of David, This is consistent with the Scriptures stating that the Temple was built on Mt. Moriah which was out of, north of and uphill from the City of David. Scripture also mentions the Temple being on top of the Mountain which would be Mt Moriah the location of the present Temple Mount.
It seems that you are unaware of these verses in the text of Scripture, Why are you not aware of what the Scriptures say about the location of the Temple ?
DZ

Dn Zach

Dear @ Charles Stuart
Scripture quite clearly eliminates the City of David as being a viable option for the actual location of the Temple Solomon built.
If Scripture is authoritative and historically reliable, then we must accept the conclusion of Scripture over the various pop-theories that are circulating in our culture.

Scripture confirms that Solomon built the Temple, outside of the City of David, on top of Mt. Moriah which is where the current Temple Mount is presently located. Let's accept what the Scriptures say !!

Remember that Josephus described how the Romans destroyed the Fortress Antonia at the foundations, to gain a northern entrance onto the Temple Mount. This means that The Antonia Fortress was destroyed from the foundations up and no longer exists. What remains is the Temple Mount; which is on the top of Mt. Moriah where the Scriptures confirm the Temple was built.
You do not seem the be familiar with what the Scriptures say on this subject of the actual location of the Temple.
Be Well, DZ

All comments from YouTube:

Margaret Paterson

2y↑4

Hi guys great videos. I'm not Jewish I'm Christian, I love watching everything about Israel and learning about the wonderful Jewish people, their customes and where they come from. Where can I send a small monthly donation to the city of David?. Keep up this great work guys. God bless xx

Craig Bennett

2y↑54

I do have a question on the existing wall. Wasn't the temple completely torn down and not one stone on another?

The Israel Guys

2y↑2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ9gzIV8qHQ

Michael Shubr

2y↑17

Josephus records that the Temple was razed to its very foundation and “that the Camp of those who destroyed it (Antonian Fortress)” was all that remained. He also records that the Antonian Fortress was forty acres in size with arial walkways that descended into the Temple Courtyard which could be looked down upon from the Fortress structure!

yamyam 29

The Temple itself is not the Temple plaza you see now. The mount is not the Temple itself

yamyam 29

@Michael Shubr The antonia fortress was razed to the ground to make a ramp up to the Temple plaza. Well, the temple itself was destroyed and all that remained is the plaza itself, the Mount Moriah expanded by Herod

Michael Shubr

2y↑8

@yamyam 29 That’s backwards from what Josephus recorded. There is a lot of revisionist history being passed off to support Tradition. The Muslims record there was a. Christian Church where the Dome is at today. There is also record of a statue of Hadrian on a Horse when the Muslims took the area, both were recorded as being built on the old Antonian Fortress. The only discoveries under the Temple Mount have been Roman. I find it highly unlikely that the Temple was built over a Roman Theatre, and while services were being conducted by the levites that Romans were laughing and bawling from the entertainment under the Fortress Mount.
The Romans could have dug through their fortress foundation to enter the courtyard below, but Josephus and Eleazor state the only thing left standing was the Roman Fort.

35 More Replies...

SmoothRuffian

2y↑10

I had started to wonder if the temple was not where the mount is because of some of those theories. But seeing this presentation has really cleared it up for me. The Temple Mount was massive! It seems impossible for it to have been built over the landscape of the city of David area.

moester75

2y↑5

Outstanding job you two did with this documentary about the Temple in Jerusalem. Y’all made me feel like I was up there with you walking right beside you. Joseph Good knows his Temple Mount history and he backs up the traditional argument for the Temple Mount being in the correct location and the Roman fortress being in the north west corner. Those amateur historians had me doubting the traditional belief and they almost convinced me that the City of David might be the correct place. Also, its absurd to believe that the correct location of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem would be mistaken by word of mouth being passed down from generation to generation. At no time was Jerusalem completely devoid of the descendants of Jacob. This seventeen minute documentary kills the City of David argument completely.

AJA Jade

2y↑3

Excellent Job! I have heard these theories about the City of David being the actual site for a while and wondered. I personally felt the most awesome sense of connection while at the Kotel- and being told these theories about the alternative site- I kept wondering… if that was a roman Fortress - what was this amazing connection I felt!? The entire old city is amazing and the City of David (where his palace clearly was) is also amazing! But the Kotel was indescribable!!!

David Saprykin

What is kotel?

Karin Karger

2y↑4

Awesome! Can't wait for part 2! Bless you guys for your presentation of Truth in all aspects of your ministry.

Tom Chaffer

2y↑20

Perfect resolution to my own questions. Thank you for this beautiful (live-action-Bible) coverage of the issue ❤️

The Israel Guys

You're welcome, thank you for watching!

Donald Witt

2y↑1

Thank you it was breath taking I won't to thank yall

Tzaddik Media

1y↑1

Thank you so much for this video series. There are so many ignorant and gullible Christians out there that are just looking for another exciting conspiracy theory to jump into.

Ronald Dunlap

47w↑1

I thought Bob Cornuke's views of the Temple being in the City of David made perfect sense, but I think you guys kinda of dismantled those ideas pretty well. Great Video that everyone who is interested in the City of David theory should watch!

Pineapple

2y↑6

Boy would I love a personal tour with these guys.

Heavenly Guitar

2y↑7

Thank you for the videos about the Temple Mount location. When you present all sides of the story it really is looking like the traditional site is correct.

YunaOnHome

2y↑6

Romans forts had to have the ability to hold at least a legion even if there wasn’t one always. There’s one in a backwater in Britain where I ride past everyday whose roads always stay over time and it’s the size of Temple Mount. However there’s plenty of land to the north of the Temple Mount which strangely enough is the exact size from its north edge to the northern wall of the medieval city. I think I you wish to get extra information out of Josephus is to look into the complex narrative of the Multiple towers and how they looked from one another.

Dn Zach

YunaOnHome

2y↑1

@Dn Zach then who crucified Jesus lol

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Mark Anthony

2y↑2

A man named Asher Kaufman did very credible work that established the original temple location was north of the Dome of the Rock in an area now occupied by the Dome of the spirits. Part of his calculation included the idea that the Holy of Holies will prophetically line with the eastern gate...the current eastern gate is right above the original one. There is one additional thing...under the Dome of the Rock is the actual rock that wasn't part of Herod's fill. In this rock there are deep grooves cut by Solomon to drain away the blood of the tens of thousands of animals he sacrificed at the temple dedication ( you can read about that in the book of Kings).

34 More Replies...

Pineapple

2y↑3

Love the last comment. “Turn off the fake news and tune into what’s really going on”.

HolyLandSite

2y↑7

Thanks for sharing about this important topic. I've done years of research on this and am fully convinced the true location of the original temple is on the current Temple Mount. I've also done videos on this and am working on another one at this time.

Abe Lincoln

2y↑1

So the mighty and pagan Roman Empire ... accepted Herod gave them ... and agree to use a Jewish Fortress connected directly to the Temple Complex Walls of the God of the Jews? The model makes no sense. The Temple & the Fort Antonia used by the Romans were connect by a 600 ft long sky bridge. The Roman & Temple complexes were separated from each other.

And the Romans attacked the tiny fortress first .... with 600 or so men inside ... to then uses the sky bridges to access the Temple but which were destroyed by the Jewish defenders. Clearly the Temple & Fort was separated ... and the Romans attacked the Fort NOT the northern Wall of the Temple Complex that Fort Antonia was suppose to be connected to at the north west end.

The traditional Model makes no sense at all. The Temple & Fort had to be separated by 600 ft. The Romans take what they want ... and don't accept what they are given. Herod would have been ordered by the Romans to SEPARATE the Temple Complex from the now Roman Fortress.

And the Romans are not going to only have 600 men ... to police millions of Jews visiting their holiest City.

Radio K.A.O.S.

Years of research and you don't have enough common sense to know it's exactly the same size as remaining roman forts scattered around Europe. 🤣🤣🤣

Yeah, sure.
Maybe 10,000 squashed into the Israeli model, NOT.

Melissa Reyes

2y↑3

Love this!!! Thank you for such great information and breaking it down!!!

Lynne Lovett

2y↑31

Great episode Israel Guys. Looking forward to episode two of this series.

The Israel Guys

2y↑2

Thanks!

Aaron Shust

2y↑9

Well done! Love the pace, the music, and of course the content. So easy to follow your train of thought. And that teaser for ep2 was epic. 😂💪🏼

The Israel Guys

Thank you!

Darrell Moore

Edwin Pedroso

2y↑1

God bless and make possible the construction of the third temple.

Ruth

1y↑1

@Edwin Pedroso
On the day of judgement God will punish all those Jews who wear foreign clothing. (Zephaniah 1:8)

Edwin Pedroso

My concern is the presençe of the dome of the rock. Would it not be, abig the trouble to contain the Muslim opposition ? I hate to eat dying. of God's people.

CALEB HAMBLIN

2y↑12

Thank you so much for uploading this video, can't wait to see the next one. This clears up so much for those of us who don't have all the expertise.

Darrell Moore

Paul Nandico

2y↑10

If arguement is about foundation being torn down, what about foundation of traditional temple mount? It remains, though no stone was to be left.

Also, what about the supply of water? Much water needed for all the sacrifices you referenced.

I am not settled on either location. I find it all intriguing. I look forward to hearing part 2. Thank you.

The Israel Guys

2y↑1

Glad you bring it up, those topics are the discussion of episodes 2 and 3 in this series!

Here is episode 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfOv99G-eeE

Episode 3 is coming soon, stay tuned!

Paul Nandico

@The Israel Guys thank you!

Big Poppy Racing

2y↑2

Don’t forget that the Old Testament actually states it was in the City of David. But they are going to do the next episode showing the other side and information right. Or is this just more ‘one side only’. I’d like to make up my own mind. My parents taught me how to think, not what to think.

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Shivas Irons

Dn zach. What you say makes sense but what i don't get is how did they " throw down). Or tear apart stones that probably weighed tons, and why even bother? You've defeated your foes, looted everything worth looting, burned what would burn, why topple 2 ton blocks ? It must have taken forever to do anyway.

16 More Replies...

PAD

1y↑1

Thank you for this video. I always thought it absurd that Herod would build a fort for the Romans bigger than the City of David and The Temple. It's ludicrous.

Joshua

50w

No it makes sense because Israel was such a troubled province

Derick Knowlton

2y↑5

Thanks for doing this guys! I have heard this theory before. Love the history you put in too

The Israel Guys

Our pleasure!

Linda Diaz

2y↑3

It has always been my dream to visit Israel, it truly is a beautiful country,😇🌿🌹

Christopher Seal

2y↑4

The 10th Legion wasn't stationed at Jerusalem until after the Temple Mount was destroyed in 70 AD. Judea was under the provence of Syria and that is where Roman legions were stationed and cohorts were temporly assigned to Judea (Ceasaria and Jerusalem). In Jeruslam soldiers were barracked in Fort Antonia and Herod's Palace compound, plenty of space for the Roman Soldiers.

SandraD

2y↑4

Such a GREAT video! Your videos just continue to get better and better. I love watching the growth of your video ministry!

The Israel Guys

2y↑2

Thank you so much!

Jan Georgen

2y↑11

Well done, Gentlemen 👍🏻. May God richly bless you as you bless Israel, as they are a light to the nations.

The Israel Guys

Thank you!

Kendra Malczyk

1y↑2

Great video! You made it very obvious! 🎉🎉🎉

ken kiekens

2y↑2

the walk to the temple started at the pool of Siloam. Then the pilgrims would go up the stairs to the temple. currently, the steps go to the place where the current temple mount is. But the map, on the current walkway from the pool of Siloam, shows another path that turns to the right, that goes to an empty field beside Jericho road. This is where the original Herods temple may have been. You can check the picture out yourselves.

ken kiekens

So the Jericho rd cuts right across and along where the temple used to be. Right on it. The empty field.

ken kiekens

so from the pool of Siloam, look carefully and slowly at the map on the wall, one branch goes left to the current temple, and the other fork in the road goes right to the empty field and the Jericho rd.
So the fork to the left going to the current temple is for the Gentiles. While the fork in the road to the right, to the empty field, would be the Jewish temple, Solomon's temple, and Herod's temple that was destroyed.

Ivor McClinton

2y↑2

Many thanks for this clear explanation which trashes the alternate theory. So much deception about today, we desperately need this clarity.
Shalom from Northern Ireland.

Miguel Salazar

2y↑3

Anthony Nicholas

2y↑10

I wrote about this idea years ago in my sci-fi/horror novel THE MERCY GATE. I can’t get it published in part because these issues are so controversial.

Rodney Moore

2y↑1

self publish?

Anthony Nicholas

I thought about it but I’m still hoping for the traditional route

Darrell Moore

1 More Replies...

Sharon F

2y↑32

Great job guys... I can't wait for the next episode!

Carmine Fragione

2y↑2

If you want to know the location of the front door of the original temple , then you find the burial sites of the priests who served in the tent of the meeting , as House of Phinehas, Sons of Aaron , Sons of Zadok, etc. and you plot their burial position head to foot as directional arrows pointing to the door. Like a theater has it's seats all facing center stage, the priests would be buried head to foot to rise up and be facing the Temple door. Like the array of an explosion sends debris out to the perimeter, you find the graves and point back to the center of their array, for they would need to rise on the day of Resurrection and be directly facing the Temple . This information has been known for a long time by theatrical actors and guilds , but it is a secret you are not supposed to know.

rich blough

Fascinating!! Have they found any of the Graves as of yet?

Luis Lopez

They know where David was buried. Following your comment and using King David's tomb, the Temple was not on the Temple Mount, but the City of David, near the threshing floor David purchased.

Anthony Parr-Morley

2y↑2

I am very interested in this topic ! I am looking forward to the 2nd part of this subject of the true location of the Temple. Thank you Israel Guys

mike jurney

2y↑19

Now you have a big problem with Hezekiah's tunnel. Why did Hezekiah build the tunnel? It was to channel water in order to hold out against an Assyrian attack. And no doubt that he channeled the water to the fortress, David's citadel, the Acra, the ancient fortress of David, where they would hold out. This ancient Acra was very near the Temple. We know this because in the time of the Maccabee's the Seleucid dynasty captured the Acra and used it as a base to ambush the Temple if the crowds got too big. But if the Acra was farther North, next to the present day temple mount, then you have to believe that Hezekiah channeled the water to the lowest part of the city away from the Acra. Where then would they get their water to hold out in the Acra against the Seleucid army?
Josephus tells us that Simon the Hasmonean tore the Acra to the ground and then quarried the hill on which it had stood to render it lower than the temple so it was no longer a threat. This would turned the once underground reservoir under the Acra into an open pool, the Siloam pool. On the Wikipedia page for the pool of Siloam we read, "During the Second Temple period, the Pool of Siloam was centrally located in the Jerusalem suburb of Acra." Why would they call the lowest point of the City by the name Acra unless at one time, that's where the Acra stood? If the temple was close to the Acra, it must have been quite a bit more south than the traditional temple mount.

best Kaffir under the SON

2y↑4

The Temple was fed by an aquaduct.
Recently the remains of bolts for a timber sluice gate was found at the Gihon. This lifted the water to the previous height before Hezekiah's tunnel was excavated. The older water reticulation systems could only work when the gate was closed.

SpotterVideo

2y↑6

Robert Kendall

@SpotterVideo great response and very valid points. That said, I think both pov have some credibility. What we do know for sure, there will be a temple, and probably sooner than we realize. Sacrifices will resume once it is purified ceremonially having gotten the ashes of the red heifer. They are already practicing the ritual sacrifices on the specially built alter, and last but not least, other than logistics, it doesn't matter where they build it because it's temporary.

SpotterVideo

2y↑1

@Robert Kendall
Heb_10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Bob Taylor

2y↑2

It was! Christ also told His disciples that not one stone would be left on another, and that happened when Rome ransacked Jerusalem in 70 AD as Christ prophesied! How then do you get a western wall? You can if it's Fort Antonia! Why would the Romans build a Fort on lower ground with your enemies above you!

11 More Replies...

Daniel Rosas

2y↑5

NOW I'M MORE CONFUSE THAN BEFORE. PLEASE MAKE A DRAWING TO SHOW THE TEMPLE AND WHAT YOU FOUND INTERPOSSING THE DRAWING WITH THE ACTUAL BUILDINGS THANK YOU

yamyam 29

Huh??

yamyam 29

2y↑1

To some out there, if you believe that the Temple Mount which was expanded by Herod was the Temple itself and then you insert that "no stone on top of another" THEN you must recalibrate your minds on how you understand things

Joseph Stevers

2y↑3

Great video!!! I love the history of Israel! I look forward to watching that second video. I have a Weird question. That sling bag you’re wearing in the video. Where can I get one of those? Lol

Earl Schultz

2y↑3

you guys did a great job on this one! I hope this puts all the other theories to rest. great shots overhead too! keep up the great job showing the true history of the Jewish People going way back thousands of years! God bless you both!

The Israel Guys

2y↑1

Thank you!

Bert Lorenz

2y↑2

Hey Israel Guys-
Good job with getting this discussion going. I'm not sure 6 episodes will be enough to address this topic. I agree that the City of David temple location does not make sense and should be dismissed. In my new book, ‘The Temple Solution’ a plan for reestablishing a tabernacle/tent in the Jewish Quarter is presented. The book is controversial, but it provides a path for peace. Did Josephus exaggerate the immense size and precise NSEW positioning of the last temple complex, or was he telling the truth?
Thanks for raising awareness about this topic and keep searching for the truth.

ObadiYahu Hernandez

2y↑3

Appreciated the points and facts that were brought forth concerning this!

Joshua Wander

2y↑2

How anyone can completely ignore thousands of years of tradition and place the Temple Mount outside of its recognized place for personal benefit is mind boggling .

Karen19820

I know God uses all things and truly believe Mr. Carmuke is being used by God to question what is believed traditionally, and call attention to the Temple Mount for the next generation. Even I, as a 61 year old, have reviewed both beliefs about the location of the temple and the knowledge out there is definitely attention getting and detailed. God be glorified in all things.

Dn Zach

Dear@Karen19820 ,
We can be certain the Temple was not in the City of David because Scripture eliminates that option as a location of the Temple. Scripture does say that the Temple was built on Mt. Moriah, which is the location of the current Temple Mount.
I strongly believe that tradition that is supported by Scripture should be held to and if Mr. Carmuke is making people question the tradition of Scripture then he is certainly not being used by God.

It is said to see people leaving the tradition of Scripture in place of new theories.
DZ

1 More Replies...

Modern Grandmothers

2y↑3

That was awesome guys - I am sharing it with others - cant wait for the next episode

The Israel Guys

2y↑1

Awesome, thank you!

Walter Ulasinksi

2y↑5

The Temple of Solomon, the second temple, was on the threshing floor outside the city. 1) the first Temple was the tent affair Tabernacle that Moses commanded to be erected. This temple was in use for five hundred years before the Temple of Solomon. 2) in an agricultural society, no one would place a threshing floor on top of a mountain. Because first you would gave to bring the grain-stalks all the way up and then transport the threshed grain back down so you could sell it. A waste of labor that would drive the prices up. 3) the “ Temple mount was both the Roman headquarters and 5he Temple of Herod with its associated shopping mall. The only place you could purchase anything that might be sacrificed at the Temple with both Herod and theTemple priests taking a cut of all the profits. There most likely was also corruption as, how many sheep could be sacrificed each day as compared to how many were purchased. How many times could the same lamb be sold? The same with chickens. How much exchange finagling happened with the money changers? Ho2 much did they charge as service fees?

Darrell Moore

Randall Gschwind

The major point is the water from Gihon Spring!!! Way down below by the Threashing Floor!!! 37 cistern built for Roman use at Ft Antony plus Hezekiah Tunnel way below Ft Antony!!!

AJA Jade

Actually the top of a mountain would be ideal when you understand what threshing is! Separating the wheat from the chaff requires AIRFLOW! Wind! That is best found on ridges not valleys! Also in 2 Samuel 24:18-25 it states thst David WENT UP to buy it and to build the altar on the threshing floor. It also says that Arunah LOOKED DOWN and saw David and his staff coming UP! Finally you made the point yourself the threshing floor was OUTSIDE THE CITY! not within the City of David! As to the water, there were undoubtedly well opening all along the road between the Ciry if David anf trh Temple mount as excavations have now uncovered the underground aqueduct thst carried water down to the pool of Siloam and it was directly under the road much of the way. Anyone knows that almost any well requires drawing water UP from the source with buckets. This was no different!

Walter Ulasinksi

@AJA Jade consider, if you have a threshing floor atop a mountain, yes you have enough air flow to blow away the chaff, but where would that chaff land? Depending upon the wind direction a5 any given time, much would be blown over the city. A threshing floor, need not be atop Mt. Moria you just need a hill outside the city where you can get an airflow enough to separate the grain from the chaff. Generally, as you go into valleys, the prevailing winds become more predictable as the higher surrounding elevations will direct the winds in predictable directions as they are funneled off the surrounding higher elevations. While I stated nothing about water, it is known that the Romans held springs at whatever level in high regard so they would sequester such springs for themselves. Water management , a practice that has ben going on for thousands of years, even before the establishment of Jerusalem, could be led almost anywhere providing it is on a down hill course. The best slope is usually around 3-4 degrees, as it permits a good water flow without causing a hydraulic braking factor. Due to an aqueduct being too full and the pressure becoming too great. So a Mikva outside the city but not far from a likely small rise would be a good indication.
Another factor, is the excavation to the foundation stones of the temple mount. These being of a monumental size of between 50-100 tons.
Even with the conscripted labor used by Solomon, it is unlikely that they would have sufficient labor to bring quarried stones of that size and weigh up so far on the mountain nor would there be a call for such. However the Puppet King Herod, a Syrian needing to prove to both the Romans and the Jews how great his power was, would contract monumental building all over to become known as Herod the Great and in proving his power would have quarried stones of the size the Romans used at Balbek brought up the mountain. To create the forth Temple. And outclass the third Temple from the Hasmonean dynasty which was a rebuild of Solomon’s Temple destroyed by the Babylonians circa 534 BCE. Herod’s ego was such that he even had his mountain of Herodium built in the desert.

Ezekiel's Altar

2y↑1

Interesting that this was posted on September 4th, which is 18 days away from the Equinox. On this day (and April 7th) the sunrise over the mount of olives shines into the Holy of Holies, giving the Temple its orientation.

tounsi925

why do you pick dome of the rock in your profile while you are not muslim it is a muslim shrine not for jews or christians

Ezekiel's Altar

@tounsi925 The Holy Quran does not prohibit anyone from visiting a mosque. Abraham's altar can be built beside the Dome of the Rock since there is nothing over its location.

1 More Replies...

Merrill Sloan

Water flowed down hill. There are 43 cisterns on our near the temple mount. The water in these cisterns most likely provided the large volume of water for the cleansing of the sacrificial blood and entrails, so the temple area needing cleansing needed to be sufficiently lower than these sources to enable the flow and volume of cleansing water needed. Thus the area receiving the water had to be south of the cisterns and at a lower level. It has been shown that some the cisterns after interconnected and perhaps more will be found to be so.

tkcdac

Or the necessary water for a siege for the Roman Garrison? The active water source is the spring in the City of David.

Luis Lopez

The requirement was for fresh running water for all Temple related duties. Cisterns were not considered clean and could not be used for temple worship. Also, The aqueducts that supplied water for those cisterns you mention were built after the temple mount was already built.

Charles Stuart

2y↑1

The traditional temple mount plaza is a man made raised plaza mount with retaining walls

Robert Johnson-Taylor

What everybody seems to forget or ignore, is that the temple at time of Herod was not the 2nd temple. The 2nd temple was built by Zerubbabel, and the temple he built was tiny. I’m not sure it was even built on top of the 1st temple or somewhere near it. One has to start from that point. Herod’s temple was never sanctified, the temple that Zerubbabel built was, even though it did not have the holy objects like the ark etc.

The Israel Guys

1y↑1

Herod's Temple was a modification of the second Temple, a continuation.

Haddie Bee

2y↑2

Superbly done!

The Israel Guys

Thank you

Sean Tierney

2y↑4

I think you missed the biggest argument about the location of the temple. the bible clearly states that it was built on the threshing floor of ornan the Jebusite. not only was it stated that this is north of the city, but every threshing floor ever found has been outside of a residential area. threshing is a agricultural process that puts a lot of debris into the air.

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Great Point !
However even more convincing the Scriptures say that the temple was built outside of the City of David and on top pf Mt. Moriah.
DZ

Kenny G

This is almost as important as where the garden of Eden was. Not to mention the location of the Four thrones at Cair Paravel.

Steve Dyches

We are the temples in which we stand, many are desolate. The Garden of Eden is a probate mindset. It is all about our states of mind, the spiritual realm of our total being is our intangible thought world, prone to corruption and utter destruction. We must tend to our garden well so that it will produce good fruits abundantly.

The Legendary Other Nathan

This is an amazing video. Thank you.

Jayne zoboski

2y↑5

YES!!!! I believe the temple belongs in the CITY OF DAVID!!!

Dn Zach

2y↑1

Krushim

What I've seen as a popular theory isn't the city of david but that the location is just slightly off and a little to the side of what is now the dome. The result being you could build the new temple beside the dome without disturbing the muslim shrine and still be in the correct location

RD2024

2y↑3

Great job Israel guys. God bless you from an Israeli woman.

Mer Av

2y↑3

My mind explodes. What an amazing ride you're taking us on... please stay safe!

Tim Chaffey

2y↑1

Nice job on this one and the next video in the series. I wish you would've corrected Cornuke's blatant misuse of Josephus at the 5:43 mark, since Cornuke (like Ernest Martin before him) regularly uses an ellipsis to remove information from quotes that he does not like. For example, Cornuke cites 2 Chr. 3:1 three times in his book, and yet each time he replaces "on Mount Moriah" with an ellipsis because those three words obliterate his claim. Back to the quote in the video...Josephus did not say that Antonia might "seem composed of several cities." He wrote that it was "divided into apartments of every description and for every purpose, including cloisters, baths and broad courtyards for the accommodation of troops; so that from its possession of all conveniences it seemed a town, from its magnificence a palace" (Jewish War, V.240–241). The word Cornuke lists as "cities" is the singular noun (polis) in Greek. Furthermore, as the actual quote shows, he was not writing about Antonia's size; he was describing its amenities and splendor.

Joshua Vander Plaats

2y↑1

I cannot recall the source or author. But I am sure that I read some where that the proximity of soldiers close to the temple was necessary because Rome was deeply concerned that if there were to be popular uprisings strong enough to overthrow roman hegemony, it would be at the Temple. It may have been in Josephus, but possibly in Eusebios, the greek Church historian. But may be Gibbons, too. Regardless, I am inclined to keep to the traditional location in this case.

Michael Shubr

Recently a Roman Theatre was discovered under the supposed Temple Mount—looked like nothing but garrisons for soldiers when I visited under the Mount in 2017. There is also record of a Christian Church that was built on the Antonia’s Fortress prior to the Mosque present today—my votes for a location over the Gihon Spring as stated in the Tanakh!

Charles Stuart

2y↑1

I agree with Michael, I have seen the escalated Roman Theater under the Traditional temple mount and it's resemble military quarters for soldiers and horses. The traditional temple mount is what remains of the Fort Antonia complex. Non-military people don't understand that a military Base not only must have quarters buildings for it's 6000 soldiers but ample acreage within it's complex to do military training exercises that in Roman time included hundredth of soldiers on horses running around at speed. And the reality that hundreds of horses stored produce a very strong daily poop 💩 smell.

The Israel Guys

Are you referring to Solomon's stables? If so that is from crusader times and had nothing to do with the Romans. Also the Bible never mentions once any connection between the Gihon spring the Temple

Michael Shubr

@The Israel Guys Incorrect, 2 Chronicles 3:1, specifically states, “then Solomon began to build the House of the Lord in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where the Lord had appeared to his father David, at the place that David had prepared on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite”—tradition states that this was over the Gihon Spring! 1Kings 1:33 also tells us that Solomon was specifically instructed by David to be anointed King over the Gihon!

Dn Zach

@Michael Shubr
Yes, Mt, Moriah but this is clearly not over the Gihon Spring ! Look at a map !
Solomon was anointed King over the Gihon, but that was before the Temple existed and has little to do with the location of the Temple.
Scripture does give us a strong indication that the Temple was not in the City of David so that location can be eliminated.
The Temple was on the top of Mt. Moriah as Scripture says and this is where the present Temple Mount is located.

1 More Replies...

Papet Master

Has anyone checked Locating Solomon’s Temple by Norma Robertson? I'm quite convinced her findings are fact-based and should be considered in modern talks about the Temple.

Trust God

2y↑3

Where the truth is there's dispute; but the truth can not be hidden.

Hernandez-Yanez Bold Voyagers of Zion

2y↑9

nice job guys, God bless both.

Pete V

This is high quality stuff thanks

Scott McNeal

2y↑1

After seeing all your commentaries, I believe you are correct. I've been looking at it differently a long time. Passing this on to my pastor for review also. 8) Looking forward to the next installment.

The Israel Guys

2y↑1

Thanks for sharing!

Charles Stuart

The City of David has throughout natural flat threshing floors, a living water spring, and it is also part of mount Zoriah. Excavations has shown finds dating back to dates of both Jewish temples and of course to it's name sake King David.

Leo Sath

Good informed reporting…Thank you

yamyam 29

2y↑6

A very great video debunking that hilarious theory about the Temple Mount being the Antonia Fortress. A very educational video

wayne english

Josephus used the Greek word huper to identify the location of Fort Antonia. Rather than indicating that the Fort was built on top of the rock, which would be the Greek word epi, the word used by Josephus indicated that the fortress was built over and around the rock.

Dn Zach

Yes, that rock is still there under the school and can be easily seen from the northern view of the Temple Mount. The Fortress Antonia was destroyed by Titus from the foundations, as Josephus describes, but the rock on which the fortress was built upon is still there.

Navigator001

2y↑2

I thought you were going to tell us what "Four square" meant. I don't know if it will fit down below Fort Antonio, and above the City of David, or not.

The Whole Bible with George Crabb

49w↑1

I agree the traditional site is right.
One theory I have, is that Herods Temple was where the Dome of the rock is. However, Solomons Temple I believe was over the Dome of the Spirits or Tablets.

Charles Stuart

2y↑1

The four squares Josephus is writing about is not the top of the traditional temple mount plaza where the Dome of the Rock is because said plaza is not square but rectangular. The Titus tunnels under the Traditional temple mount where the Antonia Fortress was were excavated and they do go through massive foundation Stones and emerge to the city of David. The Titus tunnels which are not to be confused with the exterior perimeter wall Stones have their other opening inside the Dome of the Rock. structure.

ad70preterist

Great information thank you.

Linda Davidson

2y↑27

Praying for the Jewish people to get their temple mount back. Also have prayed for years for the peace of Jerusalem. God bless you and your people.

Dan Carlisle

2y↑3

I understand praying for the peace of Jerusalem as that is calling for Maranatha. But I do not see believers should pray for the Temple Mount so they can build a temple that will user in deception but yes also awaken the 144, 000 I expect. Shalom

The Israel Guys

2y↑1

The gospels say that Jesus was consumed with zeal for the Temple, not something said about anything else.

Debra Jessen

2y↑1

@The Israel Guys Ya, `was’ being the optimal word. Matthew 23:37 - 39 - “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her - how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. Look! Your house is abandoned to you. For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, `Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name.’ 😊🙏🏾🙏🏽🙏🏿🙏

A K

2y↑1

Why get it back?
Seriously why is it crucial to build stones?

The Israel Guys

2y↑2

It's the place God chose to put his name forever

6 More Replies...

Ester Edson

2y↑1

You should check out a book called the Ark Report by Harry Moskoff. He expresses a very compelling position of the real location of rhe Temple Mount

Dn Zach

What are his scholarly credentials ?

Return to torah/ De regreso a la torah

2y↑2

Oh man! Y’all chose the best temple expert to be in y’all video Joseph Good. I hope y’all get to use the second temple app; he is apart of.

Katarina Ericka-Krista von Brandt-Cadieux

It’s not just important to Christians and Jews, it’s important to us messianic-Hebrews also❤️🇮🇱🙏

Bobby

2y↑1

Awesome episode. Thank you.

Charles Stuart

2y↑1

The traditional temple mount plaza floor is man made tiles it has no flat threshing floor. In fact excavations under the Dome of the Rock show the place never had a flat threshing floor.

Kevin Dmonte Dmonte

2y↑3

The temple Mount is not the same place where Abraham went to sacrifice his son Isaac.This is fort Antonio an Roman fort .Thr exact location of the temple is near the Jewish market place,just south of fort Antonio

Luke Hilton

Did you watch this episode? We clearly debunk that theory.

The Eternal's Believer

2y↑1

@Luke Hilton Josephus confirmed Jesus' prophecy where He clearly said that the temple would be completely destroyed from top to bottom, so you didn't debunk anything. Jesus is not a liar, and He didn't lie about this.

Luke Hilton

@The Eternal's Believer We're not finished yet....episode 3 will address the issue of what Jesus said about the Temple being destroyed. Stay tuned!

victor suarez

This is amazing!!!

Charles Stuart

2y↑1

The traditional temple mount has man made cisterns and man made aguaducts but no living water.

Debra Wolf

I watched this with my mother; thanks for the info 🇮🇱

TRUTH ISLAM

2y↑2

I have heard that the correspondence of governor of Judea has been found. Apparently during the time of Jesus's ministry, he had sent multiple requests for an increase of the numbers of troupes to manage the Judean garrison. He was denied.
So then if he had a Legion 6000 soldiers at his disposal why would complain that he was feeling vulnerable.
This lends credence to the theory that he only had a Cohort 600 soldiers plus staff.
Therefore this number of men plus staff would fit into the Fortress of Antonia that Josephus describes.

Dn Zach

Dear TRUTH ISLAM,
Also consider that there was a strong Roman garrison at the fortress on the grounds of Herod's Palace, across the city from the Temple Mount.
DZ

Shane Carter

Just a question, Josephus said in your quote from him is that it was the tower of the fort. Would not the tower be different from the fort? Most forts have towers.

Charles Stuart

2y↑3

The traditional temple mount site looks like a fortress because it was a fortress, the Antonia fortress. In the new testament, Jesus said that every stone of the Jewish temple mount would be destroy as such the traditional temple mount site with the wailing walls stones still intact cannot be the location of the temple. The real location of the temple is in what little remains of the city of David which was much bigger and square than what is today remains or could be seen.

Dn Zach

guy faux

Very well done. Have you guys done one of these on Sinea in Arabia?

Dn Zach

Mt. Sinai in Arabia, but don't confuse that idea with the perspective that Mt. Sinai was in today's Saudi Arabia !

1 More Replies...

Ron Mey

Very good to see such a sensible and logical presentation, rather than the modern, popular, deception. Ernest Martin's book is strewn with grammatical errors and spelling mistakes. I believe this to be reflective of his reasoning.

Willie Dunckley

2y↑1

Thank you for the valuable insights

Steven Simpson

Dr Ernest Martin's book The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot is the original work Cornuke used to create his book.

Ancient Library

I went back and forth on this and I trully believe it was located in temple mount.

Hillard Foster

2y↑3

They have done excavation under the wall and found coins that prove the wall was built after Herod rebuilt the Temple.
That proves the wall was built after Herod's temple. The wall cannot be the temple.

SJ M

No one's saying that wall is the Temple....it's a retaining wall holding in the fill that was brought in by Herod to expand the Temple mount platform.

Hillard Foster

@SJ M if it is the retaining wall that Herod built for his expansion then how did coins that were minted after Herod died found under the retaining wall?
That clearly shows that the wall was built after Herod was dead. It can't be part of his expansion. It could be the retaining wall for Fort Antonio which was built after Herod was dead.

SJ M

@Hillard Foster The Antonia fortress was built at the northwest corner, on exposed bedrock, which is still there (the bedrock) as the Israel guys showed. There are many tunnels and passageways in and around the Templemount area and coins and artifacts from different periods are always being found.

Hillard Foster

@SJ M then we go back to the both the coins proving that the wall is post Herod construction and the word defined as Cohort. The coins are indisputable proof of later construction. Now for the word defined and used as Legion over and over again, but just once used for Cohort at Jerusalem. It is amazing that everyone over the entire Roman Empire was misusing this word except for in Jerusalem. That is an impossible to defend position, unlike Fort Antinio.

SJ M

@Hillard Foster There's also the possibility that the retaining wall was reconstructed at a later time using some of the original stones.
One can see that the stones are from three different periods from bottom to the top.

3 More Replies...

Deborah Gamez

2y↑1

So we’ll done! I’ve been waiting for this type of a response to the other theories out there. Great footage and explanation .

The Israel Guys

Thank you!

Charles Stuart

Many ruin Roman forts throughout the Roman empire we're 20 to 35 acres. The traditional temple mount plaza is 36 acres which is consistent to be the remains of territorial site of the Antonia Fortress.

Jonathan Ncheengamwa

The temple was completely destroyed but not the temple platform. When Jesus (Yoshua) said no stone of the temple would be left on another he meant just that. He did not talk about the temple platform

Krishnamohan Rao

The temple mount was built right on top of the great temple of Solomon

Rusty Appling

2y↑1

The Tabernacle was in the city of David while the first temple was being built.

Doron Keidar

2y↑26

Short and to the point, great job! If you have missed it, the main reason you won't be able to find the ruins of Fort Antonia is that the Romans raised it to the ground to access the Temple Mount where the Jewish Zealots were holding their ground. This fact gets ignored by the sensationalists who would like you to believe that the Roman fort was the Temple Mount and that nearly 3 million Jewish pilgrims crammed into the City of David for Passover. I have studied this subject in depth and have been privileged to hear first-hand information from the top archaeologist and experts on the Temple Mount and the City of David (Prof. Dan Bahat, Eli Shukron, Joseph Good, Eilat Mazar, Dr Shmuel Bahat, Rabbi Mordechai Persoff, Harry H Moskoff to name a few). Plus as one who lives in Jerusalem, I have spent thousands of hours on location to verify the facts and many who have written books on this subject have only spent a few hours on a tourist-guided tour on site. All that to say these guys have done their research and have done a great job explaining the facts.

Fred Simcha Wang

It doesn't matter where the real location of the temple was the State of Israel can erect an artificial hilltop immediately adjacent to Al Aqsa and build the third temple on top. The State of Israel both has the finances and the technology to get this over with thank you very much and have a great day 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

M

Sorry - had to stop with first lot of distortion.
The Alaska mosque has construction elements from Solomon’s Temple.
Might get back to it later.
Love you and your work. 🕎