A most important consideration concerning the temple in Jerusalem

Some believe the temple was located at the Dome of the Rock. Others believe it was located else where. Considering the Dome of the Rock, the altar may have stood upon the showcased rock, or the Holy of Holies may have stood upon this rock. It also has been proposed that the approximate center of the Holy Place which is the main room of the temple stood upon the aforementioned rock,

I have a proposal which has never been considered before. The Dome of the Rock is on the site of  the temple but not exactly where anyone has proposed it to have been located before. This is a most important consideration concerning the location of the temple in Jerusalem. The site was that the rock under the dome was bedrock under:

THE EASTERN HALF OF THE HOLY PLACE, AND THE ADJOINING  DOORWAY WITH IT’S THRESHOLD, AND DOORPOSTS, PILLARS, WESTERN END OF PORCH BEFORE THE DOORWAY AND PILLARS,  AND ALSO SOME SPACE NORTH OF THESE AREAS, CONSISTING OF A FEW ROOMS AND PASSAGEWAYS.   

Instead of the commonly supposed idea that the rock was at the western part of the temple, I propose it was at the eastern part of the temple.  

This can be considered the summation of my entire theses. If any evidence were to surface at any time from now confirming the above statements, then I hold claim by virtue of the dates by which I have written papers, blog entries, books, websites, to this discovery or proposal, and if any evidence were to surface confirming that the above statements are wrong, then I acknowledge that I am not the discoverer and that I am in error with all the statements I have written over the years. There can be only one true site of the temple unless it was built at more then one place which is doubtful.

The main paper containing my full theses, can be found as always written in these blog entries may be found here:

temple paper

Other papers, website, video links may be found from links in my other blog entries.

Strange angles on temple mount can be explained

I have discovered a procedure for laying out the eastern and western sides of the Muslim Inner Platform on the Temple Mount.

I can show how these sides were a temple feature incorporating the dimensions of the inner courtyard in a hidden pattern. The location of the Cheil is also confirmed by the western side of the Muslim Inner Platform.

A ruined staircase on the southern side of the Muslim Inner Platform also is related to these two sides.

I will include this material in my updated paper on the Temple Mount.

 

 

Hidden triangle has a Muslem connection to the Jewish Temple

I have discovered connections of the Muslim inner platform on which the Dome of the Rock was built, reuse Jewish temple measurements.and features. This involves the angle and length of the eastern wall of the inner platform. I have also discovered a 3-4-5 right triangle which I have not seen before in the design. 3-4-5 right triangles were very ancient types of sacred triangles.

I will put the details in my updated paper.  

major evidence for the location of the Jerusalem Temple

More evidence for the location of the  Jerusalem Temple comes from  the archeological remains of known locations of large cisterns about a central area which match ancient Talmudic descriptions for where cisterns could have been dug on the temple site. This has been done in other reconstructions (as by Leen Ritmeyer), but one unique particular cistern is a major piece of evidence for placing the temple precisely at my location.

This cistern of an unusual shape has a noticeable hole in a knob at its western end  This hole appears to be a well shaft similar to wells having a large pulley wheel once attached to a  rope to pull up buckets of water.

  • This cistern seen in Fig.D7  and in Figs. 6 and 6a

(see my paper “How Jerusalem Temple Laid Out Using Measuring Cords” )

puts this well just within the southern end of the outdoor court yard, and thus outside the Golah Chamber, whereas Leen Ritmeyer’s reconstruction puts the well Inside the chamber building. This difference in distance is very slight but very significant because in my reconstruction, water could have been drawn efficiently within the courtyard instead of from a room inside a building. If the well was ever made to overflow (by aqua duct or connecting to the Laver water supply which appears to have been the case since a connection did exist [see Fig. 86 number 40 in Below The Temple Mount In Jerusalem; Shimon Gibson and David M. Jacobson; BAR International Series 637; Hadrian Books Ltd; England), this would have flooded the courtyard with much needed water to wash the bloody courtyard. To flood the courtyard with a well located inside a building would have been obviously impossible to achieve. There also were a number of smaller openings running in a long narrow section running south of the big well which would have been inside the chamber in both reconstructions. In both reconstructions this wheel well would have been near the ramps going up to the nearby altar. Here is a fact: I have created a reconstruction made by laying out a triangle from natural features on the temple mount, which predicts where temple features should have been located. If during archaeological digging, the predicted feature does exist, then the whole design is confirmed. Here is just one example where archaeological digging — the known existence of this underground cistern with this well like opening (I believe there is evidence of rope wear on the sides of this well hole which would be evidence of this being a well shaft at some time) is precisely where my model predicts this well to be — by the side of the ramp going up to and close to the base of the great altar, but just abetting the wall of the nearby Golah Chamber building. This location also is my predicted location of the Golah Chamber being west of the Hewn Chamber, both chambers being near the altar. (The Golah Chamber being in Benjamin, and the Hewn Chamber being in Judah as detailed in my paper.) This location also shows a connection to my predicted location of the laver. Now this laver was located on the south side of the temple’s Ulam. This is similar to the thigh bone being connected to the hip bone and the hip is connected to…  i.e. if you find one bone in a skeleton, you can reconstruct the locations of all the other bones but only if you know the lengths of the other bones. In the case of the temple and all the courts we do from the Talmud.

A number of other cisterns are on predicted sites. In fact all cisterns are either on the predicted sites or are very close to them. I have a number of other predicted sites working perfectly, which are not cisterns. All of these sites are detailed in my paper.

Here are major pieces of evidence for my location:

  •  Cistern 24 have dimensions and structures matching Talmudic detailing. (I am in the process of adding this cistern to my paper. I will announce this when the update is available.
  • Great Altar must be on bedrock.
  • Temple had to be close to summit of the hill where the mid line through the eastern end of the Holy Place on the northern side of this mid line would have the bedrock just below the floor level to allow a priest to obtain dirt from the bedrock floor here for the ritual of Sotah. A adult male could not lift a 1 Cubit square stone and reach the underlying bedrock  by going down a ladder by squeezing though a 1 Cubit square hole. He must have been able to touch the rock because the depth of the foundation had to be very shallow at this particular location.
  • The location of the well hole discussed previously is at the predicted location outside the Golah Chamber.
  • Details of the rock under octagonal building can be explained as not being the site of the Holy of Holies. Also the age of cuttings on the surface of this rock can be dated post temple destruction described in my paper linked here.
  • Evidence within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre as described in my paper, ” Holy Sepulchre

Except for the final statement, all of the above holds true in my reconstruction, but not in the Leen Ritmeyer reconstruction.

 

feature on Temple Mount is major confirmation of temple’s location

I have discussed a feature on the Temple Mount in my paper concerning the temple’s location which is a major conformation of the temple’s location. I am currently working on an update of this paper which will detail my research concerning this feature located to the north west of the Dome of the Rock in a building topped by a small dome. Under this building is a sloping rock floor with two rock scarps. This feature has the designation of ‘cistern 24’ in an old numbering system. Links to my current paper can be found in the previous blog entry.