Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :



As I concluded in part six, according to rabbinic teachings, Moshiach ben David's crowning achievement -- which will in fact convince many Orthodox Jews of his messiahship -- will be the construction of a third and final temple in Israel. Now, before we begin to examine this issue from a Scriptural perspective, let's look at the reality on the ground in the state of Israel. If this King Messiah does appear in Israel as many Orthodox Jews expect, and if he is somehow successful in having the temple rebuilt, it will indeed be a monumental feat. Why? Well, for one thing, because the temple ceased to exist almost two thousand years ago, and no one has been able to build a new one since then, although a few people -- such as Julian the Apostate -- have tried over the centuries, and failed.

As many of my readers will know, in our modern day, one of the primary impediments to building a new temple is directly related to the political situation surrounding the Temple Mount, or the "Noble Sanctuary" -- or "Haram Ash-Sharif" -- as it is known to the Muslims. While the Temple Mount is viewed as a holy site by both Jews and Christians due to the long-held belief that it is there where both the first and second temples stood many centuries ago, it is also viewed as the third most holy site in the Islamic religion -- after Mecca and Medina -- as well for a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons why the three major Abrahamic religions -- that is, Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- reverence the Temple Mount are due to the following beliefs:

1. God created the world there.

2. God created Adam there.

3. Abraham tried to sacrifice Isaac on the rock there.

4. God's divine presence is most strongly manifest there.

5. The Foundation Stone under the Dome of the Rock is where the Holy of Holies was located during the temple period.

6. Muhammad's Night Journey to heaven started there from the Dome of the Rock.

Regarding item number one above, according to ancient Jewish tradition, when God created the Universe, the first place He created was the Foundation Stone on the Temple Mount. In an article entitled "The Real Location of the First, Second, and the Third Holy Temple, Which Is Soon to Be Built, Is Only on the Holy Temple Mount in Jerusalem," Gershon Salomon -- who is a former IDF officer and the founder of the Temple Mount and Eretz Yisrael Faithful Movement -- writes the following regarding this Jewish belief:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The intention of G‑d from the beginning was to create 'first' the place which would be the location of His Holy House where He would dwell in the midst of His people Israel. So G‑d created first the 'foundation rock', which is located until today on the top of Mount Moriah or the Holy Temple Mount, as it is commonly called. A very old tradition that was passed along the Jewish people from father to son says that this rock was the 'foundation rock' upon which G‑d created the entire universe. G‑d created the universe in circles of holiness. The first circle which is the most holy place in the world is the foundation rock. The second circle which is also very holy is the location of the Holy Temple Mount until today. The third circle of holiness is Jerusalem. The fourth circle of holiness that G‑d created is the Holy Land of Israel. The fifth circle is the rest of the world."

----- End Quote -----

While the Israelis seized the West Bank -- including East Jerusalem -- from Jordan during the 1967 Six-Day War, in a strange twist of events, shortly after the Israeli flag was hoisted over the Temple Mount in 1967, General Moshe Dayan ordered that the flag be lowered, and that the Muslim Waqf -- or religious trust -- be given the authority to manage the Temple Mount. It is said that he made this decision in order to maintain the peace. Thus, to this very day, the Jordanian Islamic Waqf retains full control over Judaism's most holy site, with little interference from the Israelis. In fact, while they are given limited access to the Mount, religious Jews and other non-Muslims are not allowed to pray on, bring prayer books to, or wear religious apparel on the Temple Mount. Furthermore, ironically, the Israeli police enforce these restrictions, because the government of Israel views this measure as an important deterrent to Muslim violence, which could potentially result in a greater Middle East war.

While some Orthodox rabbis do encourage Jews to visit the Temple Mount, most of them forbid entry to the Mount out of concern that said visitors may possibly violate some aspect of Jewish law. In fact, even Jewish rabbis who do encourage visits to the Temple Mount prohibit entrance to the actual Dome of the Rock. This position is based on concern that the Jewish visitors to the Mount may inadvertently tread on holy and forbidden ground.

Similar to the Israeli government, in its much-touted Middle East peace plan, even the administration of President Donald Trump of the United States seemed to support a continuation of the current status quo. In a fifty-page document called the "Peace to Prosperity" proposal, on page sixteen the plan describes the US's position regarding the Temple Mount. Not surprisingly, as occurred with a number of other statements that were issued by the Trump administration, the following statement is very confusing, because on one hand it supports the status quo, while on the other it states that everyone should be able to pray on the Temple Mount, which is clearly contrary to the current status quo:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Unlike many previous powers that had ruled Jerusalem, and had destroyed the holy sites of other faiths, the State of Israel is to be commended for safeguarding the religious sites of all and maintaining a religious status quo. Given this commendable record for more than half a century, as well as the extreme sensitivity regarding some of Jerusalem's holy sites, we believe that this practice should remain, and that all of Jerusalem's holy sites should be subject to the same governance regimes that exist today. In particular the status quo at the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif should continue uninterrupted.

Jerusalem's holy sites should remain open and available for peaceful worshippers and tourists of all faiths. People of every faith should be permitted to pray on the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif, in a manner that is fully respectful to their religion, taking into account the times of each religion's prayers and holidays, as well as other religious factors."

----- End Quote -----

As I mentioned at the very beginning of this series, despite this situation being the status quo for many decades now in Israel, with each passing year, calls to change the current arrangement with the Muslims have been growing stronger. This push for change particularly comes from the Orthodox Jewish community, and influential organizations such as the Temple Mount Faithful, the Movement for the Establishment of the Temple, and the Temple Institute. For example, in an October 2019 article in the Tablet Magazine, writer Matthew Ackerman offered the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"In light of this, it's worth reconsidering Israeli policy regarding the Temple Mount. Even after gaining control of the site in 1967, Israel has maintained the preexisting "status quo" in which the area is administered by a foreign religious authority that maintains a blanket ban on all non-Muslim prayer. For peace, security, and justice, Israel should now take formal control of the Temple Mount, open the site to prayer for all, erect a large and beautiful synagogue so the point is made plainly, and do it quickly.

A few years of the sight of a beautiful synagogue on the Temple Mount would rewrite humanity's mental map of Jerusalem, and the Jewish state beyond it. The synagogue would in short order become an extremely powerful version of what Pierre Nora has termed a 'memory site,' or a 'symbolic element of the memorial heritage of any community.'

I am not promoting the construction of the Third Temple, the long prophesied event believed to herald the messianic age. I do promote the construction of a synagogue, which confirms the Jewish right to pray only.

To confirm the justice of Jewish rights, to secure Israel forever, to build toward peace among Jews and all peoples, the Jews should build a synagogue on the Temple Mount, and do it soon."

----- End Quote -----

Ackerman is not alone in his thoughts. As we have seen, the sense amongst Orthodox Jews is that the arrival time of their messiah, Moshiach ben David -- Messiah son of David, or King Messiah -- is drawing very near, and they are convinced that it is not only their right to rebuild the temple, but they are convinced that this man will do it just as soon as the conditions are right to do so. While Ackerman does not appear to fully support the construction of a third temple on the Temple Mount, others are not so quick to back down in their demands.

Obviously, this creates a very delicate situation in both a political and a religious sense. It has in fact created a dangerous situation, because some of the people who belong to these various organizations are quite radical in nature, and they will do whatever it takes to ensure that a new temple is eventually built on the summit of the Temple Mount. As you may already know, over the decades, this tension has resulted in a few riots occurring on the Temple Mount in which people -- primarily Palestinians -- have been killed. Furthermore, there has been talk by some individuals, and even plans made, to purposely destroy the Dome of the Rock, so that a temple can be built in its place. Clearly then, some individuals are very committed to seeing that a third temple is constructed on the Temple Mount.

Tragically, to our own shame, such plans of destruction have even involved certain misguided, radical Christians who have erroneously believed that it is their responsibility to bring about the End of Days. Thankfully, such evil plans have been detected by the Israeli authorities, and have been aborted before they were carried through. Make no mistake. Purposely destroying the Dome of the Rock would inevitably lead to a very major war in the Middle East. It would be the religious war of wars which would rile up Muslims worldwide.

Other more cool-headed individuals have looked for other more diplomatic ways to make a third Jewish temple a reality. One proposal I read quite some time ago suggested that based on satellite photographs, there is sufficient space next to the al-Aqsa Mosque for a third temple to be constructed there. In other words, based on this claim, all three edifices -- that is, the al-Aqsa Mosque, the Dome of the Rock and the third temple -- could reside simultaneously on the Temple Mount. If there's really any feasibility to this proposal, both Judaism and Islam could be represented on the Temple Mount without the need to resort to violence.

However, this immediately leads to a number of questions. For example, would the Muslims really be open to such a peaceful possibility and solution? After all, an Islamic waqf -- also known as an endowment, donation or trust -- whether it is for religious or charitable purposes, is traditionally bestowed in perpetuity, with no intention of reclaiming the assets. In other words, the Muslims will not easily surrender any part of the Haram al-Sharif compound for the purpose of building a third Jewish temple there.

What about the Orthodox Jews? After all, they are convinced by centuries of tradition -- whether true or not -- that the Foundation Stone which is located inside of the Dome of the Rock is where the Holy of Holies was once located. As such, it is highly unlikely that they would ever accept the temple being constructed anywhere else. Clearly then, there is very strong recalcitrance on the part of both of the parties, and religious tradition is extremely hard to break. But this is not the only problem plaguing the potential construction of a third temple on Mount Moriah. As you will now see, even the legitimacy of the Jewish claim to the Temple Mount has been questioned by certain parties.

Recently, I came across information on a number of websites which I found to be rather interesting. According to this information -- which bears a similar message to the "Temple Denial" campaign which has been promoted by the Palestinians and other Muslims for decades -- neither of the two temples was really ever located on the summit of the Temple Mount to begin with. If true -- I will leave it to you to decide what you want to believe once you have completely read this series -- then even calling Mount Moriah the Temple Mount is really a misnomer and a deception, and it would seem to negate any legitimate claim to the mount for the purpose of building a third temple.

According to the information, what Christians and Jews today refer to as the Temple Mount was in actuality the location of Antonia Fortress, Fortress Antonia, Fort Antonia, or whatever you wish to call it. This fort was originally a citadel which had been built by the Hasmonean dynasty, who ruled Judea from the Seleucid Empire, north and east of Israel. This empire in fact resulted from the division into four parts of the former Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great following his death, as is mentioned by the Prophet Daniel. In these verses, the he goat represents the Macedonian/Greek Empire, and the great horn or notable horn represents Alexander the Great. The four notable ones represent the four generals who carved up what had been the Macedonian/Greek Empire:

"And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand. Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven."


As I said, the Hasmonean citadel was later refurbished and given the new name of Antonia Fortress by Herod the Great in honor of his patron, Roman general Mark Antony, whose job it was to protect the Second Temple. This is the very same Mark Antony who had a love affair with Egyptian queen Cleopatra -- and had three children by her -- even though he was married to Octavia. Following the power struggle and breakdown of the Second Triumvirate, Mark Antony and Cleopatra were forced to eventually flee to Egypt, where they committed suicide.

But returning to Fortress Antonia, according to historians -- including Flavius Josephus -- the fortress housed part of the Roman garrison which was stationed in Jerusalem. One website I visited described the fortress as being a large enclosed military camp some thirty-six acres in size. It was basically a miniature Roman city with its own administration, living quarters and temple structures to accommodate approximately six thousand soldiers of the 10th Legion. The Romans likewise stored the high priest's vestments within Fortress Antonia as well. In Book XV, Chapter XI of his "Antiquity of the Jews", Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, informs us that Fortress Antonia was a completely separate and wall-enclosed structure that was located to the north of the temple. This is made evident by the following excerpt:

----- Begin Quote -----

Now on the north side [of the temple] was built a citadel, whose walls were square, and strong, and of extraordinary firmness. This citadel was built by the kings of the Asamonean race, who were also high priests before Herod, and they called it the Tower, in which were reposited the vestments of the high priest, which the high priest only put on at the time when he was to offer sacrifice. These vestments king Herod kept in that place, and after his death they were under the power of the Romans, until the time of Tiberius Caesar . . . But for the tower itself, when Herod the king of the Jews had fortified it more firmly than before, in order to secure and guard the temple, he gratified Antonius, who was his friend, and the Roman ruler, and then gave it the name of the Tower of Antonia."

----- End Quote -----

Where the conflict arises is in the fact that there are some historians who believe that Antonia Fortress was more than likely located at the eastern end of the great wall of the city, on the northeastern corner of the city, just OUTSIDE of the Temple Mount, and near the Pool of Bethesda. In contrast, the information I discovered suggests that Antonia Fortress was really located ON THE SUMMIT of the Temple Mount itself. In other words, as I mentioned a moment ago, the information proposes that Fortress Antonia occupied the entire thirty-six acres of the Temple Mount. As a result, what today is claimed to be the Wailing Wall -- and supposedly a retaining wall for the temple complex -- was in reality a part of Fort Antonia, and not a part of the temple complex whatsoever. If this is true -- I do not know one way or the other -- then there is nothing holy about the wall where the Jews pray everyday. It is a deception. Please note that I am not the first person to mention this important point. Please conduct your own online research if you doubt it.

This info regarding what may possibly be the true history of the controversial wall received strong support in 2011 when archaeologists with the Israel Antiquities Authority found four bronze coins underneath the massive foundation stones of the wall near a Roman-era drainage tunnel that begins at the Pool of Siloam. These coins were stamped around 17 A.D. by Valerius Gratus. For the record, Gratus was the prefect who immediately preceded Pontius Pilate as the governor of Judaea. Gratus is most known for the fact that he repeatedly changed the appointment of the Jewish high priest. Caiaphas was his final appointment, who as many of you will know, in fact prophesied Jesus' death, as I mentioned to you at the end of part two. Here again are the same verses:

"Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death."


So why is the discovery of these four bronze Roman coins so important? Quite simply, because while Herod the Great -- who is also known as Herod I -- is credited with having built the Temple Mount compound, according to historical records, he died in 4 B.C., or about twenty years before the date of the coins. In other words, the coins indicate that Herod I didn't build that portion of the wall, and that construction of the wall was not near completion when he died. More specifically, certain historians are convinced that construction of the Western Wall had not even begun at the time of Herod's death. Instead, their view is that it was finished some five decades later by Herod's great grandson, King Herod Agrippa II. This is in fact what historian Flavius Josephus likewise writes in Book XX Chapter IX Paragraph VII of his "Antiquities of the Jews", as we see here:

----- Begin Quote -----

And now it was that the temple [meaning the courts around the temple] was finished. So, when the people saw that the workmen were unemployed, who were above eighteen thousand, and that they, receiving no wages, were in want, because they had earned their bread by their labours about the temple, and while they were unwilling to keep them by the treasures that were there deposited, out of fear of [their being carried away by] the Romans: and while they had a regard to the making provision for the workmen, they had a mind to expend those treasures upon them; for if any one of them did but labour for a single hour, he received his pay immediately; so they persuaded him to rebuild the eastern cloisters. These cloisters belonged to the outer court, and were situated in a deep valley, and had walls that reached four hundred cubits [in length] and were built of square and very white stones, the length of each of which stones was twenty cubits, and their height six cubits. This was the work of king Solomon, who first of all built the entire temple. But king Agrippa, [meaning Herod Agrippa II] who had the care of the temple committed to him by Claudius Caesar, considering that it is easy to demolish any building, but hard to build it up again, and that it was particularly hard to do it to these cloisters, which would require a considerable time, and great sums of money, he denied the petitioners their request, about that matter; but he did not obstruct them when they desired the city might be paved with white stone. He also deprived Jesus the son of Gamaliel, of the high priesthood, and gave it to Matthias, the son of Theophilus, under whom the Jews' war with the Romans took its beginning.

----- End Quote -----

Furthermore, from a logistical standpoint, it does make sense that if the Romans wanted to build a fortress which had the best vantage point for seeing all of the surrounding area, they would in fact have chosen the summit of Mount Moriah.

Based on that assumption, this information goes on to claim that both the first and the second temples were not located on the Temple Mount itself, but approximately six hundred feet outside of it, and a little below it, on Mount Ophel, near the Gihon Spring. In fact, some sources state that the original temple was purposely built by King Solomon right on top of the Gihon Spring, because it was the only water source in Jerusalem, and water was necessary for the purification rituals which were conducted by the Jewish priests. There are no water sources on the summit of Mount Moriah. What is also interesting about this possibility is that this is also where Solomon was anointed as the next king by Zadok the priest, as witnessed by Nathan the Prophet. We're clearly told that upon arriving at the Gihon Spring, Zadok "took an horn of oil out of the tabernacle, and anointed Solomon", as we see by the following verses:

"So Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and the Cherethites, and the Pelethites, went down, and caused Solomon to ride upon king David's mule, and brought him to Gihon. And Zadok the priest took an horn of oil out of the tabernacle, and anointed Solomon. And they blew the trumpet; and all the people said, God save king Solomon."


To add to this ancient mystery, the Gihon Spring was located in the Kidron Valley. This famous valley originates slightly northeast of the Old City of Jerusalem, very near to and yet outside of the Temple Mount. In fact, the Kidron Valley is what separates the Temple Mount from the Mount of Olives. In my view, the fact that the Gihon Spring is closely associated with the temple seems to add credence to the idea that both temples were located on Mount Ophel, and not on Mount Moriah. What is also interesting is the fact that at different times during their history, the Jews built the upper and lower pool of Siloam to store the water from the Gihon Spring. This pool is closely associated with the temple in the Gospels. You may recall that shortly after leaving the temple, Jesus healed the blind man and told him to go and wash his eyes in the Pool of Siloam in John chapter nine, as we see here:

"Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing."


My point is, in my view, these verses suggest that the Pool of Siloam was located very close to the temple complex. In other words, near the base of the temple complex, close to the bottom of Mount Ophel. In fact, ancient maps, as well as twenty-first century archeological excavations have solidly confirmed that the Pool of Siloam is located outside of the Temple Mount, in the Kidron Valley far below. The Wikipedia website describes it as "a rock-cut pool on the southern slope of the City of David, the original site of Jerusalem, located outside the walls of the Old City to the southeast. The pool was fed by the waters of the Gihon Spring, carried there by two aqueducts." If all of this is difficult for you to visualize, you will find a map in part ten of this series which shows how everything was laid out. As you will clearly see on the map, Herod's temple complex is actually located to the south of Fortress Antonia on a separate ridge, and is connected to the fort by two 600-foot long colonnades.

In briefly summarizing the history of the original temple, the "Hope of Israel" website states the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The original city of Jerusalem was in the southeastern part of present day Jerusalem, on a crescent shaped ridge. The ridge had two mounds, one on the north and the other on the south. The Temple was built on the northern mound called Ophel, very near to the Gihon Spring. The southern mound was called Mt. Zion, upon which stood David's city. Solomon's palace was in between the two on raised ground. The walls around the square Temple platform were very high, the southwestern corner being about 450 feet high. In Herod's time Fort Antonia which is about 600 feet north of the Temple platform was connected to the Temple premises by a double colonnade bridge on the western side. The present Haram-esh-Sharif was the original location of Fort Antonia which was a Roman encampment. The rock protruding at the center was considered sacred by early century Christians because Jesus had stood on it before Pilate; there was a Christian Church above it in the fourth to sixth centuries, but the Moslem rulers built the Dome of the Rock on the site. Caliph Omar built the original Al Aqsa mosque on the southern end of the Haram as the 'new' Temple of Solomon. The Western wall of the Haram has no sacredness attached to it as present day Jews believe because it is the retaining wall of Fort Antonia and later modifications. The original sites of David's city and the Temple are completely lost due to the total removal of the southeastern ridge by Simon the Hasmonean who leveled Mt. Zion, and the Roman legions which destroyed the Temple."

----- End Quote -----

Let me again refer you to the images which are included in part ten of this series, so that you can actually visualize what these different sources are proposing as being the real site of Fortress Antonia, the Temple Mount, Solomon's Palace and the City of David.

Please go to part eight for the continuation of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.