Associates for Scriptural Knowledge
P.O. Box 25000 Portland, OR 97298-0990 Phone: 503-292-4352 Fax: 503-292-4351 |
In this large world in which we live, no man is ever an
island. Each of us is constantly coming in contact with other from whom we
learn many valuable teachings that cause us to change our minds on some
important occasions. In regard to the discovery of the site of the Temples in
Jerusalem, I have had the pleasure and the good fortune of being brought into
the company of many of the top historians and archaeologists of Jerusalem over
the period of my professional career as a historian and theologian. My first
visit to Jerusalem in 1961 set my mind on solving the problems that affected
the true geographical comprehension of early Jerusalem throughout all its
periods of history. I watched closely how Professor Benjamin Mazar and Meir
Ben Dov (his assistant at the time) went about their professional duties and
this was a great learning experience. Both of them were more than willing to
answer questions for me in the many private times that I could learn from
them. I later met Professor Mazar's son, Ory, who was the first to recommend
to me that the Temples of Solomon and Zerubbabel were located on the Ophel
mound just to the north of the original Mount Zion on the southeast ridge. He
said that his father was leaning in that direction at the time of his death.
After a study of six months, in 1995 I wrote a preliminary report that
suggested strongly that this theory was indeed correct for the two earlier
Temples. I was then under the impression that Simon the Hasmonean (along with
Herod a century later) moved the Temple from the Ophel mound to the Dome of
the Rock area. Mr. Bill Lavers in England in reading closely the texts in
Josephus mentioned that Herod stated dogmatically that his Temple (though
enlarged to be double in size of the former Temple) was still located in the
same general area as that of the former Temples. This was also pointed out to
be by Dr. James Tabor and David Sielaff (My historical and compositional
editor). |
|
But then I noticed the eyewitness account of Eleazar who led the final contingent of Jewish resistance to the Romans at Masada. He stated that he Roman fortress which had long been in Jerusalem was the only structure left by 73 C.E. With this key in mind, I came to the conclusion in 1997 that all the Temples were indeed located on the Ophel mound over the area of the Gihon Spring. It then became clear that the dimensions of the Temple (with its unique shape and characteristics) was not the Haram esh-Sharif. We then began to draw (as would an architect) the Temple at its location over the Gihon Spring. I had the good fortune of having a professional artist, who was also interested in biblical matters, draw what Josephus stated in his writings. My thanks go to Lydia Cooper who provided the pictures showing how the Temple and Fort Antonia looked in relationship to one another. The illustrations she provided help make the matter much clearer to those who have only a limited amount of study into these historical and geographical matters. This book is a result of my concluding research that shows that the Temples of God in Jerusalem were indeed located over the Gihon Spring and not over the Dome of the Rock. What has been amazing to me is the vast amount of Jewish, Muslim, and Christian records that remain available from the first to the sixteenth centuries that clearly vindicate the conclusions that I have reached in this book of research. Any information that you readers may have or discover that either support or detract from the conclusions that I have made in this book, would be greatly appreciated by me. |
|
| ASK #: BK08 | Published: 2000 | ISBN: 0-945657-95-1 |
| 486 pages, Softbound | Illustrations | New book |
| $24.95 US | $29.95 Canadian | $34.95 Other |
"This is an unexpected, exceptional analysis of the historical and
archaeological data of the Temples of Jerusalem. This new explanation of
the venue of the First and Second Temples provides the solution to
heretofore incongruous statements in Josephus with the evidence of the
biblical and archaeological records. Not only a work of significant
scholarly impact it may well serve as the awaited stimulus for the
building of Jerusalem's Third Temple by shifting our collective focus
from the Haram esh-Sharif to the area of the Gihon Spring."
"When I first read of Ernest L. Martin's thesis that both the 1st
and
2nd Jewish Temples, those of Solomon and Herod, were located south of
the presently accepted Dome of the Rock location--down in the area of
the ancient City of David over the Ophel spring, my reaction was short
and to the point--impossible, preposterous!! Having now read his
arguments I am convinced this thesis, however revolutionary and
outlandish it first appears, deserves careful, academic and critical
consideration and evaluation. I am not yet convinced that Martin has
ironed out all the problems or handled all the potential objections, yet
he has set forth a case that should be heard. His arguments regarding
the size of the Fortress Antonia, based on Josephus and other evidence
we have about Roman military encampments, must be addressed. He also
makes a most compelling argument based on Luke, writing a decade or so
after the 70 C.E. destruction, and obviously wanting to report on the
lips of Jesus an accurate prediction of the state of things regarding
"not one stone left upon another" in the post-War city of
Jerusalem.
Historians of the Byzantine, Islamic, and Crusader periods are more
qualified to judge his arguments from subsequent epochs, however, my
initial reading of Martin's presentation has left me with the same
impression--all of this evidence needs to be reexamined in the light of
this radical proposal. Martin's thesis is so bold, so utterly
non-conventional, and so potentially upsetting, radically altering
central aspects of the theological, historical, cultural, and political
understanding of Jerusalem and its holy places, it should not be
ignored. I hope Martin's book will begin a most interesting debate and
critical discussion of all relevant issues."
| Chapter | Page |
| 1 What was the Haram esh-Shariff? | 8 |
| 2 The Roman Fortress at Jerusalem | 33 |
| 3 The Largeness of Fort Antonia | 50 |
| 4 The Conclusion of the Mosaic System | 60 |
| 5 The Harem esh-Shariff was Fort Antonia | 75 |
| 6 The Rock and Fortress of Antonia | 82 |
| 7 The Significance of the "Rock" under the Dome of the Rock | 93 |
| 8 Many Modern Sites for the Temples in Jerusalem | 108 |
| 9 The Real Jewish Site of the Temples | 142 |
| 10 All Jewish Buildings in Jerusalem Destroyed in 70 C.E. | 163 |
| 11 Every Stone Uprooted from the Temple | 168 |
| 12 Ruins of the Temple in Southeastern Jerusalem | 199 |
| 13 The First "Western (Wailing) Wall" | 218 |
| 14 The Actual Temple Site from 638 to 1099 C.E. | 233 |
| 15 The Garden of Eden, The Tower of Babel and the Temple of God | 248 |
| 16 Where did Solomon build the Temple? | 262 |
| 17 The Centrality of the Early Temples | 271 |
| 18 The Temple on the Southeast Ridge | 277 |
| 19 The Prime Position of the Temple | 283 |
| 20 The Original Temple over the Gihon Spring | 288 |
| 21 Necessary Spring Waters within the Temples | 308 |
| 22 Where was the Akra? | 322 |
| 23 The City of David and the Ophel | 331 |
| 24 Critical Problems Facing Simon the Hasmonean | 340 |
| 25 A New Temple had to be Built | 356 |
| 26 The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Jerusalem of Simon | 363 |
| 27 Resistance to Simon's Rule | 368 |
| 28 Simon's Building Projects | 381 |
| 29 The Temple in the Book of Enoch | 387 |
| 30 Rebuilding the Temple | 396 |
| 31 Descriptions of Fort Antonia and the Temple of Herod | 410 |
| 32 The Colonnades from the Temple to Fort Antonia | 423 |
| 33 The Temple that Josephus Knew | 432 |
| 34 The Proper Comparisons of the Temple | 456 |
| 35 How Could the Rabbis Forget? | 471 |
|
© 1976-2008 Associates for Scriptural Knowledge - ASK is supported by freewill contributions |