The true location of the Temple in Jerusalem

[TheDivineWatermark]

i have an allegorical mind.
i automatically as i read bible read it like that sometimes.
like all the language about skies opening up and birds falling and all that. i see it as non-literal because of the destruction of edom in isaiah 34. the language makes it sound like nobody survives, but in context we can see its just judgment on edom
its also in isaiah where God rides on a cloud to egypt. i dont think thats literal and didnt happen, but its judgment coming thats what it means

but i just see it that way. the people in that time spoke like that, very colorful language
i like it, they werent boring westerners.
if bible was written today it would be like this:

section A: a meteorite will land on coordinates X,Y and will cause third of the area to burn up, equaling a land area of 20m2
lolz. we would be so precise and clinical with it. like a engineering manual

Even as a pre-tribber (speaking for myself), I've stated many times that I believe "stars" (for example) are not necessarily [in EVERY verse where found] speaking of those twinkling things we see up in the sky at night:

Daniel 8 -

"9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them."

No, not those twinkling lights we see up in the night sky, here.

Often ppl view "pre-tribbers" as though they [/we] view everything in a woodenly-literal sense, but that's just not the case for all pre-tribbers. Discussion is good, for coming to see this...

 

[JaumeJ]

To be indifferent to the Word of our Father in order to favor the endeavor of man is worldly at best, at worst, Satanic.

Since when does Bible discussion include the theories of men?

 

[JaumeJ]

With all due care for all, the Tmple had to be constructed o the mount in Jerusalem by Solomon. David was forbidden to have anything to do with the actual construction of it.

God (Yahweh or Yah) chose Jerusalem for Himselff. Previously, inhabited by theJebusites, it wa called simply Urusalaim, City of Pece. When God chose it for His puposes, the name waqs changed to Yahurushalaim or, City of Yahweh's Peace.

Please do not confuse the true New Jerusalem compared to Sarah with the staging ground of our Father's will in this temporal place, the Jerusalem of this age compared to Hagar. All blessing in Jesus, Yeshua to all.

In the Bible discussion, those being indifferent or bored by the Word from the Bible in favor of the thinking of man apart from the Word seem to be, how shall we say, out of place.

 

[Absolutely]

David's temple was the same as that of Solomon's. David was given the blueprints and Solomon followed them to the letter. David was barred from building the temple hence it became Solomon's responsibility. And even after all that, Solomon became totally irresponsible.

well,a couple of things to consider;
1] the location of Davids temple would have been too small
2] the stables found under the temple mount are attributed to Solomon.

I have not yet taken a position either way. Missler does an amazing job on the subject,and believes quite convincingly with the op that Davids city was the site of Solomon / herods temple

 

[Nehemiah6]

...Davids city was the site of Solomon / herods temple...

Of course Zion (Jerusalem) is called David's city, and Mount Zion was the location of the Temple. God chose Jerusalem very specifically, and Melchizedek (a theophany of Christ) was the king-priest of Salem (Jerusalem) at the time of Abraham. Jerusalem was also called Jebus at one time. There are many prophecies indicating that Jerusalem will be redeemed and restored after the Second Coming of Christ, and will be an eternal city on earth.

 

[JaumeJ]

I believe that in consulting the Old Testament, you will find the city of David was Hebron, and he later took the throne to Jerusalem…….

 

[JaumeJ]

Something for consideration is the fact that David means Beloved in our tongue. We all know the Beloved is Jesus, Yeshua. It is He Who sits on the Throne of the beloved.

Whenmaking a reference to Jerusalem being the city of David, it may serve to keep in mind what David means here, for David lift his city of refuge moving the capital to Jerusalem, however to the Jerusalem of the salve not of the free woman.

Ergo, the New Jerusalem is the true city of the Beloved wich has ot yet been brought down to us, the Jerusalem of the Beloved, David...…...our King Jesus, Yeshua, all one in the same- Praise Yeshua always, amen.

 

[FlyingDove]

The Western Wall/Wailing Wall

Source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jerusalem-the-old-city

The Western Wall
When Rome destroyed the Second Temple in 70 C.E., only one outer wall remained standing. The Romans probably would have destroyed that wall also, but it must have seemed too insignificant to them; it was not even part of the Temple itself, just an outer wall surrounding the Temple Mount. For the Jews, however, this remnant of what was the most sacred building in the Jewish world quickly became the holiest spot in Jewish life. Throughout the centuries, Jews from throughout the world traveled to Palestine, and immediately headed for the Kotel ha-Ma'aravi (the Western Wall) to thank God. The prayers offered at the Kotel were so heartfelt that non-Jews began calling the site the "Wailing Wall."


(My NOTE: In 52 days (Neh 6:15) the outer wall (already in existence & not part of the Temple itself) is repaired.)

Question: Does this info solve the debate over: Matt 24:2 There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down?

 

[Absolutely]

The Western Wall/Wailing Wall

Source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jerusalem-the-old-city

The Western Wall
When Rome destroyed the Second Temple in 70 C.E., only one outer wall remained standing. The Romans probably would have destroyed that wall also, but it must have seemed too insignificant to them; it was not even part of the Temple itself, just an outer wall surrounding the Temple Mount. For the Jews, however, this remnant of what was the most sacred building in the Jewish world quickly became the holiest spot in Jewish life. Throughout the centuries, Jews from throughout the world traveled to Palestine, and immediately headed for the Kotel ha-Ma'aravi (the Western Wall) to thank God. The prayers offered at the Kotel were so heartfelt that non-Jews began calling the site the "Wailing Wall."


(My NOTE: In 52 days (Neh 6:15) the outer wall (already in existence & not part of the Temple itself) is repaired.)

Question: Does this info solve the debate over: Matt 24:2 There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down?

That temple mount looks slick to me.
Nothing there but that dome thingy

 

[Absolutely]

Something for consideration is the fact that David means Beloved in our tongue. We all know the Beloved is Jesus, Yeshua. It is He Who sits on the Throne of the beloved.

Whenmaking a reference to Jerusalem being the city of David, it may serve to keep in mind what David means here, for David lift his city of refuge moving the capital to Jerusalem, however to the Jerusalem of the salve not of the free woman.

Ergo, the New Jerusalem is the true city of the Beloved wich has ot yet been brought down to us, the Jerusalem of the Beloved, David...…...our King Jesus, Yeshua, all one in the same- Praise Yeshua always, amen.

Yes,David being a forerunner. The triune anointing. Prophet,priest and king.King Saul represented false leadership.
,or anointing lost in the leadership.(leadership never,ever was meant to be outside Gods anointing)

 

[Absolutely]

Of course Zion (Jerusalem) is called David's city, and Mount Zion was the location of the Temple. God chose Jerusalem very specifically, and Melchizedek (a theophany of Christ) was the king-priest of Salem (Jerusalem) at the time of Abraham. Jerusalem was also called Jebus at one time. There are many prophecies indicating that Jerusalem will be redeemed and restored after the Second Coming of Christ, and will be an eternal city on earth.

I meant to say the area between the original city of David and the site of the temple mount.
According to modern archeology and eyewitness account the place of the dome is not the place of solomans/herods temple temple

 

[posthuman]

... Christianity has gained much ground in Israel over the last 30 years or so. There are many in Israel who question whether or not to rebuild the Temple and revert back to old ways.

there are a lot of Jews in Israel who have very un-Christian reasons for not wanting to build a temple :|

 

[posthuman]

what is all this about 'David's temple' ??
David didn't build a temple. he had the tabernacle. that is not the same.

 

[JaumeJ]

Theory science Dogma.... We know that the old city of David was completely destroyed, not one stone left upon another, buried over and plowed into a field. There was absolutely nothing recognizable left. But you would rather place your faith in a few stones that God missed...

You really should actually read the Bible and discuss the Bible in this, the Bible Discussion Forum. hAULING IN THE faulty thinking of science of this age excluding our Father's teching is not the spirit nor reason for this Forum.

If you wish to discuss things dreamed up by men without consulting God, perhaps you would find a more suitable forum because this one is not it. God bless you.

 

[iamsoandso]

lol, maybe it's just me but I've always thought that the ones arguing that the temple was somewhere else other than what is believed and giving proof that it was somewhere else because they found parts of it is counterproductive. I mean if it's not and they found pieces of it somewhere else did they not then prove one stone setting on another just in a different place? Seems like it's a boxing match with a mirror,lol my money's on the mirror...

 

[JaumeJ]

Many folks cannot see beyond what is physical. Do the brethren not all realize Jesus was making reference to the Living Stones of the Temple. HE BEING THE Head and the Corner rejected of men and taken to heaven?

 

[GtrPkr]

If hindsight was always 20/20 and physical evidence set before us was always obvious.... THEN JESUS NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN CRUCIFIED!

 

[GtrPkr]

If a frog had wings it wouldn't have to bump it's butt all the time! What's the point of all this arguing? Where is any evidence to the contrary?

 

[JaumeJ]

If hindsight was always 20/20 and physical evidence set before us was always obvious.... THEN JESUS NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN CRUCIFIED!

You are juxti posing time … There is no argument when reason is expressed. There is no reason in your posting, so you seem to be the one with all the arguing.

Once more this is BIBILE DISCUSSION nto an archeological forum based on the theories of non-believers.

 

[GtrPkr]

You are juxti posing time … There is no argument when reason is expressed. There is no reason in your posting, so you seem to be the one with all the arguing.

Once more this is BIBILE DISCUSSION nto an archeological forum based on the theories of non-believers.

2000 years ago the theory was if a man performed miracles and perfectly satisfied all old testiment prophecy regarding the Lamb of God then He must be a heretic...